Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:49:42.044Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Factors affecting milk production in Improved Awassi dairy ewes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

E. Gootwine
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Reproduction, Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Centre, PO Box 6, Bet Dagan 50250, Israel
G. E. Pollott
Affiliation:
Imperial College at Wye, University of London, Ashford, Kent TN25 5AH, UK
Get access

Abstract

This study investigated the factors affecting milk production and lactation curve parameters from the complete lactations of Awassi dairy sheep. The animals were kept in a single flock under intensive management and milked twice daily starting at lambing. Lambs were removed from the ewes at birth into an artificial rearing unit. The results of the analyses of 3740 complete lactations showed a mean litter size of 1·28 lambs born per ewe lambing and average total milk yield of 506 l from lactations 214 days in length and with an average lambing interval of 330 days. Mean lactation number was 3·71 and ewes conceived on average in the 6th month of the lactation. The lactations peaked on day 45 at a yield of 3·44 l. The maximum milk secretion potential of the ewes was 3·9 l/day, with milk yield increasing at 62 g/day mid way between lambing and peak yield and declining at 16·5 g/day mid way between peak and the end of lactation. Age at first lambing, lactation number, litter size, month of lambing and month of conception during the lactation had significant effects (P < 0·05) on some or all of the lactation parameters investigated. Relatively high milk yield was obtained in lactations starting in the January to March period. The monthly effect on milk production was explained by significant (P < 0·05) heat load and photoperiod effects. High milk production was found to have a significant (P < 0·05) adverse effect on reproductive performance. Conception followed a significant (P < 0·05) short term variation in milk production.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aharoni, Y., Brosh, A. and Ezra, E. 1999. Effects of heat load and photoperiod on milk yield and composition in three dairy herds in Israel. Animal Science 69: 3747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, D. V. 1994. Heat stress interaction with shade and cooling. Journal of Dairy Science 77: 20442050.Google Scholar
Barillet, F. and Astruc, J. M. 1998. Report of the Working Group on Milk Recording of Sheep: survey of milk recording, use of AI and progeny test, pedigree information and supervisory systems, and on-farm computerisation of data collection in ICAR member countries. Proceedings of the 31st biennial session of the International Committee for Animal Recording (ICAR), Rotorua, New Zealand, 13-18 January 1998. EAAP publication no. 91, pp. 327343.Google Scholar
Barillet, F., Boichard, D., Barbat, A., Astruc, J. M. and Bonaiti, B. 1992. Use of an animal model for genetic evaluation of the Lacaune dairy sheep. Livestock Production Science 31: 287299.Google Scholar
Becker, W. A. 1984. A manual of quantitative genetics. Academic Enterprises, Washington.Google Scholar
Berman, A. and Wolfenson, D. 1992. Environmental modifications to improve production and fertility. In Large dairy herd management (ed. Van, H. H. Horn and Wilcox, C. J.), pp. 126135. American Dairy Science Association, Champain, IL.Google Scholar
Bocquier, F., Kann, G. and Thimonier, J. 1993. Effects of body composition variations on the duration of the postpartum anovulatory period in milked ewes submitted to two different photoperiods. Reproduction, Nutrition, Development 33: 395403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butler, W. R., Fullenkamp, S. M., Cappiello, L. A. and Handwerger, S. 1981. The relationship between breed and litter size in sheep and maternal serum concentrations of placental lactogen, estradiol and progesterone. Journal of Animal Science 53: 10771081.Google Scholar
Butler, W. R. and Smith, R. D. 1989. Interrelationships between energy balance and postpartum reproductive functions in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 72: 767783.Google Scholar
Byatt, J. C., Warren, W. C., Eppard, P. J., Staten, N. R., Krivi, G. G. and Collier, R. J. 1992. Ruminant placental lactogens: structure and biology. Journal of Animal Science 70: 29112923.Google Scholar
Chemineau, P. , Malpaux, B., Delgadillo, J. A., Guerin, Y., Ravault, J. P., Thimonier, J. and Pelletier, J. 1992. Control of sheep and goat reproduction: use of light and melatonin. Animal Reproduction Science 30: 157184.Google Scholar
Epstein, H. 1985. The Awassi sheep with special reference to the improved dairy type. Animal production and health paper no. 57, Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.Google Scholar
Eyal, E., Lawi, A., Folman, Y. and Morag, M. 1978. Lamb and milk production of a flock of dairy ewes under an accelerated breeding regime. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 91: 6979.Google Scholar
Gabina, D., Arrese, F., Arranz, J. and Baltran De Heredia, I. 1993. Average milk yield and environmental effects on Latxa sheep. Journal of Dairy Science, 76: 11911198.Google Scholar
Gootwine, E., Bor, A., Braw-Tal, R. and Zenou, A. 1995. Reproductive performance and milk production of the improved Awassi breed as compared with its crosses with the Booroola Merino. Animal Science 60: 109115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gootwine, E., Leibovich, H., Waisel, G., Zenou, A. and Spormas, I. 1994. “Ewe and Me” on farm software for dairy and mutton sheep and goat flocks. Proceedings of the fifth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Guelph, vol. 22, pp. 6768.Google Scholar
Kassem, R., Owen, J. B. and Fadel, I. 1989. Rebreeding activity in milking Awassi ewes under semi-arid conditions. Animal Production 49: 8993.Google Scholar
Landau, S. and Leibovich, H. 1992. [Nutritional requirements of sheep.] Israel Ministry of Agriculture, Extension Services, Tel Aviv.Google Scholar
Lucy, M. C., Savio, J. D., Badinga, L., De La Sota, R. L. and Thatcher, W. W. 1992. Factors that affect ovarian follicular dynamics in cattle. Journal of Animal Science 70: 36153626.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morant, S. V. and Gnanasakthy, A. 1989. A new approach to the mathematical formulation of lactation curves. Animal Production 49: 151162.Google Scholar
Nebel, R. L. and McGilliard, M. L. 1993. Interactions of high milk yield and reproductive performances in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 76: 32573268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pollott, G. E. 2000. A biological approach to lactation curve analyses for milk yield. Journal of Dairy Science In press.Google Scholar
Pollott, G. E. and Gootwine, E. 2000. Appropriate mathematical models for describing the complete lactation of dairy sheep. Animal Science 71: 197207.Google Scholar
Schofield, S. A., Phillips, C. J. C. and Owens, A. R. 1991. Variation in the milk production, activity rate and impedance of cervical mucus over the oestrus period of dairy cows. Animal Reproduction Science 24: 231248.Google Scholar
Schoknecht, P. A., Nobrega, S. N., Petterson, J. A., Ehrhardt, R. A., Slepetis, R. and Bell, A. W. 1991. Relations between maternal and fetal plasma concentrations of placental lactogen and placental and fetal weights in well-fed ewes. Journal of Animal Science 69: 10591063.Google Scholar
Silanikove, N. 1992. Effects of water scarcity and hot environment on appetite and digestion in ruminants: a review. Livestock Production Science 30: 175194.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1989. SAS user’s guide, version 6, fourth edition, volume 2, GLM-VARCOMP. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1997. SAS/STAT software: changes and enhancements through release 6•12. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar