Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T18:27:21.609Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of cow genetic merit for milk production on response to level of concentrate supplementation in a grass-based system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

J. Kennedy ,
P. Dillon ,
P. Faverdin ,
L. Delaby ,
F. Buckley  and
M. Rath
J. Kennedy
Affiliation:
Dairy Production Department, Teagasc, Moorepark Production Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
P. Dillon
Affiliation:
Dairy Production Department, Teagasc, Moorepark Production Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
P. Faverdin
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR Production du lait, 35590 St Gilles, France
L. Delaby
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR Production du lait, 35590 St Gilles, France
F. Buckley
Affiliation:
Dairy Production Department, Teagasc, Moorepark Production Research Centre, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
M. Rath
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
Get access

Abstract

The objective of this study was to investigate if there is a genotype ✕ feeding system interaction for milk production in Holstein-Friesian dairy cows. For this purpose, 48 high genetic merit (HM) and 48 medium genetic merit (MM) dairy cows, were used in a two (genotypes) ✕ three (levels of concentrate feeding) randomized-block design experiment in three consecutive years. In year 1, all animals were in their first lactation, while in year 2 and year 3, 18 and 12 first lactation cows replaced animals culled at the end of the previous lactation. A total of 66 cows remained in the study in the same feeding system for the 3-year duration of the study. Concentrate feeding levels were 376, 810 and 1540 kg per cow per lactation; these were identified as the LC, MC and HC feeding systems respectively. There was a separate farmlet for each feeding system; farmlets were managed so that pre-grazing and post-grazing herbage height were similar for all three feeding systems. When compared on treatment means there was a significant genotype ✕ feeding system interaction for fat yield, while for mean solid-corrected milk yield the interaction was close to statistical significance (P = 0·07). However, regression coefficients of both milk and protein yield on pedigree index for milk and protein yield were significantly different between the LC and the HC. The interaction between feeding system and the regression of both on pre-experimental milk and protein yield were close to statistical significance (P = 0·08 and P = 0·09 respectively). Outputs of milk, fat, protein and lactose were greater for the HM than the MM cows. Feeding system had a significant effect on milk, fat, protein and lactose yields. There was a significant genotype ✕ feeding system interaction for body condition score (BCS) at the end of lactation; the MM cows had a higher rate of body tissue repletion than the HM cows especially in the HC system. The results suggest that there is a genotype ✕ concentrate feeding level interaction and that feeding systems developed in the past for animals of lower genetic merit may require adaptation if they are to be optimal for higher genetic merit animals.

Keywords

concentratesdairy cowsgenotype nutrition interactiongrazingmilk production.
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 75 , Issue 3 , December 2002 , pp. 433 - 445
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2002

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

Agricultural and Food Research Council. 1993. Energy and protein requirements of ruminants. An advisory manual prepared by the AFRC Technical Committee on Response to Nutrients. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1993. International benchmarking in the Australian dairy industry. Prepared for the Dairy Research and Development Corporation by the Boston Consulting Group incorporating Pappas Carter, Evans and Koop.Google Scholar
Broster, W. H. and Broster, V. J. 1984. Reviews of the progress of dairy science: long term effects of the plane of nutrition on the performance of the dairy cow. Journal of Dairy Research 51: 149–196.Google Scholar
Buckley, F., Dillon, P., Crosse, S., Flynn, F. and Rath, M. 2000a. The performance of Holstein-Friesian dairy cows of high and medium merit for milk production on grass based feeding systems. Livestock Production Science 64: 107–119.Google Scholar
Buckley, F., Dillon, P., Mee, J. F., Evans, R. and Veerkamp, R. F. 2000b. Trends in genetic merit for milk production and reproductive performance. Proceedings of the Teagasc national dairy conference 2000, ‘Dairying 2000 – opportunities for the new millennium’, Silver Springs Hotel, Cork, Ireland, pp. 43–59.Google Scholar
Castle, M. E., Reiter, W. C. and Watson, J. N. 1980. Silage and milk production: a comparison between three-grass silages at different digestibilities. Grass and Forage Science 35: 219–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clancy, M. J. and Wilson, R. K. 1966. Development and application of a new chemical method for predicting the digestibility and intake of herbage samples. Proceedings of the 10th international grassland congress, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 445–452.Google Scholar
Cromie, A. R., Kelleher, D. L., Gordan, F. J. and Rath, M. 1998. Genotype by environment interaction for milk production traits in Holstein-Friesian dairy cattle in Ireland. Proceedings INTERBULL open management, 18-19 January, Rotorau, New Zealand, bulletin no 18. INTERBULL, Uppsala, Sweden.Google Scholar
Delaby, L., Peyraud, J. L. and Delagarde, R. 2001. Effect of the level of concentrate supplementation, herbage allowance and milk yield at turn-out on the performance of dairy cows in mid lactation at grazing. Animal Science 73: 171–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillon, P., Crosse, S. and O’Brien, B. 1997. Effect of concentrate supplementation of grazing dairy cows in early lactation on milk production and milk processing quality. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research 36: 145–159.Google Scholar
Dillon, P., Crosse, S., Stakelum, G. and Flynn, F. 1995. The effect of calving date and stocking rate on the performance of spring-calving dairy cows. Grass and Forage Science 50: 286–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferris, C. P., Gordan, F. J., Patterson, D. C., Mayne, C. S. and Kilpatrick, D. J. 1999. The influence of dairy cow genetic merit on the direct and residual response to level of concentrate supplementation. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 132: 467–481.Google Scholar
Fulkerson, W. J. 2000. The productivity of Friesian cows: effect of genetic merit and level of concentrate feeding. Final report – DAN 082.Google Scholar
Funk, D. A. 1993. Optimal genetic improvement for the high producing herd. Journal of Dairy Science 76: 3278–3286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garnsworthy, P. C. 1988. The effect of energy reserves at calving on performance of dairy cows. In Nutrition and lactation in the dairy cow. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
Gibb, M. J., Ivings, W. E., Dhanoa, M. S. and Sutton, J. D. 1992. Changes in body components of autumn-calving Holstein-Friesian cows over the first 29 weeks of lactation. Animal Production 55: 339–360.Google Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1984. The effect of level of concentrate supplementation given with grass silage during the winter on total lactation performance of autumn-calving dairy cows. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 102: 163–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, F. J., Patterson, D. C., Yan, T., Porter, M. G., Mayne, C. S. and Unsworth, E. F. 1995. The influence of genetic index for milk production on the response to complete diet feeding and the utilization of energy and nitrogen. Animal Science 61: 199–210.Google Scholar
Grainger, C., Davey, A. W. F. and Holmes, C. W. 1985. The performance of Friesian cows with high and low breeding indexes. 1. Stall feeding and grazing experiments and performance during the whole lactation. Animal Production 40: 379–388.Google Scholar
Hoden, A., Peyraud, J. L., Muller, A., Delaby, L., Faverdin, P., Peccatte, J. R. and Fargetton, M. 1991. Simplified rotational grazing management of dairy cows: effects of rates of stocking and concentrate. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 116: 417–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchings, N. J. 1991. Spatial heterogeneity and other sources of variance in sward height as measured by the sonic and the HFRO sward sticks. Grass and Forage Science 46: 277–282.Google Scholar
Kolver, E. S., Napper, A. R., Copeman, P. J. A. and Muller, L. D. 2001. A comparison of New Zealand and overseas Holstein-Friesian heifers. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 60: 265–269.Google Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust. 1997. Genstat 5, release 4. 1. IACR-Rothamsted, Harpenden.Google Scholar
Leaver, J. D., Campling, R. C. and Holmes, W. 1968. Use of supplementary feeds for grazing dairy cows. Dairy Science Abstracts 30: 355–361.Google Scholar
Lindberg, C. M., Swanson, G. J. T. and Mrode, R. A. 1998. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science, 1998, p. 191.Google Scholar
Lowman, B. G., Scott, N. and Somerville, S. 1976. Condition scoring of cattle, revised edition. Bulletin of the East of Scotland College of Agriculture, no. 6.Google Scholar
Lucy, M. C. 2001. Reproductive physiology and management of high yielding dairy cattle. Livestock Improvement Corporation lecture, Department of Animal Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211, USA.Google Scholar
Mayne, C. S. and Gordon, F. J. 1995. Implications of genotype ✕ nutrition interactions for efficiency of milk production systems. In Breeding and feeding the high genetic merit dairy cow (ed. Lawrence, T. L. J., Gordon, F. J. and Carson, A.), British Society of Animal Production occasional publication no. 19, pp. 67–77.Google Scholar
Morgan, D. J., Stakelum, G. and Dwyer, J. 1989. Modified neutral detergent cellulase digestibility procedure for use with the “fibertec” system. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 28: 91–92.Google Scholar
O’Donovan, M. 2000. The relationship between the performance of dairy cows and grassland management on intensive dairy farms in Ireland. PhD. thesis, University College Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
Reis, R. B. and Combs, D. K. 2000. Effects of increasing levels of grain supplementation on rumen environment and lactation performance of dairy cows grazing grass legume pasture. Journal of Dairy Science 83: 2888–2898.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stakelum, G., Dillon, P. and Murphy, J. 1988. Supplementary feeding of grazing dairy cows. Proceedings of Moorepark dairy conference, Teagasc, Dublin, pp. 25–27.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1991. User’s guide: statistics. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. 1980. Conserved forages. In Feeding strategies for dairy cows (ed. Broster, W. H., Johnson, C. L. and Tyler, J. C.), pp. 8. 10–8. 14. Agricultural Research Council, London.Google Scholar
Tilley, M. A. and Terry, R. A. 1963. A two-stage technique for the in-vitro digestion of forage crops. Journal of the British Grassland Society 31: 69–72.Google Scholar
Tyrell, H. F. and Reid, J. T. 1965. Prediction of the energy value of cow’s milk. Journal of Dairy Science 48: 1215–1223.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J., Wine, R. H. and Moore, L. A. 1966. Estimation of the true digestibility of forages by the in–vitro digestion of cell wall. Proceedings of the 10th international grassland congress, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 438–441.Google Scholar
Veerkamp, R. F. and Brotherstone, S. 1997. Genetic correlation’s between linear type traits, feed intake, live weight and BCS in Holstein-Friesian dairy cattle. Journal of Animal Science 64: 385–392.Google Scholar
Veerkamp, R. F. and Emmans, G. C. 1995. Sources of genetic variation in energetic efficiency of dairy cows. Livestock Production Science 44: 87–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veerkamp, R. F., Koenen, E. P. C. and De Jong, G. 2001. Genetic correlations among BCS, yield, and fertility in first parity cows estimated by random regression models. Journal of Dairy Science 84: 2327–2335.Google Scholar
Veerkamp, R. F., Simm, G. and Oldham, J. D. 1994. Effects of interaction between genotype and feeding system on milk production, feed intake, efficiency and body tissue mobilization in dairy cows. Livestock Production Science 39: 229–241.Google Scholar
Weigel, K., Rekaya, R., Fikse, F., Zwald, N. and Gianola, D. 2000. Preliminary report on international dairy sire evaluation using individual performance records. Proceedings INTERBULL meeting, 14-15 January 2000, Bled, Slovenia, bulletin no. 25. INTERBULL, Uppsala, Sweden.Google Scholar