Verdú M, Bach A, Devant M
J Anim Sci. 2015 Jun;93(6):3018-33. doi: 10.2527/jas.2014-8540.
A total of 240 Holstein bulls (121 ± 2.0 kg initial BW; 99 ± 1.0 d of age), from 2 consecutive fattening cycles, were randomly allocated in 1 of 6 pens and assigned to 1 of the 3 treatments consisting of different concentrate feeder designs: a control feeder with 4 feeding spaces (CF), a feeder with less concentrate capacity (CFL), and a single-space feeder with lateral protections (SF). Each pen had a straw feeder and a drinker. All animals were fed a high-concentrate diet for ad libitum intake. Concentrate consumption was recorded daily using a computerized feeder, straw consumption was recorded weekly, and BW was recorded every 14 d. Animal behavior was registered on d 1, 3, 5, 8, and 14 and every 28 d by scan sampling. Eating behavior at concentrate feeders was filmed on d 12, 125, and 206. On d 7, 120, and 204, samples of rumen contents were collected for measurement of pH and VFA and blood samples were obtained to analyze NEFA, haptoglobin, glucose, and insulin. Animals were slaughtered after 223 d, and HCW and lesions of the rumen wall and liver were recorded. The accumulative concentrate consumption per animal tended (P = 0.09) to be greater with CF than with CFL and SF. Also, CV of concentrate consumption was greater (P < 0.01) for SF than for CF or CFL. However, feeder design did not influence the other performance and carcass data. Also, no differences among treatments in rumen wall evaluation and liver abscesses were observed. At 7 and 204 d of study, SF bulls had greater (P < 0.05) rumen pH compared with CF and CFL bulls. On d 7, the acetate to propionate ratio from SF was greater (P < 0.05) than for CFL or CF. At d 7, NEFA of SF were greater (P < 0.05) compared with CF and CFL. Bulls fed with CF have the greatest (P < 0.01) concentrate disappearance velocity followed by bulls fed with CFL and finally by bulls fed with SF, and this was associated with different feeding behaviors. Bulls on SF spent more time (P < 0.05) eating straw and exhibited fewer (P < 0.05) displacements at concentrate feeder than CF and CFL bulls. The CFL bulls exhibited (P < 0.01) more attempted mounts and tended (P = 0.10) to exhibit more completed mounts than CF bulls. In conclusion, both alternative feeder designs (CFL and SF) are good strategies to reduce total concentrate consumption without impairing performance, rumen health, or animal welfare in Holstein bulls fed high-concentrate diets. However, at the beginning, there was evidence that animals fed using SF had problems with adaptation.
总共240头荷斯坦公牛（初始体重121±2.0千克；年龄99±1.0天），来自连续两个育肥周期，被随机分配到6个围栏中的1个，并被分配到3种处理方式中的1种，这3种处理方式由不同的精料饲喂器设计组成：一个有4个采食空间的对照饲喂器（CF）、一个精料容量较小的饲喂器（CFL）和一个带有侧向保护的单空间饲喂器（SF）。每个围栏都有一个秸秆饲喂器和一个饮水器。所有动物都饲喂高浓缩日粮，自由采食。每天使用计算机化饲喂器记录精料消耗量，每周记录秸秆消耗量，每14天记录体重。在第1、3、5、8和14天以及每28天通过扫描取样记录动物行为。在第12、125和206天拍摄精料饲喂器处的采食行为。在第7、120和204天，采集瘤胃内容物样本测量pH值和挥发性脂肪酸，并采集血样分析非酯化脂肪酸、触珠蛋白、葡萄糖和胰岛素。223天后屠宰动物，记录热胴体重以及瘤胃壁和肝脏的病变情况。每头动物的累计精料消耗量，CF组比CFL组和SF组有更高的趋势（P = 0.09）。此外，SF组精料消耗量的变异系数比CF组或CFL组更大（P < 0.01）。然而，饲喂器设计并未影响其他生产性能和胴体数据。此外，各处理组在瘤胃壁评估和肝脓肿方面未观察到差异。在研究的第7天和204天，SF组公牛的瘤胃pH值高于CF组和CFL组公牛（P < 0.05）。在第7天，SF组的乙酸与丙酸比值高于CFL组或CF组（P < 0.05）。在第7天，SF组的非酯化脂肪酸高于CF组和CFL组（P < 0.05）。饲喂CF的公牛精料消失速度最快（P < 0.01），其次是饲喂CFL的公牛，最后是饲喂SF的公牛，这与不同的采食行为有关。SF组的公牛花费更多时间采食秸秆（P < 0.05），并且在精料饲喂器处的驱赶行为比CF组和CFL组公牛少（P < 0.05）。CFL组公牛比CF组公牛表现出更多的爬跨尝试（P < 0.01），并且有更多完成爬跨的趋势（P = 0.10）。总之，两种替代饲喂器设计（CFL和SF）都是减少高浓缩日粮荷斯坦公牛总精料消耗量的良好策略，且不会损害其生产性能、瘤胃健康或动物福利。然而，在开始时，有证据表明使用SF饲喂的动物存在适应问题。
