Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T13:30:08.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison of machine-milking and the calf-suckling technique as methods of measuring the milk yield of beef cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

S. H. Somerville  and
B. G. Lowman
S. H. Somerville
Affiliation:
Edinburgh School of Agriculture, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
B. G. Lowman
Affiliation:
Edinburgh School of Agriculture, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
Get access

Abstract

The milk production of 14 Hereford × British Friesian females in their second lactation (cows) and 36 in their first lactation (heifers) was measured at three levels of nutrition either by machine-milking twice a day, without the use of exogenous oxytocin, or by a calf-suckling technique. Machine-milking significantly increased the number of cows drying-off within 150 days of parturition (i><0·05) and significantly reduced milk yields compared with the calf-suckling technique (P< 0·01).

The 150-day cumulative milk yields of the heifers were not significantly affected by method of milking, but the coefficient of variation of milk yield was significantly greater in the machine-milked group(P< 0·05). One machine-milked heifer dried-off within the first 150 days of lactation.

There was no evidence of an interaction between method of milking and plane of nutrition in either the cows or the heifers.

It was concluded that measuring the milk production of beef cows by machine-milking, without the use of exogenous oxytocin, may be unreliable. Factors influencing the usefulness and reliability of the calf-suckling technique are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 30 , Issue 3 , June 1980 , pp. 365 - 372
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1980

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

REFERENCES

Broster, W. H 1972. Effect on milk yield of the cow of the level of feeding during lactation. Dairy Sci. Abstr. 34: 265–288.Google Scholar
Broster, W. H, Broster, Valerie J. and Smith, T. 1969. Experiments on the nutrition of the dairy heifer. VIII. Effect on milk production of level of feeding at two stages of the lactation. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 72: 229–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drewry, K. J, Brown, C. J and Honea, R. S 1959. Relationships among factors associated with mothering ability in beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 18: 938–946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Du, Y. L P., Baker, R. D and Barker, J. M 1978. The use of short-term secretion rate measurements for estimating the milk production of suckler cows. J. Dairy Res. 45: 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Neindre, P. and Petit, P. 1975. [Estimation of milk production in nursing cows during early lactation.] Annls Zootech. 24: 559–563.Google Scholar
Lowman, B. G, Scott, N. and Somerville, S. 1973. Condition scoring of cattle. Bull. No. 6, E. Scotl. Coll. Agric.Google Scholar
Lucas, H. L 1960. Critical features of good dairy feeding experiments. J. Dairy Sci. 43: 193–212.Google Scholar
Schake, L. M, Riggs, J. K, McGinty, D. D and Marion, P. T 1966. Effects of feed intake levels upon yield and composition of milk from confined beef cows. J. Anim. Sci. 25: 248–249 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Somerville, S. H 1977. Nutrition of the lactating beef cow. Ph.D.Thesis, Univ. Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Totusek, R., Arnett, D. W, Holland, G. L and Whiteman, J. V 1973. Relation of estimation method, sampling interval and milk composition to milk yield of beef cows and calf gain. J. Anim. Sci. 37: 153–158.Google Scholar
Wood, P. D. P. 1969. Factors affecting the shape of the lactation curve in cattle. Anim. Prod. 11: 307–316.Google Scholar
Yates, N. G, Macfarlane, W. V and Ellis, R. 1971. The estimation of milk intake and growth of beef calves in the field by using tritiated water. Aust. J. agric. Res. 22: 291–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar