Department of Animal Science, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
J Dairy Sci. 2013 Aug;96(8):5035-45. doi: 10.3168/jds.2012-6282. Epub 2013 Jun 13.
Sprinklers reduce heat load in cattle, but elicit variable behavioral responses: cows readily use water in some studies, but in others either avoid it or show no preference. Nevertheless, on US dairies, a common way to cool cows is with nozzles mounted over the feed bunk that intermittently spray (i.e., 5 min on, 10 min off, as in this study) animals' backs while they feed. The objectives of this study were to determine how this type of sprinkler system affects behavior (single-treatment phase), and to assess preferences when cows were allowed to choose between feed bunks with or without sprinklers (choice phase). Data were collected 24h/d for lactating Holsteins tested in groups of 3 cows (n=8 groups) in warm ambient conditions [air temperature (mean ± standard deviation): 24-h average=24.5±2.5°C, maximum=36.0±3.5°C]. In the single-treatment phase, cows were fed from shaded bunks with or without sprinklers for 2 d/treatment, with order of exposure balanced in a crossover design. When sprinklers were present, cows spent more time at the bunk, both feeding [sprinkler vs. no sprinkler: 3.5 vs. 2.5h/24h, standard error (SE)=0.12h] and standing without feeding (4.3 vs. 2.3h/24h, SE=0.32 h) than when no sprinklers were present. Sprinklers lowered the average 24-h core temperature (38.8 vs. 39.2°C, SE=0.08°C), particularly on warmer days. Water cooling also mitigated the effects of weather on feeding time, which decreased with increasing heat load (air temperature and temperature-humidity index) when cows did not have sprinklers, but was unchanged when sprinklers were provided. In the choice phase, feed was provided ad libitum in both treatments for 5 d and preference was assessed. All groups preferred the feed bunk with sprinklers (78 vs. 22% of time spent near both feed bunks, SE=3.9%), and the magnitude of this preference increased linearly with heat load. In both phases of the study, cows protected their heads from direct spray when head position was elective (i.e., standing without feeding): cows were more likely to put their heads through the head gates when the sprinklers were on than off (single-treatment phase: 78 vs. 59%, respectively, of time spent standing without feeding, SE=2.8%; choice phase: 71 vs. 52%, SE=2.0%). In conclusion, although cows avoided wetting their heads, this is the first study to demonstrate that cattle readily use and clearly prefer sprinklers mounted above the feed bunk, possibly due to the cooling provided by this resource.
喷头可以降低牛只的热量负荷,但会引起不同的行为反应:在一些研究中,奶牛很容易使用水,但在其他研究中,它们要么避免使用水,要么不表现出偏好。然而,在美国的奶牛场,一种常见的给奶牛降温的方法是在饲料槽上方安装喷嘴,间歇地给正在进食的动物背部喷水(例如,在本研究中为 5 分钟喷水,10 分钟停喷)。本研究的目的是确定这种类型的喷头系统如何影响行为(单处理阶段),以及当奶牛被允许在有或没有喷头的饲料槽之间选择时,它们的偏好如何(选择阶段)。在温暖的环境条件下,对 8 组 3 头奶牛(n=8 组)进行了 24 小时/天的数据采集[空气温度(平均值±标准偏差):24 小时平均=24.5±2.5°C,最大=36.0±3.5°C]。在单处理阶段,奶牛连续 2 天在有或没有喷头的遮阳饲料槽中进食,交叉设计平衡暴露顺序。当喷头开启时,与没有喷头时相比,奶牛在饲料槽旁的时间更多,无论是进食时(喷头 vs. 无喷头:3.5 vs. 2.5h/24h,标准误差(SE)=0.12h)还是站立不进食时(4.3 vs. 2.3h/24h,SE=0.32 h)。喷头降低了奶牛的平均 24 小时核心温度(38.8 与 39.2°C,SE=0.08°C),特别是在较热的天气下。水冷却还减轻了天气对进食时间的影响,当奶牛没有喷头时,随着热负荷(空气温度和温湿度指数)的增加,进食时间减少,但当提供喷头时,进食时间没有变化。在选择阶段,在两种处理方式下,奶牛可以自由进食 5 天,并评估其偏好。所有组都更喜欢有喷头的饲料槽(在靠近两个饲料槽的地方,喷头组花费 78%的时间,SE=3.9%),而且这种偏好的程度随热负荷线性增加。在研究的两个阶段,当头部位置是可选的(即站立不进食)时,奶牛会保护头部免受直接喷水:当喷头开启时,奶牛更有可能把头伸进头门(单处理阶段:喷头开启时分别有 78%和 59%的时间站立不进食,SE=2.8%;选择阶段:喷头开启时分别有 71%和 52%的时间站立不进食,SE=2.0%)。总之,尽管奶牛避免弄湿头部,但这是首次表明奶牛很容易使用并明显更喜欢安装在饲料槽上方的喷头,这可能是因为这种资源提供了冷却效果。