Animal Welfare Program, Faculty of Land and Food Systems, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T1Z4, Canada.
J Dairy Sci. 2009 Nov;92(11):5497-502. doi: 10.3168/jds.2009-2331.
Free-stall housing systems are designed to provide a comfortable and hygienic lying area, but some aspects of stall design may restrict usage by cows. The aim of this study was to compare free-stall housing with a comparable lying area (open pack) without stall partitions. We predicted that cows would spend more time lying down and standing in the bedded area when provided access to an open pack than when in free stalls. We also predicted that cows would spend less time standing outside of the lying area and less time perching with the front 2 hooves in the lying area when using the open pack. Groups (n = 8) of 12 cows each were provided access to either the open pack or stalls. After a 7-d adaptation period, each group was tested sequentially in the 2 treatments for 3 d each. This no-choice phase was followed by an 8-d choice phase during which cows had simultaneous access to both treatments. During the no-choice phase, cows spent more time lying down (13.03 +/- 0.24 vs. 12.48 +/- 0.24 h/d) and standing with all 4 hooves in the bedded area (0.96 +/- 0.12 vs. 0.41 +/- 0.12 h/d) of the open pack than in the stalls. During the choice phase, cows spent more time lying down (7.20 +/- 0.29 vs. 5.86 +/- 0.29 h/d) and standing with all 4 hooves in the bedded area (0.58 +/- 0.07 vs. 0.12 +/- 0.07 h/d) of the open pack than in the stalls. In both the no-choice (1.66 +/- 0.24 vs. 0.55 +/- 0.24 h/d) and choice (0.55 +/- 0.07 vs. 0.29 +/- 0.07 h/d) phases, cows spent more time standing with just 2 hooves in the stalls than in the open pack. In conclusion, cows spent more time lying and standing with all 4 hooves in the bedded open pack than in the stalls. Additionally, cows spent more time standing in the alley and standing with just the front 2 hooves on the bedding in the stalls than in the bedded open pack; increased standing time on wet concrete is a known risk factor for lameness.
自由卧床饲养系统旨在提供舒适和卫生的躺卧区域,但卧床设计的某些方面可能会限制奶牛的使用。本研究的目的是比较无卧床区的自由卧床区和类似的躺卧区(开放式包装)。我们预计,当提供开放式包装时,奶牛在卧床区的躺卧和站立时间会比在自由卧床区更多。我们还预计,当使用开放式包装时,奶牛在躺卧区外站立的时间、前脚在躺卧区栖息的时间会更少。每组(n=8)12 头奶牛分别被安置在开放式包装或卧床区。经过 7 天的适应期后,每组在两种处理方式下各进行 3 天的测试。在无选择阶段之后,是 8 天的选择阶段,在此期间,奶牛同时可以使用两种处理方式。在无选择阶段,奶牛在开放式包装中的躺卧时间(13.03 +/- 0.24 比 12.48 +/- 0.24 小时/天)和站立时间(4 只脚都在卧床区)(0.96 +/- 0.12 比 0.41 +/- 0.12 小时/天)都多于卧床区。在选择阶段,奶牛在开放式包装中的躺卧时间(7.20 +/- 0.29 比 5.86 +/- 0.29 小时/天)和站立时间(4 只脚都在卧床区)(0.58 +/- 0.07 比 0.12 +/- 0.07 小时/天)都多于卧床区。在无选择(1.66 +/- 0.24 比 0.55 +/- 0.24 小时/天)和选择(0.55 +/- 0.07 比 0.29 +/- 0.07 小时/天)阶段,奶牛在卧床区的站立时间仅为 2 只脚,多于开放式包装。总之,奶牛在开放式包装的卧床区中用 4 只脚躺卧和站立的时间多于卧床区。此外,奶牛在卧床区的过道中站立的时间以及前脚在卧床上站立的时间多于开放式包装;在潮湿的混凝土上站立时间增加是跛行的已知风险因素。