Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork P61C996, Ireland; Animal Production Systems Group, Wageningen University & Research, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Animal Production Systems Group, Wageningen University & Research, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Animal. 2024 Aug;18(8):101222. doi: 10.1016/j.animal.2024.101222. Epub 2024 Jun 20.
Internationally, consumer dissatisfaction with cow-calf separation at birth has led to increased interest in alternative calf-rearing methods, specifically cow-calf contact (CCC) systems. The objectives of this preliminary study were to estimate whether CCC could be incorporated into an Irish spring-calving, pasture-based system, and to investigate the effects on cow milk production and health. Three systems were compared: the conventional Irish system (CONV;18 cows), cow and calf were separated < 1 h postbirth, cows were pasture-based and milked twice-a-day; a full-time access system (FT;14 cows), cow and calf were allowed constant, unrestricted access, were pasture-based, and cows were milked twice-a-day; and a part-time access system (PT;18 cows), cow and calf had unrestricted access when indoors at night, cows grazed outdoors by day while calves remained indoors, and cows were milked once-a-day in the morning. Cows were blocked and balanced across the three systems by previous lactation machine milk yield (MMY), BW, and body condition score (BCS). Following an 8-week CCC period, all calves were weaned (FT and PT underwent a 7-d gradual weaning and separation process) and all cows were milked twice-a-day. Cow MMY was recorded daily and milk composition was recorded weekly; milk data were analysed from weeks 1 to 8 (CCC period), weeks 9 to 35 (post-CCC period), and weeks 1 to 35 (cumulative lactation). Cow BW and BCS were taken weekly for weeks 1-12, and at the end of the lactation. During the CCC period, all systems differed (P < 0.001) in MMY (mean ± SEM; 24.0, 13.6, and 10.3 ± 0.50 kg/d for CONV, FT, and PT cows, respectively). After the CCC period, CONV MMY (20.2 ± 0.48 kg/d) remained higher (P < 0.001) than the FT (16.6 kg/d) and PT cows (15.7 kg/d). The FT and PT cows yielded 24 and 31% less in cumulative lactation MMY and 26 and 35% less in cumulative lactation milk solids yield, respectively, compared to CONV (5 072 ± 97.0 kg and 450 ± 8.7 kg). During the CCC period, somatic cell score was higher (P = 0.030) in PT cows (5.15 ± 0.118) compared to FT cows (4.70 ± 0.118), while CONV (4.94 ± 0.118) were inconclusive to both. The PT cows (523 ± 4.9 and 520 ± 6.8 kg) were heavier than the CONV (474 ± 4.9 and 479 ± 6.8 kg) and FT (488 ± 4.9 and 487 ± 6.8 kg) cows at week 4 and week 8 (both P < 0.001). The PT cows had higher BCS than CONV and FT at all observed times. This preliminary research suggests that although CCC was incorporated without impacting cow health, the two CCC systems investigated negatively affected cow production.
国际上,消费者对牛犊出生时与母牛分离的不满导致人们对替代犊牛饲养方法的兴趣增加,特别是母牛小牛接触(CCC)系统。本初步研究的目的是估计 CCC 是否可以纳入爱尔兰春季产犊的牧场系统,并研究其对奶牛产奶量和健康的影响。比较了三种系统:传统的爱尔兰系统(CONV;18 头牛),母牛小牛在出生后 <1 小时分离,母牛为牧场基础,每天挤奶两次;全时访问系统(FT;14 头牛),母牛小牛可以自由、不受限制地接触,牧场基础,每天挤奶两次;和分时访问系统(PT;18 头牛),母牛小牛在晚上室内自由进入,白天在户外放牧,小牛留在室内,早上在室内挤奶一次。根据前次泌乳机产奶量(MMY)、BW 和体况评分(BCS),将母牛按 BLOCK 分成三组。在进行了 8 周的 CCC 后,所有的小牛都断奶(FT 和 PT 进行了 7 天的逐渐断奶和分离过程),所有的母牛每天挤奶两次。记录了母牛的 MMY 每日记录和每周记录的牛奶成分;从第 1 周到第 8 周(CCC 期)、第 9 周到第 35 周(CCC 后)和第 1 周到第 35 周(累积泌乳期)分析了牛奶数据。在第 1 周到第 12 周每周测量母牛 BW 和 BCS,在泌乳期末测量。在 CCC 期间,所有系统的 MMY 均不同(P<0.001)(平均值±SEM;CONV、FT 和 PT 牛的 MMY 分别为 24.0、13.6 和 10.3±0.50kg/d)。在 CCC 期之后,CONV 的 MMY(20.2±0.48kg/d)仍然高于 FT(16.6kg/d)和 PT(15.7kg/d)。与 CONV(5072±97.0kg 和 450±8.7kg)相比,FT 和 PT 牛在累积泌乳期 MMY 和累积泌乳期牛奶固体产量中分别减少了 24%和 31%,减少了 26%和 35%。在 CCC 期间,PT 牛的体细胞评分(P=0.030)高于 FT 牛(5.15±0.118),而 CONV 牛(4.94±0.118)则无明显差异。PT 牛(523±4.9 和 520±6.8kg)在第 4 周和第 8 周时比 CONV(474±4.9 和 479±6.8kg)和 FT(488±4.9 和 487±6.8kg)牛重(均 P<0.001)。PT 牛在所有观察时间的 BCS 都高于 CONV 和 FT。本初步研究表明,尽管 CCC 的实施没有影响牛的健康,但研究的两种 CCC 系统对牛的生产都产生了负面影响。