Cunha T O, Frizzarini W S, Ribeiro L C, Teixeira N N, Webster H H, Lewandowski L R, Zhu R, Dettlaff S E, Arriola Apelo S I, Shaver R D, Toledo M Z, Martins J P N, Wiltbank M C, Hernandez L L
Department of Animal and Dairy Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706.
Purina Animal Nutrition, Land O'Lakes Inc., Sun Prairie, WI 53718.
J Dairy Sci. 2025 Sep;108(9):10365-10376. doi: 10.3168/jds.2024-26188. Epub 2025 Jul 8.
Our primary objective was to investigate the effect of 2 dietary treatments differing in energy density during late lactation on body reserves and the subsequent effects on the next dry period and lactation of high-producing Holstein cows. At 150 d of gestation, 66 multiparous lactating Holstein dairy cows were blocked by expected calving date and then randomly assigned to 2 dietary treatment groups that were fed either a high-energy diet (HE; 1.74 Mcal NEL kg DM) or a low-energy diet (LE; 1.50 Mcal NEL kg DM) to achieve a high or normal BCS at dry-off, respectively. Thereafter, both groups were fed identical diets. At dry-off, the HE group had higher BCS (3.69 ± 0.08 vs. 3.25 ± 0.05) and backfat thickness (BFT; 43.9 ± 2.5 vs. 37.1 ± 1.3 mm) compared with the LE group. Subsequently, during the dry period, LE cows had increased BFT and increased daily rumination time by 20 min compared with the HE group. During the last 10 d of gestation and the first 21 DIM, LE cows had increased DMI compared with HE cows. De novo fatty acid (FA; <C FA) content in milk relative to total FA concentrations (preformed FA and mixed FA) was lower in the HE group during the first 21 d of lactation, averaging 18.6% versus 20.2% ± 0.3% compared with LE cows. No differences in energy balance or milk production were detected during the first 3 wk of lactation or during the first 90 DIM. Circulating nonesterified fatty acid concentrations tended to differ between treatments (0.51 and 0.46 ± 0.01 mmol/L for HE and LE, respectively); however, no differences in BHB were detected between groups. In summary, dietary energy manipulation during late lactation led to differences in body reserves at dry-off, which were followed by distinct changes in body reserves during the dry period and early lactation. These patterns may reflect adjustments in feed intake in response to internal cues related to body fat, suggesting a possible regulatory mechanism toward an individual adiposity setpoint.
我们的主要目标是研究泌乳后期两种能量密度不同的日粮处理对高产荷斯坦奶牛体储备的影响,以及随后对下一干奶期和泌乳期的影响。在妊娠150天时,66头经产泌乳荷斯坦奶牛按预期产犊日期进行分组,然后随机分为2个日粮处理组,分别饲喂高能日粮(HE;1.74 Mcal NEL/kg DM)或低能日粮(LE;1.50 Mcal NEL/kg DM),以使干奶时达到较高或正常的体况评分(BCS)。此后,两组均饲喂相同的日粮。干奶时,与LE组相比,HE组的BCS更高(3.69±0.08对3.25±0.05),背膘厚度(BFT)更厚(43.9±2.5对37.1±1.3 mm)。随后,在干奶期,与HE组相比,LE组奶牛的BFT增加,每日反刍时间增加20分钟。在妊娠最后10天和产犊后前21天,与HE组奶牛相比,LE组奶牛的干物质采食量(DMI)增加。在泌乳期的前21天,HE组牛奶中从头合成脂肪酸(FA;<C FA)含量相对于总FA浓度(预先形成的FA和混合FA)较低,与LE组奶牛相比,平均为18.6%对20.2%±0.3%。在泌乳期的前三周或产犊后前90天,未检测到能量平衡或产奶量的差异。不同处理间循环非酯化脂肪酸浓度存在差异趋势(HE组和LE组分别为0.51和0.46±0.01 mmol/L);然而,两组间β-羟丁酸(BHB)未检测到差异。总之,泌乳后期的日粮能量调控导致干奶时体储备的差异,随后在干奶期和泌乳早期体储备发生明显变化。这些模式可能反映了采食量根据与体脂相关的内部信号进行的调整,提示可能存在针对个体肥胖设定点的调节机制。