Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T06:59:17.913Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Ration particle size has different effects on digestive but not production parameters in higher-yielding (Holstein) compared to lower-yielding (Girolando) cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2024

Rafael Sandin Ribeiro
Affiliation:
Department of Biosystems and Engineering, Federal University of São João del-Rei, São João del-Rei, MG, Brazil
Abias Santos Silva
Affiliation:
Embrapa Dairy Cattle, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
Jaciara Diavão
Affiliation:
Embrapa Dairy Cattle, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
João Paulo Sacramento
Affiliation:
Department of Biosystems and Engineering, Federal University of São João del-Rei, São João del-Rei, MG, Brazil
Duarte Minighin
Affiliation:
Department of Biosystems and Engineering, Federal University of São João del-Rei, São João del-Rei, MG, Brazil
Thierry Ribeiro Tomich
Affiliation:
Embrapa Dairy Cattle, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
Fernanda Samarini Machado
Affiliation:
Embrapa Dairy Cattle, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
Mariana Magalhães Campos
Affiliation:
Embrapa Dairy Cattle, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
Luiz Gustavo Ribeiro Pereira
Affiliation:
Embrapa Dairy Cattle, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg C, Denmark
Rogério Martins Maurício
Affiliation:
Department of Biosystems and Engineering, Federal University of São João del-Rei, São João del-Rei, MG, Brazil
Alexandre Vieira Chaves*
Affiliation:
School of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
*
Corresponding author: Alexandre Vieira Chaves Email: alex.chaves@sydney.edu.au
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of total mixed ration particle size (length) and breed of cow on intake dynamics, animal performance and CH4 emissions, comparing high yielding Holstein and low yielding Girolando cows. The experimental design was 2 × 2 Latin Square arranged as a crossover factorial scheme with two diets (short particle size, SPS and long particle size, LPS) and the two breed compositions. The design comprised two periods of 26 d each, where all data collection was performed at cow level. No influence of the particle size occurred for the passage rate, neutral detergent fiber digestibility, performance and milk composition, methane emissions or ruminal fermentation parameters. Girolando cows had greater dry matter intake (DMI) when fed SPS, while Holsteins had the same (P < 0.05). Girolando cows had lower dry matter digestibility when fed LPS compared to SPS, while Holsteins had the opposite effect (P < 0.05). Also, the digestibility of crude protein and non-fibrous carbohydrates decreased in Girolando cows fed LPS, but not in Holsteins (P < 0.05). Girolando cows reduced DMI by 10.6% when fed LPS diet (P < 0.05). Girolando had an increased eating rate (+24 g of DM/min; P < 0.05) compared to Holstein cows, but Holstein cows had a lower CH4 intensity (by 29.7%: P < 0.05). Girolando cows increased the dry matter intake when fed a diet with short particle size, while the same did not happen in Holsteins. Dry matter digestibility increased in Holsteins when fed long particle size, while the opposite was observed in Girolando cows. Nutrient digestibility was reduced in Girolando cows when fed short particle size. Particle size did not influence eating time, eating rate, feed trough visits, visits with intake, milk yield and composition regardless of the breed. Reducing particle size increased CH4 intensity in both breeds.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Hannah Dairy Research Foundation

Dairy cows are commonly fed total mixed ration (TMR) on commercial dairy farms. This feed practice has several advantages compared to providing the diet components separately, including higher dry matter intake (DMI) and lower sorting by the animals (Cooke et al., Reference Cooke, Monahan, Brophy and Boland2004; Bharanidharan et al., Reference Bharanidharan, Arokiyaraj, Kim, Lee, Woo, Na, Kim and Kim2018). In addition, an earlier study observed that the TMR in feed mixers promotes a particle size reduction (Bharanidharan et al., Reference Bharanidharan, Arokiyaraj, Kim, Lee, Woo, Na, Kim and Kim2018).

This reduction of the particle size (PS) can cause changes in the fermentation rate passing through the rumen, resulting in an increase in DMI, reduced ruminal neutral detergent fiber (NDF) degradation (Nasrollahi et al., Reference Nasrollahi, Imani and Zebeli2015; Haselmann et al., Reference Haselmann, Zehetgruber, Fuerst-Waltl, Zollitsch, Knaus and Zebeli2019) and possibly lower enteric methane (CH4) yield and intensity (Knapp et al., Reference Knapp, Laur, Vadas, Weiss and Tricarico2014). Some studies demonstrated effects of particle size promoted by chopping of the bulky forages on DMI (Yang and Beauchemin, Reference Yang and Beauchemin2006; Alamouti et al., Reference Alamouti, Alikhani, Ghorbani, Teimouri-Yansari and Bagheri2014), animal performance (Alamouti et al., Reference Alamouti, Alikhani, Ghorbani, Teimouri-Yansari and Bagheri2014; Ramirez et al., Reference Ramirez, Harvatine and Kononoff2016), ingestive behavior and mastication (Alamouti et al., Reference Alamouti, Alikhani, Ghorbani and Zebeli2009, Reference Alamouti, Alikhani, Ghorbani, Teimouri-Yansari and Bagheri2014), digesta passage rate (Ramirez et al., Reference Ramirez, Harvatine and Kononoff2016), ruminal fermentation profile and nutrients apparent digestibility (Alamouti et al., Reference Alamouti, Alikhani, Ghorbani and Zebeli2009, Reference Alamouti, Alikhani, Ghorbani, Teimouri-Yansari and Bagheri2014). However, only one study has reported the effects of particle size on CH4 yield (Wang et al., Reference Wang, Larsen, Weisbjerg, Johansen, Hellwing and Lund2022).

The effect of PS on ruminant feeding depends on many factors, such as the forage type, concentrate bulk ratio and feeding level (Tafaj et al., Reference Tafaj, Zebeli, Baes, Steingass and Drochner2007; Li et al., Reference Li, Beauchemin and Yang2020). To our knowledge, no studies evaluated the effect of PS and breed composition on CH4 yield and ingestive behavior under tropical conditions using crossbreeding dairy cows (Bos taurus × Bos indicus). The understanding of the effects of diet PS on Girolando ingestive behavior, animal performance and CH4 emissions is still unclear compared to Holstein cows. So, we hypothesized that the PS (short or long) affects the ingestive behavior, performance, and the CH4 emissions of Holstein and Girolando lactating dairy cows in a different manner. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the effects of TMR particle size (length) and breed of cow on intake dynamics, performance and CH4 emissions in Holstein and Girolando lactating dairy cows.

Materials and methods

The study was performed at the Multi-use Livestock Laboratory of Bioefficiency and Sustainability, Embrapa Dairy Cattle, Minas Gerais, Brazil (21°33′22″S, 43°06′15″W). The procedures were approved by the Embrapa Dairy Cattle Animal Care and Use Committee (protocol n° 6250160316).

Experimental animals

Eight multiparous lactating cows (four Holstein cows with 636 ± 37.8 kg of body weight (BW) and four multiparous Girolando cows [½ Holstein × ½ Gyr]), (BW = 649 ± 62.4 kg), paired by milk production level (26.3 ± 1.29 and 14.0 ± 1.11 kg/d, respectively) and days in milk (DIM: 98.8 ± 1.89 and 97.0 ± 2.71 d, respectively) were used.

Experimental design and treatments

The experimental design was 2 × 2 Latin Square arranged as a crossover factorial scheme with two diets (short particle size, SPS or long particle size, LPS) and two breeds (Holstein and Girolando) comprising two periods of 26 d each (online Supplementary Fig. S1), where all data collection was performed at a cow level. Two particle size lengths of a diet based on maize silage, Tifton hay (Cynodon spp.), soybean meal, ground corn, and mineral mix were evaluated. The ingredient percentages used in the formulation were the same for both treatments (online Supplementary Tables S1, S2, and S3). The diets were formulated using the software Large Ruminant Nutrition System (version 1.0.29: Texas A&M University, Texas, Amarillo, USA; Fox et al., Reference Fox, Tedeschi, Tylutki, Russell, Van Amburgh, Chase, Pell and Overton2004) for supplying the maintenance and milk yield requirements (26.3 ± 1.29 and 14.0 ± 1.11 kg/d for Holstein and Girolando, respectively). Weekly, the dry matter (DM) of maize silage and Tifton hay was determined at 135°C for two h according to the method 930.15 (AOAC, 1990) to correct the proportions of the TMR. Feed samples (diet offered, refusals, and feces) were dried in a forced ventilation oven at 55°C for 72 h, ground (Wiley mill; A. H. Thomas) through a 1-mm screen sieve and grouped (DM basis) by period for each cow. Individual samples were analyzed for DM, OM, total N, ether extract (EE), and ash according to methods 930.15, 942.05, 984.13, 920.39, and 942.00, respectively (AOAC, 2005).

Intake and ingestive behavior

During the adaptation period and the last five days (day 21 to 26) of each experimental period, the cows were housed in a free stall barn equipped with individual automatic electronic bins (feeders, water drinker, and weighing device: AF-1000 Master Gate Intergado®, Betim, MG, Brazil) for measurements at cow level. Diets were offered at 0900 and 1600 h and to avoid sorting, the amount of feed was adjusted during the first 14 d of each period, calculating feed allowances with a goal of 5% refusals. To measure the DMI and digestibility, the cows were individually allocated to a tie-stall barn. From day 15 to 20 of each experimental period, individual cows' samples of the offered diet and refusals were weighed and collected for further analysis. In addition, the individual ingestive behavior was monitored using electronic bins (Intergado®, Betim, MG, Brazil) (Chizzotti et al., Reference Chizzotti, Machado, Valente, Pereira, Campos, Tomich, Coelho and Ribas2015).

Milk yield and composition

Cows were milked twice daily at 0700 and 1600 h, and the milk yield was recorded automatically using the Delpro Manager System software (DeLaval®, Delpro, Jaguariúna, SP, Brazil), equipped with electronic milk measurer MM23, controls MPC 580/680, and an automatic extractor for sampling milk. Milk yield and individual milk samples were collected daily in two sequential milkings (morning and afternoon) from the 15th to 26th day of the experimental period for measurements of milk composition.

Apparent total tract digestibility

The apparent digestibility of the DM, organic matter (OM), and nutrients (crude protein: CP, neutral detergent fiber: NDF, acid detergent fiber: ADF and non-fibrous carbohydrates: NFC) were estimated by total feces collection during five consecutive periods (day 15 to day 20 of each period).

Methane measurement

The CH4 yield and intensity measurements were performed using four open respiration chambers according to procedures described by Machado et al. (Reference Machado, Tomich, Ferreira, Cavalcanti, Campos, Paiva, Ribas and Pereira2016). The calculation of the CH4 emission was made using the air flux and the difference of the CH4 in the air entering (outside air) and leaving the chambers (Machado et al., Reference Machado, Tomich, Ferreira, Cavalcanti, Campos, Paiva, Ribas and Pereira2016).

Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed using the MIXED procedure of SAS where particle size, breed and interaction were used as fixed effects and cows (n = 8) nested within the period were the random effect. Data were tested for normality of the residues (Shapiro–Wilk; P > 0.05) after model fitting. The Kenward–Roger method was used to calculate the approximate denominator degrees of freedom. Means were compared using the LSMEANS/DIFF. Differences were considered significant when P ≤ 0.05. Additionally, Pearson's correlation analysis among k p and DMI was performed.

Results

Interaction between particle size and breed was significant for DMI where Girolando cows ate less LPS (P < 0.05; Table 1) than SPS. Particle size did not influence time spent at feed trough, eating rate, feed trough visits and visits with intake (P > 0.05; Table 1), even as no interaction was reported for any ingestive behavior response (P > 0.05; Table 1).

Table 1. Effect of the diet particle size (PS) and breed (B) on DM intake and ingestive behavior of DM

DMI, dry matter intake; SPS, short particle size; LPS, long particle size; sem, standard error of the mean; n.s., not significant. PS, effect of particle size (SPS vs. LPS); B, effect of breed (Holstein vs. Girolando); PS × B, effect of interaction between particle size and breed.

Within a row, means with different superscripts are different by Tukey test (P ≤ 0.05).

Passage rate (k p) was greater (P < 0.05; Table 2) in Holstein compared to Girolando (4.97 vs. 4.49%/h, respectively). Holstein cows had lower DM digestibility when fed a SPS diet, while Girolando cows had lower DM digestibility when fed LPS diet (P < 0.05; Table 2). Girolando cows had greater OM, CP, and NFC digestibility when fed SPS (P < 0.05; Table 2). Particle size did not influence milk yield or composition (P > 0.05; Table 3).

Table 2. Effect of the diet particle size (PS) and breed (B) on passage rate, DM, and nutrient apparent digestibility of dairy cows

k p, passage rate; DM, dry matter; OM, organic matter; CP, crude protein; NDF, neutral detergent fiber; ADF, acid detergent fiber; NFC, non-fibrous carbohydrates. SPS, short particle size; LPS, long particle size; sem, standard error of the mean; n.s., not significant. PS, effect of particle size (SPS vs. LPS); B, effect of breed (Holstein vs. Girolando); PS × B, effect of interaction between particle size and breed.

Table 3. Effect of particle size and breed on milk yield, fat-corrected milk, energy-corrected milk, milk composition, and feed efficiency of Holstein and Girolando cows

FCM, fat corrected milk; ECM, energy corrected milk; MUN, milk urea nitrogen. SPS, short particle size; LPS, long particle size; sem, standard error of the mean; n.s., not significant; PS, effect of particle size (SPS vs. LPS); B, effect of breed (Holstein vs. Girolando); PS × B, effect of interaction between particle size and breed.

Cows fed the diet with a SPS had lower CH4 intensity (−29.8%; P < 0.05). Also, Girolando cows had greater CH4 intensity (+42.4%) than Holstein cows (P < 0.05). Interaction particle size × breed was not detected for any parameter of CH4 emissions (P > 0.05) (Table 4).

Table 4. Effect of particle size and breed on CH4 production of Holstein and Girolando cows

SPS, short particle size; LPS, long particle size; sem, standard error of the mean; n.s., not significant. PS, effect of particle size (SPS vs. LPS); B, effect of breed (Holstein vs. Girolando); PS × B, effect of interaction between particle size and breed.

Discussion

Particle size had a distinct influence on the DMI, DM, and nutrient digestibility of Holstein and Girolando lactating dairy cows. Feed intake is regulated by the interaction between physical (retention time) and physiological mechanisms (e.g., osmolarity, hormone release: Allen, Reference Allen2014). Due to their greater milk yield, Holstein cows require more nutrients and energy than Girolando cows. In this scenario, the greater mammary nutrient uptake stimulates DMI, which is associated with a reduction of the available metabolites for liver oxidation (Allen, Reference Allen2014). Girolando cows, due to their lower milk yield, require a lesser quantity of nutrients for the mammary gland, resulting in a greater nutrient availability for liver oxidation and consequently reduction of the appetite (Allen et al., Reference Allen, Bradford and Oba2009; Allen, Reference Allen2014). It is interesting to note that Holstein cows did not exhibit a decreased DMI when fed LPS compared to Girolando cows, possibly due to the greater liver oxidation in Girolando cows fed SPS. Furthermore, this difference in DMI when fed SPS between breeds can also be attributed, in part, to increased rumen capacity in Holstein cows (Allen, Reference Allen2000). Haselmann et al. (Reference Haselmann, Zehetgruber, Fuerst-Waltl, Zollitsch, Knaus and Zebeli2019) demonstrated that Holstein Friesian cows fed a reduced particle size diet increased the DMI by 8.57%. The reduction in particle size most likely increased the pass-through reticulum-rumen of Holstein cows. However, it seems not to be a limitation for low levels of DMI (2.4% of BW) as observed on Girolando cows. Also, a previous study demonstrated that long particles (>1.18 mm) are 4.7-fold more sensitive to escaping the reticulum (Seo et al., Reference Seo, Lanzas, Tedeschi, Pell and Fox2009). Particle size reduction may increase the surface area, favoring ruminal degradation (Haselmann et al., Reference Haselmann, Zehetgruber, Fuerst-Waltl, Zollitsch, Knaus and Zebeli2019) as demonstrated in the current study, mainly for cows with lower DMI.

Girolando cows had greater eating rate, feed trough visits, and visits with intake compared to Holsteins. This means that a lower eating time meal can be associated with a greater eating rate, resulting in compensation during the meal. Conversely, faster meals promote increased ruminal distension and lower eating time (Allen, Reference Allen2014). In a previous study, Maulfair and Heinrichs (Reference Maulfair and Heinrichs2013) testing a SPS of maize silage, observed a decrease in eating time for the cows fed SPS compared to those provided LPS. Additionally, Girolando cows possibly had lower peaks of short-chain fatty acid production when fed SPS, although only butyric acid showed any effect of breed, given time for short chain fatty acid absorption.

Nasrollahi et al. (Reference Nasrollahi, Ghorbani, Khorvash and Yang2014) also observed an increase of eating rate of cows fed a SPS diet. The results of the present study suggest that for cows with lower intake capacity, such as the Girolando breed, TMR with SPS seems to be more beneficial and does not increase the risk of ruminal acidosis. Furthermore, for each extra meal frequency per day, DMI is predicted to increase by 0.19 kg/d. As a result, cows eating faster can consume 2.3 kg/d of DM more than others with lower meal frequency (Johnston and DeVries, Reference Johnston and DeVries2018).

Holstein cows had greater k p (+10.7%) regardless of particle size length compared to Girolando cows. This greater k p can be explained by their greater DMI. Additionally, a positive correlation between DMI and k p was observed (r = 0.85; P < 0.05). The total DMI k p was not estimated, but the k p of wet forage can suggest that in Holstein cows, feed remains less time in the rumen, which supports the digestibility results.

Holstein cows had lower DM digestibility on the SPS treatment, contrasting with Girolando cows. This can be explained due to rumen capacity and ingestive potential of the Holsteins compared to Girolando cows. Due to the great capacity and ingestive potential, when fed SPS, the feed probably passes through the rumen faster compared to LPS in Holsteins as observed in the study of Bauer et al. (Reference Bauer, Eghbali, Hartinger, Haselmann, Fuerst-Waltl, Zollitsch, Zebeli and Knaus2023). Feeding a reduced particle chopped hay potentiated by the increase of < 4.0 mm decreased DM and nutrient digestibility.

The NDF digestibility was not influenced by particle size or breeding. In contrast, Jiang et al. (Reference Jiang, Lin, Yan, Hu, Wang and Wang2018) did not observe any effect of particle size on DM or nutrient apparent digestibility. In general, the results of the current study demonstrate that the DMI level (Holstein = 3.1 vs. Girolando = 2.4% of BW) promotes a significant effect on rumen digestibility, assuming that the impact of the particle size on DMI is mainly associated with rumen passage rate (Tafaj et al., Reference Tafaj, Zebeli, Baes, Steingass and Drochner2007). Furthermore, previous studies demonstrated that decreasing the particle size of lactating dairy cows enhanced the rumen passage rate, resulting in an increase in DMI and a decrease in the NDF and ADF digestibility (Junck et al., Reference Junck, Tafaj, Zebeli, Steingaß and Drochner2005; Tafaj et al., Reference Tafaj, Zebeli, Baes, Steingass and Drochner2007).

The particle size did not influence milk yield or composition, except for MUN, regardless of the breeding. The same was reported by others (Coon et al., Reference Coon, Duffield and DeVries2018; Li et al., Reference Li, Beauchemin and Yang2020). This was expected, because particle size alone did not affect milk yield or composition (Tafaj et al., Reference Tafaj, Zebeli, Baes, Steingass and Drochner2007). Having said this, some studies have demonstrated greater milk lactose (Alamouti et al., Reference Alamouti, Alikhani, Ghorbani and Zebeli2009; Zebeli et al., Reference Zebeli, Ametaj, Junck and Drochner2009) and protein (Maulfair and Heinrichs, Reference Maulfair and Heinrichs2013). Classical studies suggested that milk composition is only influenced by particle size when the NDF concentration is close to or below the minimum level (25% of DM) recommended by the NRC (2001). In the current study, diets were formulated with 34% of NDF, justifying the lack of effect of the particle size on milk yield and composition.

The particle size reduction did not influence the CH4 yield but increased the CH4 intensity (g CH4/kg milk). Perhaps, an effect of the decrease in particle size would occur if there was a reduction in retention time capable of reducing the ruminal OM fermentation, especially the fibrous fraction (Beauchemin et al., Reference Beauchemin, Ungerfeld, Abdalla, Alvarez, Arndt, Becquet, Benchaar, Berndt, Mauricio, McAllister, Oyhantçabal, Salami, Shalloo, Sun, Tricarico, Uwizeye, De Camillis, Bernoux, Robinson and Kebreab2022). In part we cannot explain this increase in CH4 intensity for the SPS diets, while CH4 emissions are mainly due to the influence of animal performance, which impacts the CH4 intensity (Evans, Reference Evans2018). One possible explanation is that reducing particle size increases the surface area for microbial attachment, including ruminal fibrolytic bacteria, enabling rumen DM digestion and improving the final products (Zebeli et al., Reference Zebeli, Aschenbach, Tafaj, Boguhn, Ametaj and Drochner2012). CH4 intensity is related to the CH4 produced in the final product (milk yield, carcass yield, etc.), and cows producing more milk yield appear to dilute CH4 intensity. Girolando cows increased the CH4 intensity by 42.9% compared to Holstein cows. This increase is related to the lower milk yield of the Girolando cows, while for the Holstein cows, the CH4 was diluted by the greater milk yield, as discussed above.

In conclusion, Girolando cows increased the dry matter intake when fed a diet with short particle size, while the same did not happen in Holsteins. Dry matter digestibility increased in Holsteins when fed long particle size, while the opposite was observed in Girolando cows. Nutrient digestibility was reduced in Girolando cows when fed short particle size. Particle size did not influence eating time, eating rate, feed trough visits, visits with intake, milk yield and composition regardless of the breed. Reducing particle size increased CH4 intensity in both breeds.

Supplementary material

The supplementary material for this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022029924000207

Acknowledgements

Authors are grateful to SEG/Embrapa, Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do estado de Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG).

References

Alamouti, AA, Alikhani, M, Ghorbani, GR and Zebeli, Q (2009) Effects of inclusion of neutral detergent soluble fibre sources in diets varying in forage particle size on feed intake, digestive processes, and performance of mid-lactation Holstein cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 154, 923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alamouti, AA, Alikhani, M, Ghorbani, GR, Teimouri-Yansari, A and Bagheri, M (2014) Response of early lactation Holstein cows to partial replacement of neutral detergent soluble fibre for starch in diets varying in forage particle size. Livestock Science 160, 6068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, MS (2000) Effects of diet on short-term regulation of feed intake by lactating dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 15981624.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allen, MS (2014) Drives and limits to feed intake in ruminants. Animal Production Science 54, 1513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, MS, Bradford, BJ and Oba, M (2009) Board-Invited Review: The hepatic oxidation theory of the control of feed intake and its application to ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 87, 33173334.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
AOAC (1990) Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 15th Edn. Washington, DC: AOAC International.Google Scholar
AOAC (2005) Official Methods of Analysis, 18th Edn. Gaithersburg: AOAC International.Google Scholar
Bauer, K, Eghbali, M, Hartinger, T, Haselmann, A, Fuerst-Waltl, B, Zollitsch, W, Zebeli, Q and Knaus, W (2023) Effects of particle size reduction of meadow hay on feed intake, performance, and apparent total tract nutrient digestibility in dairy cows. Archives of Animal Nutrition 78, 116.Google Scholar
Beauchemin, KA, Ungerfeld, EM, Abdalla, AL, Alvarez, C, Arndt, C, Becquet, P, Benchaar, C, Berndt, A, Mauricio, RM, McAllister, TA, Oyhantçabal, W, Salami, SA, Shalloo, L, Sun, Y, Tricarico, J, Uwizeye, A, De Camillis, C, Bernoux, M, Robinson, T and Kebreab, E (2022) Invited Review: Current enteric methane mitigation options. Journal of Dairy Science 105, 92979326.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bharanidharan, R, Arokiyaraj, S, Kim, EB, Lee, CH, Woo, YW, Na, Y, Kim, D and Kim, KH (2018) Ruminal methane emissions, metabolic, and microbial profile of Holstein steers fed forage and concentrate, separately or as a total mixed ration. PLoS ONE 13, e0202446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chizzotti, ML, Machado, FS, Valente, EEL, Pereira, LGR, Campos, MM, Tomich, TR, Coelho, SG and Ribas, MN (2015) Technical Note: Validation of a system for monitoring individual feeding behavior and individual feed intake in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 34383442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooke, DWI, Monahan, FJ, Brophy, PO and Boland, MP (2004) Comparison of concentrates or concentrates plus forages in a total mixed ration or discrete ingredient format: effects on beef production parameters and on beef composition, colour, texture and fatty acid profile. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research 43, 201216.Google Scholar
Coon, RE, Duffield, TF and DeVries, TJ (2018) Effect of straw particle size on the behavior, health, and production of early-lactation dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 101, 63756387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evans, B (2018) The role ensiled forage has on methane production in the rumen. Animal Husbandry, Dairy and Veterinary Science 2, 14.Google Scholar
Fox, DG, Tedeschi, LO, Tylutki, TP, Russell, JB, Van Amburgh, ME, Chase, LE, Pell, AN and Overton, TR (2004) The Cornell net carbohydrate and protein system model for evaluating herd nutrition and nutrient excretion. Animal Feed Science and Technology 112, 2978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haselmann, A, Zehetgruber, K, Fuerst-Waltl, B, Zollitsch, W, Knaus, W and Zebeli, Q (2019) Feeding forages with reduced particle size in a total mixed ration improves feed intake, total-tract digestibility, and performance of organic dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 102, 88398849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, F, Lin, X, Yan, Z, Hu, Z, Wang, Y and Wang, Z (2018) Effects of forage source and particle size on feed sorting, milk production and nutrient digestibility in lactating dairy cows. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 102, 14721481.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnston, C and DeVries, TJ (2018) Short Communication: Associations of feeding behavior and milk production in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 101, 33673373.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Junck, B, Tafaj, M, Zebeli, Q, Steingaß, H and Drochner, W (2005) Influence of particle size of grass silage fed in TMR on passage rate and digesta volume in high-yielding dairy cows. Proceedings of the Society of Nutrition Physiology 14, 139.Google Scholar
Knapp, JR, Laur, GL, Vadas, PA, Weiss, WP and Tricarico, JM (2014) Invited Review: Enteric methane in dairy cattle production: quantifying the opportunities and impact of reducing emissions. Journal of Dairy Science 97, 32313261.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, C, Beauchemin, KA and Yang, W (2020) Feeding diets varying in forage proportion and particle length to lactating dairy cows: I. Effects on ruminal pH and fermentation, microbial protein synthesis, digestibility, and milk production. Journal of Dairy Science 103, 43404354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Machado, FS, Tomich, TR, Ferreira, AL, Cavalcanti, LFL, Campos, MM, Paiva, CAV, Ribas, MN and Pereira, LGR (2016) Technical Note: A facility for respiration measurements in cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 48994906.Google ScholarPubMed
Maulfair, DD and Heinrichs, AJ (2013) Effects of varying forage particle size and fermentable carbohydrates on feed sorting, ruminal fermentation, and milk and component yields of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 30853097.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nasrollahi, SM, Ghorbani, GR, Khorvash, M and Yang, WZ (2014) Effects of grain source and marginal change in Lucerne hay particle size on feed sorting, eating behavior, chewing activity, and milk production in mid-lactation Holstein dairy cows. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 98, 11101116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nasrollahi, SM, Imani, M and Zebeli, Q (2015) A meta-analysis and meta-regression of the effect of forage particle size, level, source, and preservation method on feed intake, nutrient digestibility, and performance in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 89268939.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
NRC (2001) Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle, 7th rev. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Ramirez, HA, Harvatine, KJ and Kononoff, PJ (2016) Short Communication: Forage particle size and fat intake affect rumen passage, the fatty acid profile of milk, and milk fat production in dairy cows consuming dried distillers grains with solubles. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 392398.Google Scholar
Seo, S, Lanzas, C, Tedeschi, LO, Pell, AN and Fox, DG (2009) Development of a mechanistic model to represent the dynamics of particle flow out of the rumen and to predict rate of passage of forage particles in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 39814000.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tafaj, M, Zebeli, Q, Baes, C, Steingass, H and Drochner, W (2007) A meta-analysis examining effects of particle size of total mixed rations on intake, rumen digestion and milk production in high-yielding dairy cows in early lactation. Animal Feed Science and Technology 138, 137161.Google Scholar
Wang, WJ, Larsen, M, Weisbjerg, MR, Johansen, M, Hellwing, ALF and Lund, P (2022) Effects of particle size and toasting of fava beans and forage source on nutrient digestibility, ruminal fermentation, and metabolizable protein supply in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 105, 88068823.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, WZ and Beauchemin, KA (2006) Effects of physically effective fiber on chewing activity and ruminal pH of dairy cows fed diets based on barley silage. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 217228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zebeli, Q, Ametaj, BN, Junck, B and Drochner, W (2009) Maize silage particle length modulates feeding patterns and milk composition in loose-housed lactating Holstein cows. Livestock Science 124, 3340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zebeli, Q, Aschenbach, JR, Tafaj, M, Boguhn, J, Ametaj, BN and Drochner, W (2012) Invited Review: Role of physically effective fiber and estimation of dietary fiber adequacy in high-producing dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 10411056.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1. Effect of the diet particle size (PS) and breed (B) on DM intake and ingestive behavior of DM

Figure 1

Table 2. Effect of the diet particle size (PS) and breed (B) on passage rate, DM, and nutrient apparent digestibility of dairy cows

Figure 2

Table 3. Effect of particle size and breed on milk yield, fat-corrected milk, energy-corrected milk, milk composition, and feed efficiency of Holstein and Girolando cows

Figure 3

Table 4. Effect of particle size and breed on CH4 production of Holstein and Girolando cows

Supplementary material: File

Ribeiro et al. supplementary material

Ribeiro et al. supplementary material
Download Ribeiro et al. supplementary material(File)
File 405.9 KB