Effect of grain and straw supplementation on marginal milk-production responses and rumen fermentation of cows grazing highly digestible subterranean clover pasture

2003 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 467 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. J. Wales ◽  
P. T. Doyle
Keyword(s):  
Milk Production ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Protein Concentration ◽  
Milk Protein ◽  
Subterranean Clover ◽  
Ground Level ◽  
Ruminal Fluid ◽  
Cereal Grain ◽  
Production Response

The marginal milk-production response to cereal grain supplementation of dairy cows grazing irrigated subterranean clover (Trifolium subterraneum L.) pasture in spring was investigated. We also determined whether the addition of a perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) straw supplement would improve that response. There were 8�replicated treatments in a factorial design with 2 amounts of cereal grain pellet [0 and 5.0 kg dry matter (DM)/cow.day] and 4 amounts of straw (0, 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 kg DM/cow.day), 48 cows in total. Cows in all treatments grazed subterranean clover at an allowance (measured to ground level) of 19 kg DM/day. The barley and wheat pellet and straw had a neutral detergent fibre (NDF) concentration of 164 g/kg DM and 704 g/kg DM, respectively. Cows from all treatments consumed pasture with an in vitro DM digestibility of 743�g/kg DM and NDF concentration of 313 g/kg DM, compared with the pregrazed pasture on offer of 707 and 360, respectively. Pasture DM intake was not affected (P>0.05) by supplementation with either grain or straw, and averaged 12.7�kg�DM/cow.day. Cows supplemented with grain achieved a marginal milk-production response of 1.0�kg�fat-corrected milk (FCM)/kg DM grain. However, with increasing amounts of straw, responses of 0.0, 0.9 and 0.5 kg FCM/kg DM grain were observed. Fat-corrected milk yields were not different (P>0.05) between straw treatments and averaged 25.8 kg FCM/cow.day. Grain feeding significantly (P<0.05) reduced milk fat concentration and increased (P<0.05) milk protein concentration, although offering increasing amounts of straw had no significant (P>0.05) effect on either milk fat or milk protein concentration. Average ruminal fluid pH was significantly (P<0.05) lower when cows consumed cereal grain pellets than with those treatments without cereal grain (5.82 v. 6.09). There were no differences (P>0.05) in ruminal fluid pH among cows that consumed different amounts of straw. When cows were managed to limit intake of subterranean clover by restricting pasture allowance, supplementation with cereal grain resulted in acceptable marginal milk-production responses of 1.0 kg FCM/kg DM cereal grain. Under these circumstances, providing additional NDF as straw did not improve the milk-production response to cereal grain, with NDF ranging from 290 to 337 g/kg DM when 0–1.7 kg DM straw was consumed.

Production responses of dairy cows grazing well-managed kikuyu (Pennisetum clandestinum) pastures to energy and protein supplementation

1996 ◽  
Vol 36 (7) ◽  
pp. 763 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Reeves ◽  
WJ Fulkerson ◽  
RC Kellaway
Keyword(s):  
Milk Production ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Milk Protein ◽  
Protein Supplementation ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Plasma Urea ◽  
Pennisetum Clandestinum ◽  
Cereal Grain ◽  
Metabolisable Energy ◽  
Production Response

Three studies were conducted to examine the production response of Friesian cows grazing well-managed lukuyu (Pennisetum clandestinum) pasture to supplementation with a cereal grain concentrate, with and without the inclusion of formaldehyde-treated protein meal. Mean (¦ s.e.) levels of nutrients in the pasture (g/kg DM) on offer were: 205 ¦ 3 crude protein; 683 ¦ 7 in vitro organic matter digestibility; 239 ¦ 2 acid detergent fibre; 615 ¦ 8 neutral detergent fibre and 4.47 ¦ 0.16, 2.51 ¦ 0.06, 31.96 ¦ 0.98, 0.39 ¦ 0.03 and 3.18 ¦ 0.09 of calcium, phosphorus, potassium, sodium and magnesium, respectively. Study 1 was a 3-farmlet study conducted over 45 days (March-April 1993) involving cows 5-6 months into lactation, which compared 3 levels of concentrate feeding at 0 (R0), 3 (R3) or 6 (R6) kg crushed barley/cow.day. Study 2 was an 18-day extension of study 1 with animals in the seventh month of lactation. The concentrate fed was 72% barley and 24% formaldehyde-treated sunflower meal. Pasture intake of individual cows was determined using an alkane technique. Mean milk yields (L/cow. day) in study 1 were 14.2, 18.3 and 18.0, and in study 2 were 12.5, 18.5 and 17.4 for treatments R0, R3 and R6, respectively. Milk fat (3.77 v. 3.26%), but not milk protein, content of the Ro cows was significantly higher than R6 cows in study 1 only. In study 2, the apparent whole-diet digestibility remained constant as concentrate level rose, indicating a negative effect of concentrate fed on forage digestibility in the absence of buffers. Study 3 was a 3 x 4 factorial design plus a 'control' group (0.5 kg barley/cow.day used as a carrier for minerals) to examine the milk production response to 3 levels of concentrate feeding (3, 6 and 9 kg/cow.day) with 4 levels of formaldehyde-treated canola meal (FTCM; 0, 20, 40 and 60% of concentrate). Rations were iso-energetic within levels of concentrates fed. The control group had significantly lower milk production (17.2 L/cow.day), as well as milk protein (2.90%), plasma urea (PU) (5.90 mmol/L) and P-hydroxybutyrate (G-OHB) (0.525 mmo1L) than other treatment groups. The mean milk production response of 0.6 L milk/kg concentrate fed in study 3 at the 3 kg/day level of feeding was lower than observed in studies 1 and 2 (1.4 and 2.0 L/kg concentrate, respectively). The level of metabolisable energy in the concentrate in study 3 had a significant influence on milk production, milk fat and milk protein levels. Plasma glucose and G-OHB levels significantly increased with the incorporation of FTCM into the concentrate. Nonesterified fatty acid levels dropped significantly below levels of other treatments at the lowest level of inclusion of FTCM. PU levels generally increased in response to increasing metabolisable energy and inclusion of FTCM in the concentrate, with an interaction between them. Milk urea (MU) levels (mmol/L) showed a significant linear (P<0.001; r2 = 0.44) relationship to PU levels (mmol/L) as follows: MU = 0.167 + 0.272PU.

Effect of grain supplementation and the provision of chemical or physical fibre on marginal milk production responses of cows grazing perennial ryegrass pastures

2001 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 465 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. J. Wales ◽  
Y. J. Williams ◽  
P. T. Doyle
Keyword(s):  
Milk Production ◽  
Perennial Ryegrass ◽  
White Clover ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Crude Protein ◽  
Ground Level ◽  
Large Degree ◽  
Herbage Intake ◽  
Cereal Grain

An experiment was undertaken to establish the marginal milk production response from cereal grain supplementation by dairy cows grazing irrigated perennial pastures in spring and whether the addition of a hay supplement would improve that response. Cows were offered perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.)–white clover (Trifolium repensL.) pasture at allowances (measured to ground level) of 20 or 40 kg dry matter (DM)/cow.day. Additional cows offered the low allowance were also offered supplements of pasture hay as a cube or pellet (2.5 kg DM/day), cereal grain as a pellet (5.0 kg DM/day) or cereal grain plus pasture hay (7.5 kg DM/day) as a pellet (1.75:1 DM basis) or cube (1.97:1 DM basis). The 7 treatments were replicated 3 times, and 63 cows were used (3 cows/treatment). The in vitro DM digestibility, crude protein and neutral detergent fibre (NDF) concentration of the barley and perennial pasture hay were 863 and 563 g/kg DM, 131 and 92 g/kg DM, and 182 and 666 g/kg DM, respectively. Cows from all treatments consumed herbage with an in vitro DM digestibility of 833 g/kg DM, crude protein content of 214 g/kg DM and NDF concentration of 457 g/kg DM compared with the pregrazed herbage on offer of 771, 174 and 527 g/kg DM, respectively. The mean pregrazing herbage mass of 4.13 t DM/ha consisted of perennial ryegrass (507 g/kg DM), white clover (188 g/kg DM), weeds (194 g/kg DM) and dead material (111 g/kg DM). Without supplements, cows consumed 11.2 kg DM/day at the low pasture allowance and 15.6 kg DM/day at the high allowance. Herbage intake did not decline to a large degree when barley was included in the diet, where a substitution rate of 0.2 kg reduction in pasture DM/kg DM cereal grain supplement was measured. The NDF concentration of the diet consumed was lowest (P< 0.05) for the grain pellet treatment (370 g NDF/kg DM) and highest (P&lt;0.05) for the fibre pellet (493 g NDF/kg DM) and the fibre cube (507 g NDF/kg DM) treatments. Fat-corrected milk yield increased (P<0.05)) from 20.1 to 24.5 kg/cow.day when cows consumed 4.5 kg DM cereal grain/day with a marginal milk response of 1.0 kg 4% fat-corrected milk/kg DM concentrate supplement. Supplementation with grain or hay had no significant effect (P>0.05) on milk fat, protein or lactose concentrations. The cows offered the high allowance spent more (P<0.05) time grazing than those offered the low allowance, but there were no significant differences in rumination time. Cows spent more time ruminating when consuming the grain &plus; fibre cube compared with the other supplement treatments, which were lower (P<0.05) and similar. Cows offered pasture at the low allowance ruminated the least. The rumen pH was not different between treatments and averaged 5.9. The ratio of acetate plus butyrate: propionate was not different between treatments and averaged 4.3. This study has shown that feeding cereal grain to cows grazing pastures high in perennial ryegrass resulted in acceptable marginal milk responses of 1 kg milk/kg DM of cereal grain in spring because of sufficient NDF in the diet. As there was adequate NDF in the diet, further supplements with pasture hay as cubes or pellets had no effect on marginal milk responses .

Protected canola meal increases milk protein concentration in dairy cows fed a grass silage-based diet

2004 ◽  
Vol 44 (9) ◽  
pp. 827 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. L. White ◽  
M. v-H. Staines ◽  
N. Phillips ◽  
P. Young ◽  
F. Coupar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Milk Yield ◽  
Protein Concentration ◽  
Milk Protein ◽  
Control Diet ◽  
Subterranean Clover ◽  
Dietary Treatment ◽  
Canola Meal ◽  
Grass Silage ◽  
South West ◽  
Cereal Grain

Low concentrations of protein in milk occur during the summer–autumn in south-west Australia. This is the period, on dryland farms, when the diet of lactating cows typically consists of grass silage and a mixture of crushed lupins and cereal grain. This experiment was conducted to test the hypothesis that supplying protected canola meal would increase the protein concentration of milk and, possibly, milk yield in cows fed grass silage and a lupin–cereal concentrate. Sixty Holstein cows in mid lactation were allocated to 2 equal-sized dietary treatment groups: control (lupin) or protected canola meal. The control diet consisted of 14.5 kg DM grass silage (annual ryegrasses–subterranean clover) and 5.4 kg DM of crushed lupins and barley (4:1) per head per day. For the protected canola meal diet, 2.15 kg DM protected canola meal replaced 2.15 kg lupins. The protected canola meal was produced by treating solvent-extracted canola meal with formaldehyde, to produce a product with an in sacco fractional degradability of 0.29 at a rumen fractional outflow rate of 0.08/h. The equivalent degradability of untreated canola meal was 0.80 and of lupin was 0.83. Cows were individually fed the concentrate ration twice daily, after each milking, then were managed as a single herd in dry lots and fed grass silage. By the end of 8 weeks, cows fed the protected canola meal diet had higher milk protein concentrations (30.7 v. 29.2 g/L; P<0.05) and higher liveweights (604 v. 593 kg; P<0.05). Milk yield (L/day) was increased by 1 L/day, but this effect was not significant (P>0.10). Fat concentration was unaffected by diet (P>0.05). Since the only difference in treatment was the replacement of a portion of lupins with protected canola meal, the results indicate that a deficiency of metabolisable amino acids contributes to the low milk protein concentrations recorded during summer–autumn in south-west Australia. Whether this was acting primarily through a stimulus of appetite, or directly on milk components, could not be determined because silage intakes were not recorded.

Protein supplementation of cows grazing limited amounts of paspalum (Paspalum dilatatum Poir.)-dominant irrigated pasture in mid-lactation

2000 ◽  
Vol 40 (7) ◽  
pp. 923 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. J. Wales ◽  
D. W. Dellow ◽  
P. T. Doyle
Keyword(s):  
Milk Production ◽  
Cottonseed Meal ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Rumen Fluid ◽  
Protein Supplementation ◽  
Canola Meal ◽  
Paspalum Dilatatum ◽  
Protein Supplements ◽  
Cereal Grain

Two experiments were undertaken in summer to investigate production responses by dairy cows offered paspalum (Paspalum dilatatum Poir.)-dominant irrigated pasture to the inclusion of protein supplements with different rumen degradable protein characteristics in cereal grain-based concentrates. In experiment 1, cows in mid lactation were offered limited amounts of herbage, at an allowance of 28 kg DM/cow. day together with 8.0 kg DM/cow. day of a pelleted supplement containing: (i) mainly barley and wheat; (ii) barley, wheat and canola meal; or (iii) barley, wheat and cottonseed meal for 35 days. The 3 supplements were formulated to have similar in vitro DM digestibilities. In experiment 2 aspects of rumen function were measured in 9 rumen fistulated lactating cows, individually fed indoors on paspalum-dominant herbage harvested daily with a finger bar mower. Cows were offered the same amount of supplements for 28 days. Pasture intakes were similar to those of the grazing cows in experiment 1. In experiment 1, there were no effects (P>0.05) of dietary treatment on herbage intake (10.2 kg DM/cow. day) or selection of nutrients from herbage. The concentration of crude protein in the total diet consumed was lower (P<0.05) for the barley + wheat treatment (137 g/kg DM), compared with the barley + wheat + canola meal and barley + wheat + cottonseed meal treatments, which were 179 and 183 g/kg DM, respectively. In vitro DM digestibility of the feed consumed by cows was similar across the treatments, and all diets contained greater than 400 g neutral detergent fibre/kg DM, indicating there were no limitations due to dietary fibre. There were no significant effects (P>0.05) of dietary treatments on milk production (21.8 kg/cow. day), milk fat concentration (34.1 g/kg) or milk protein concentration (29.8 g/kg). Urea-N was higher (P<0.01) in the milk of cows fed the barley + wheat + canola meal and the barley + wheat + cottonseed meal treatments compared with the barley + wheat treatment. In experiment 2, rumen fluid pH was higher in cows consuming barley + wheat pellets than in cows consuming barley + wheat + canola meal on most sampling occasions. Rumen ammonia-N concentration was lowest in the barley + wheat treatment and highest in the barley + wheat + canola meal treatment. When cows grazing paspalum-dominant irrigated pasture were supplemented with 8 kg DM of a cereal-based supplement, metabolisable protein was calculated to be present in sufficient quantities to support at least 22 kg milk/cow. day and, hence, was not limiting milk production. It is concluded that protein supplements offered to cows in mid-lactation, grazing irrigated pastures in summer, are unlikely to give a milk production response beyond that achieved with cereal grain.

scholarly journals Production response in dairy cows milked two or three times a day: A meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Isidro Sanchez-Duarte ◽  
Alvaro Garcia ◽  
Karla Rodríguez-Hernández ◽  
David G. Reta-Sánchez ◽  
Homero Salinas-Gonzalez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dairy Cows ◽  
Milk Production ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Dry Matter ◽  
Milk Protein ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Milk Composition ◽  
Fat Percentage ◽  
Milking Frequency ◽  
Production Response

The objective was to evaluate the effects of two (2×) vs three (3×) times per day milking on milk production and milk composition in dairy cows. Fourteen scientific papers, containing production data from 16 trials, where dairy cows were milked 2× or 3×, were analysed using meta-analysis with fixed and random-effects with the R statistical program. The degree of heterogeneity and publication bias were measured with the I2 statistic and Begg’s test, respectively. In addition, the meta-regression analysis explored other sources of heterogeneity for the response. The estimated effect size of 2× and 3× milkings was calculated for dry matter intake (DMI), milk production, and milk composition. Dry matter intake, milk production, and milk fat and protein yields showed substantial heterogeneity (I2>50%). Whereas milk fat-percentage had moderate heterogeneity (I2<50%), and milk protein had no (I2=0%)heterogeneity. The year of publication, trial duration, and cattle breed did not influence production response parameters to milking frequency. We found no evidence of publication bias for the parameters evaluated (Begg’s test; P>.05). Cows milked 2× produced less milk (2.23 kg/d), less milk fat (0.06kg/d), and less milk protein (0.05 kg/d). In contrast, the fat percentage was lower (0.07 units) in 3×, compared with 2× milking frequency. There was no effect of milking frequency on DMI and milk protein percentage. In conclusion, milk production and milk fat and protein yields improves as milking frequency increase from 2× to 3× daily, without affecting DMI. The implementation of 3× milking frequency must consider dairy cow management, labor, and milking parlour infrastructure, particular to each dairy farm.

Effects of pasture allowance on milk production of dairy cows offered increasing amounts of partial mixed rations in spring

2017 ◽  
Vol 57 (7) ◽  
pp. 1305 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. J. Auldist ◽  
M. M. Wright ◽  
L. C. Marett ◽  
J. L. Jacobs ◽  
W. J. Wales
Keyword(s):  
Milk Production ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Milk Protein ◽  
Ground Level ◽  
Canola Meal ◽  
Wheat Grain ◽  
Holstein Friesian ◽  
Maize Grain ◽  
Feeding Systems ◽  
Friesian Cows

Milk production was measured in Holstein–Friesian cows offered low, medium or high allowances of ryegrass pasture (15, 25 or 40 kg DM/cow.day to ground level) and receiving different amounts of supplement (6, 10, 12 or 14 kg DM/cow.day) as a partial mixed ration (PMR). The 27-day experiment was conducted in spring when cows were 45 ± 17.3 days in milk (mean ± s.d.). Two groups of six cows received each of the 12 combinations of pasture allowance and PMR amount. The PMR comprised wheat grain (38%, DM basis), maize grain (18%), lucerne hay (22%) and canola meal (22%). When 6 kg DM PMR/cow.day was offered, cows grazing the low allowance produced less milk and energy-corrected milk than did cows grazing the medium and high allowances. There was no effect of pasture allowance on production of milk or energy-corrected milk at any other amount of PMR offered. When cows were offered 14 kg DM PMR/cow.day, milk fat concentrations were lower for cows grazing the high pasture allowance than for cows grazing the medium allowance. There were no differences in milk fat concentrations between cows grazing the different pasture allowances at any other amount of PMR offered. When cows were offered 6 kg DM PMR/cow.day, cows grazing the low pasture allowance yielded less milk fat than did cows grazing the medium pasture allowance. Cows grazing the high allowance had greater concentrations and yields of milk protein than did cows grazing the low allowance at all amounts of PMR offered, while cows grazing the medium allowance yielded more milk protein at some amounts of PMR. Pasture utilisation decreased with increases in both pasture allowance and amount of PMR. These results will enable farmers to better optimise feeding systems that combine both pasture and PMR.

Milk production of cows grazing pasture supplemented by a partial mixed ration with or without canola meal

2019 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 778 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. J. Auldist ◽  
M. M. Wright ◽  
L. C. Marett ◽  
M. C. Hannah ◽  
E. Kennedy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Milk Production ◽  
Milk Yield ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Milk Protein ◽  
Ground Level ◽  
Canola Meal ◽  
Late Winter ◽  
Early Lactation ◽  
Wheat Grain ◽  
Maize Grain

Milk production responses were measured in grazing cows offered mixed rations with or without canola meal. Experiments were conducted in spring (Experiment 1; early lactation) and autumn (Experiment 2; late lactation). The experiments used 140 (Experiment 1) or 96 (Experiment 2) Holstein-Friesian multiparous dairy cows that had calved in late winter/early spring. Each experiment lasted 28 days including a 14-day adjustment period and a 14-day measurement period during which intake and milk production was measured. In each experiment, there were two dietary treatments: PMR: cows grazed a restricted pasture allowance (10–15 kg DM/cow per day, measured to ground level) supplemented with a PMR comprising wheat grain (60%, DM basis), lucerne hay (21%) and maize grain (19%); and PMR+C: cows were fed the same as the PMR cows, but some wheat grain in the PMR was replaced with solvent-extracted canola meal so that it comprised wheat grain (39%, DM basis), lucerne hay (21%), maize grain (19%) and canola meal (21%). The two treatments were randomly allocated to half the cows in each experiment. Cows were then further allocated into 10 groups of 7 cows (Experiment 1) or 8 groups of 6 cows (Experiment 2). Two groups of cows were assigned to receive a different amount of each ration: 8, 10, 12, 14 or 16 kg DM total supplement/cow per day for Experiment 1 and 6, 8, 10 or 12 kg DM total supplement/cow per day for Experiment 2. In Experiment 1, yields of energy corrected milk (ECM), milk fat, and milk protein were greater for PMR+C cows than PMR cows when 12 kg/cow per day of supplement or more was offered. Milk protein concentration was greater in PMR+C cows than PMR cows but only when 16 kg DM supplement/cow per day was offered. These changes in milk yield and composition were associated with increases in the intakes of pasture, supplement and total DM intake in the PMR+C cows compared with the PMR cows. In Experiment 2 there were no differences in milk yield or composition between PMR and PMR+C cows at any amount of supplement offered, nor were there any differences in intakes of pasture, supplement or total DM intake. It is concluded that replacing some of the wheat in a well-formulated PMR with canola meal can stimulate DMI and increase per-cow production of ECM when high amounts of supplement are fed in early lactation, but not late lactation.

Replacing wheat with canola meal and maize grain in the diet of lactating dairy cows: Feed intake, milk production and cow condition responses

2017 ◽  
Vol 84 (3) ◽  
pp. 240-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruairi P McDonnell ◽  
Martin vH Staines
Keyword(s):  
Dairy Cows ◽  
Milk Production ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Milk Protein ◽  
Daily Intake ◽  
Canola Meal ◽  
Grass Silage ◽  
Holstein Friesian ◽  
Maize Grain ◽  
The Difference

This research paper describes the effect of partially replacing wheat with maize grain and canola meal on milk production and body condition changes in early lactation Holstein-Friesian dairy cows consuming a grass silage-based diet over an 83-d period. Two groups of 39 cows were stratified for age, parity, historical milk yield and days in milk (DIM), and offered one of two treatment diets. The first treatment (CON) reflected a typical diet used by Western Australian dairy producers in summer and comprised (kg DM/cow per d); 8 kg of annual ryegrass silage, 6 kg of crushed wheat (provided once daily in a mixed ration), 3·6 kg of crushed lupins (provided in the milking parlour in two daily portions) and ad libitum lucerne haylage. The second treatment diet (COMP) was identical except the 6 kg of crushed wheat was replaced by 6 kg of a more complex concentrate mix (27% crushed wheat, 34% maize grain and 37% canola meal). Lucerne haylage was provided independently in the paddock to all cows, and no pasture was available throughout the experiment. The COMP group had a greater mean overall daily intake (22·5vs20·4 kg DM/cow) and a higher energy corrected milk (ECM) yield (29·2vs27·1 kg/cow;P= 0·047) than the CON cows. The difference in overall intake was caused by a higher daily intake of lucerne haylage in COMP cows (4·5vs2·3 kg DM/cow). The CON group had a higher concentration of milk fat (42·1vs39·3 g/kg;P= 0·029) than COMP cows. Milk protein yield was greater in COMP cows (P< 0·021); however, milk fat yield was unaffected by treatment. It is concluded that partially replacing wheat with canola meal and maize grain in a grass silage-based diet increases voluntary DMI of conserved forage and consequently yields of ECM and milk protein.

The effects on milk yield and composition of incorporating lactose into the diet of dairy cows given protected fat

1996 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. C. Garnsworthy
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Dairy Cows ◽  
Milk Yield ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Protein Concentration ◽  
Milk Protein ◽  
Basal Diet ◽  
Fat Supplementation ◽  
Holstein Friesian ◽  
Group A

AbstractTwenty-eight Holstein/Friesian dairy cows were divided into four groups of seven. From weeks 4 to 15 of lactation they were given a basal diet consisting of 8 kg hay, 2 kg sugar-beet feed and 2 kg grass nuts, together with a concentrate allowance of 8 kg/day. Concentrates for group A were based on cereals and soya (control). Concentrate B contained 60 g protected fat supplement per kg; concentrate C contained 100 g lactose per kg; concentrate D contained 60 g fat supplement and 100 g lactose per kg. Milk yields were 24·6, 27·7, 25·6 and 26·5 kg/day and milk protein concentrations were 32·3, 30·7, 32·7 and 31·9 g/kg for groups A, B, C and D respectively. The effect of fat supplementation on milk yield and protein concentration was significant (P < 0·05) but the effect of lactose was not significant. Milk fat concentration was not significantly affected by treatment. It is concluded that lactose can partially alleviate the depression in milk protein concentration often observed when cows are given protected fat.

The efficacy of feeding a live probiotic yeast, Yea-Sacc®, on the performance of lactating dairy cows

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Tristant ◽  
C. A. Moran
Keyword(s):  
Dairy Cows ◽  
Milk Production ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
Milk Protein ◽  
Feed Additive ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Target Dose ◽  
Lactating Dairy Cows ◽  
Farm Model ◽  
The Impact

SummaryThe following trial was conducted to evaluate the impact of feeding Yea-Sacc® (YS; Alltech Inc, USA), a zootechnical feed additive based on a live probiotic strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, to lactating dairy cows over a 12 week period. Sixty-four primiparous and multiparous Holstein dairy cows, grouped to give similar range of parity, physiological and milk production stages, were selected for the study. Cows were equally allocated to either a control feed group or a diet supplemented with YS (32 cows per treatment). The test diet was formulated to include YS (Yea-Sacc® Farm Pak) incorporated in the total mixed ration (TMR), supplying a target dose of 5 × 107 CFU/kg feed dry matter (DM). This target dose delivered 1 × 109 CFU/cow/day, for a cow consuming 20 kg feed (DM basis) daily. Each cow was considered a replicate unit. Cows were fed a nutritionally adequate total TMR plus hay and a supplementary protein/energy concentrate (calculated according to milk yield) for 12 weeks, supplied once a day after the morning milking. Weigh backs of feed were recorded daily, with refusals being maintained at 3% of the total intake. During the 12 week study period, YS had significant beneficial effects on milk production (+0.8 kg/day; P = 0.003), energy corrected milk production (+1.4 kg/day; P < 0.0001), synthesis of milk protein (+36 g/day; P = 0.001), milk protein content (+0.3 g/kg; P = 0.009), and milk urea content (−0.09 mg/l; P = 0.004). The synthesis of milk fat was similar between treatments but milk fat content was lower for the YS group compared to the control group (−1.1 g/kg; P = 0.0002). Lactose content was always higher (+0.8 g/kg; P < 0.0001) for the YS group, indicating enhanced energy utilisation. In general, the effect of YS was higher during the first study period (one to seven weeks), when cows were in early lactation and the production potential was higher. YS cows produced significantly more milk during the study, and an additional 220 kg milk per cow was sold from this group from the output measured from the beginning of the study to two weeks post-trial. However, the statistical analysis including the post-study period did not show a significant effect. The 305-day simulated milk production was higher for the YS group (+400 kg/cow) but again the difference was not significant. In conclusion, YS at a target dose of 5 × 107 CFU/kg DM improved milk production and milk quality in healthy dairy cows. In addition, when the data were included in a whole-farm model, feeding YS reduced methane emissions by 4%, reduced the number of animals required for the desired milk production by 4% and increased overall farm margins by 1.4%.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document