Lawrence D C, O'Donovan M, Boland T M, Lewis E, Kennedy E
Teagasc, Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland; School of Agriculture and Food Science, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Teagasc, Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland.
J Dairy Sci. 2015 Jan;98(1):338-48. doi: 10.3168/jds.2014-7905. Epub 2014 Nov 14.
The objective of this study was to compare the milk production, dry matter intake, and energy partitioning of autumn-calving Holstein-Friesian cows offered a high or low amount of concentrate using 1 of 2 feeding strategies. One hundred and eight autumn-calving Holstein-Friesian cows were blocked based on milk production data from wk 3 and 4 of lactation, and were divided into low-, medium-, and high-milk yield subgroups. Cows were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 treatments (n=27) in a 2×2 factorial design. Treatment factors were concentrate feeding amount, high concentrate=7.0 (Hi) or low concentrate=4.0kg of DM/cow per day (Lo), and concentrate feeding strategy, flat rate (FR) or group-fed to yield (GFY). In the GFY treatments, cows were allocated concentrate based on their milk yield in the third and fourth weeks of lactation. The lowest-yielding cows (n=9) received 5.3 and 2.3kg of DM of concentrate on the Hi and Lo treatments respectively, the highest-yielding cows (n=9) received 8.7 and 5.7kg of DM of concentrate on the Hi and Lo treatments respectively, and the average yield cows received the same amount of concentrate as the corresponding FR group (i.e., 7.0 and 4.0kg of DM of concentrate on the Hi and Lo treatments, respectively). The proportion of forage in the diet was 63% of total dry matter intake (TDMI) for the Hi treatment and 75% of TDMI for the Lo treatment. No significant interaction was noted between concentrate feeding amount and concentrate feeding strategy for dry matter intake or milk yield. Cows on the Hi treatment had a higher TDMI (18.7±0.36kg/cow per day) compared with cows on the Lo treatment (15.8±0.36kg/cow per day). The milk yield of cows offered the Hi treatment was 1.3kg/cow per day higher than the milk yield of cows on the Lo treatment (23.8±0.31kg/cow per day). Milk solids yield was 0.10kg/cow per day higher on the Hi treatment than on the Lo treatment (1.83±0.03kg of DM/cow per day). Cows on the Hi treatment had an estimated net energy demand of 18.0±0.38 UFL (unité fourragère lait)/cow per day and a net energy intake of 17.6±0.33 UFL/cow per day during the experimental period. Cows on the Lo treatment had an energy demand of 16.8±0.38 UFL/cow per day and an energy intake of 14.9±0.33 UFL/cow per day. No significant difference in TDMI, milk yield, milk solids yield, or energy balance was observed between the FR and GFY treatments. By increasing the total amount of concentrate offered, cows had higher TDMI and energy intake, which resulted in increased milk production and reduced negative energy balance and body condition score loss.
本研究的目的是比较采用两种饲养策略之一的情况下,给秋季产犊的荷斯坦 - 弗里生奶牛提供高量或低量精饲料时的产奶量、干物质摄入量和能量分配情况。108头秋季产犊的荷斯坦 - 弗里生奶牛根据泌乳第3周和第4周的产奶数据进行分组,并分为低产奶量、中产奶量和高产奶量亚组。奶牛按照2×2析因设计随机分配到4种处理之一(每组n = 27头)。处理因素为精饲料饲喂量,高量精饲料 = 7.0(Hi)或低量精饲料 = 4.0千克干物质/头·天(Lo),以及精饲料饲喂策略,平饲(FR)或按产量分组饲喂(GFY)。在GFY处理中,根据奶牛泌乳第3周和第4周的产奶量分配精饲料。产奶量最低的奶牛(n = 9)在Hi和Lo处理中分别获得5.3千克和2.3千克干物质的精饲料,产奶量最高的奶牛(n = 9)在Hi和Lo处理中分别获得8.7千克和5.7千克干物质的精饲料,中产奶量的奶牛获得与相应FR组相同量的精饲料(即Hi和Lo处理中分别为7.0千克和4.0千克干物质的精饲料)。Hi处理日粮中粗饲料占总干物质摄入量(TDMI)的比例为63%,Lo处理为75%。在干物质摄入量或产奶量方面,未发现精饲料饲喂量和精饲料饲喂策略之间存在显著交互作用。Hi处理的奶牛与Lo处理的奶牛相比,TDMI更高(18. .7±0.36千克/头·天)。Hi处理的奶牛产奶量比Lo处理的奶牛高1.3千克/头·天(23.8±0.31千克/头·天)。Hi处理的奶牛乳固体产量比Lo处理高0.10千克/头·天(1.83±0.03千克干物质/头·天)。在实验期间,Hi处理的奶牛估计净能量需求为18.0±0.38奶牛能量单位(UFL)/头·天,净能量摄入量为17.6±0.33 UFL/头·天。Lo处理的奶牛能量需求为16.8±0.38 UFL/头·天,能量摄入量为14.9±0.33 UFL/头·天。在FR和GFY处理之间,未观察到TDMI、产奶量、乳固体产量或能量平衡有显著差异。通过增加精饲料的供给总量,奶牛的TDMI和能量摄入量更高,从而导致产奶量增加,负能量平衡和体况评分损失减少。