Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-dvmhs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-13T14:40:45.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of food type and location on the attendance to an automatic milking system by daily cows and the effect of feeding during milking on their behaviour and milking characteristics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

N. B. Prescott ,
T. T. Mottram  and
A. J. F. Webster
N. B. Prescott
Affiliation:
Silsoe Research Institute, Wrest Park, Silsoe MK45 4HS
T. T. Mottram
Affiliation:
Silsoe Research Institute, Wrest Park, Silsoe MK45 4HS
A. J. F. Webster
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, University of Bristol, Langford House, Langford, Bristol BS18 7DU
Get access

Abstract

Food can be used in an automatic milking system (AMS) to encourage frequent attendance to, and modify behaviour in, an AMS. An AMS was designed such that a cow had to pass from a bedded area through the AMS to enter the feeding area. A visit resulted in milking if the interval since the last milking was greater than 4 h.

Fourteen Holstein-Friesian dairy cows were allowed to attend voluntarily an AMS for 15 h/day for three 8-day periods. In period 1 the cows were given forage in the feeding area and concentrates in the bedded area but in period 2 this was reversed. Period 3 repeated period 1. The cows were also divided into two groups of seven, only one of which was given 1 kg of concentrates when milked in each period in a cross-over design.

Visits per cow per day increased when the cows were given forage in the feeding area (6·0 v. 4·1 (s.e.d. 0·08) P < 0·05) but milkings per cow per day were only slightly different (2·6 v. 2·4 (s.e.d. = 0·02) P = 0·052). Feeding forage in the feeding area modified forage-eating behaviour by reducing the number of bouts (4·9 v. 7·6 bouts per cow per day, P < 0·05) and total forage eating time (209 v. 289 min per cow per day (s.e.d. = 33·6), P < 0·05). The cows also tended to spend less time lying (529 v. 620 min per cow per day (s.e.d. = 43·2) P = 0·051).

There was no effect of feeding/not feeding concentrates in the milking stall on visits per cow per day or milkings per cow per day. However, feeding tended to create more shuffling behaviour during the automatic teat cup attachment process (3·4 v. 6·7 shuffling bouts per milking (s.e.d. 2·07) P = 0·053) but there were no effects on the levels of kicking, successful teat cup attachment rate, vocalization, elimination, hesitations in mounting a step or poor rear leg positions. The cows tended to adjust to a more accessible stance during both the automatic attachment process (from 17% of milkings exhibiting poor leg positions at the start of attachment, to 10% at the end, P < 0·01) and over the course of the experiment (from 26% to 10%, P < 0·02). There was a trend for cows who were not fed to milk out quicker than those who were fed for all milkings per day combined (733 s v. 811 (s.e.d. 43·3) s P = 0·074) but there were no other effects on yield, milk flow rate from the udder or time taken to milk out for all milkings through the day combined or just the first milking of the day.

Feeding concentrates in the feeding area can be used as an alternative to feeding forage in the feeding area, but there is no need to feed concentrates in the milking stall. Feeding cows while they were being milked did not improve their behaviour or milking characteristics.

Keywords

automatic milking systemsbehaviourdairy cowsfeeding
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 67 , Issue 2 , October 1998 , pp. 183 - 193
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

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

Allen, C. J., Mottram, T. T., Frost, A. R., Street, M. J., Hall, R. C. and Spencer, D. S. 1992. Field trials of the Silsoe automatic milking system. In Prospects for automatic milking: proceedings of the international symposium on prospects for automatic milking (ed. Ipema, A. H., Lippus, A. C., Metz, J. H. M. and Rossing, W.), pp. 72–79. Pudoc Scientific Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Artmann, R. 1992. Status, results and further development of an automatic milking system. In Prospects for automatic milking: proceedings of the international symposium on prospects for automatic milking (ed. Ipema, A. H., Lippus, A. C., Metz, J. H. M. and Rossing, W.), pp. 23–32. Pudoc Scientific Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Bailey, D. W., Rittenhouse, L. R., Hart, R. H. and Richards, R. W. 1989. Characteristics of spatial memory in cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 23: 331–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandsma, S. 1978. The relation between milking, residual milk and milk yield. In Proceedings of the international symposium on machine milking, pp. 47–56. National Mastitis Council, Louisville, USA.Google Scholar
Bruckmaier, R. M., Schams, D. and Blum, J. W. 1994. Continuously elevated concentrations of oxytocin during milking are necessary for complete milk removal in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Research 61: 323–334.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frost, A. R., Street, M. J. and Hall, R. C. 1993. The development of a pneumatic robot for attaching a milking machine to a cow. Mechatronics 3: 409–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillerton, J. E. and Winter, A. 1992. The effects of frequent milking on udder physiology and health. In Prospects for automatic milking: proceedings of the international symposium on prospects for automatic milking (ed. Ipema, A. H., Lippus, A. C., Metz, J. H. M. and Rossing, W.), pp. 201–212. Pudoc Scientific Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Ketelaar-de-Lauwere, C. C. 1992. The use of a selection unit for automatic milking. In Prospects for automatic milking: proceedings of the international symposium on prospects for automatic milking (ed. Ipema, A. H., Lippus, A. C., Metz, J. H. M. and Rossing, W.), pp. 270–279. Pudoc Scientific Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Ketelaar-de-Lauwere, C. C. and Ipema, A. H. 1996. Cow strategies in relation to visits to an automatic milking system in a free cow traffic situation. In Proceedings of the international congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology (ed. Duncan, I. J. H., Widowski, T. M. and Haley, D. B.), p. 104. The Colonel K. L. Campbell Centre for the Study of Animal Welfare, Guelph.Google Scholar
Kilgour, R. 1981. Use of the Hebb-Williams closed-field test to study the learning ability of Jersey cows. Animal Behaviour 29: 850–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, C. H. and Wilde, C. J. 1993. Mammary cell changes during pregnancy and lactation. Livestock Production Science 35: 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kovalcik, K. and Kovalcik, M. 1986. Learning ability and memory testing in cattle of different ages. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 15: 27–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larkin, S. and McFarland, D. 1978. The cost of changing from one activity to another. Animal Behaviour 26: 1237–1246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust. 1987. Genstat 5 reference manual, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Linde, R. van der and Lubberink, J. 1992. Robotic milking. In Prospects for automatic milking: proceedings of the international symposium on prospects for automatic milking (ed. Ipema, A. H., Lippus, A. C., Metz, J. H. M. and Rossing, W.), pp. 55–62. Pudoc Scientific Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
McFarland, D. J. 1977. Decision making in animals. Nature 269: 15–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mottram, T. 1992a. Design and management of automatic milking systems. Agricultural Engineer Autumn 1992: 87–90.Google Scholar
Mottram, T. 1992b. Design and management of automatic milking systems. Part II. Agricultural Engineer Winter 1992: 115–118.Google Scholar
Mottram, T. 1993. Design and management of automatic milking systems. Part III. Agricultural Engineer Spring 1993: 6–12.Google Scholar
Mottram, T. T., Hall, R. C., Spencer, D. S., Allen, C. J. and Winter, A. 1995. The role of the cow in automatic teat cup attachment. Journal of Dairy Science 78: 1873–1880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ordolff, D. 1987. Safety considerations for automatic milking systems. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 38: 91–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prescott, N. B., Mottram, T. T. and Webster, A. J. F. 1998. Relative motivations of dairy cows to be milked or fed in a Y-maze and an automatic milking system. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 57: 23–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossing, W., Ipema, A. H. and Veltman, P. F. 1985. The feasibility of milking in a feeding box. IMAG, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Report 85-2.Google Scholar
Samuelsson, B., Wahlberg, E. and Svennersten, K. 1993. The effect of feeding during milking on milk-production and milk flow. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 23: 101–106.Google Scholar
Sibly, R. and McFarland, D. 1974. A state-space approach to motivation. In Motivational control systems analysis (ed. McFarland, D.), pp. 213–250. Academic Press, UK.Google Scholar
Spencer, D. S. and Street, M. J. 1992. The design of the management system for the Silsoe automatic milking system. In Prospects for automatic milking: proceedings of the international symposium on prospects for automatic milking (ed. Ipema, A. H., Lippus, A. C., Metz, J. H. M. and Rossing, W.), pp. 309–314. Pudoc Scientific Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Street, M. J., Hall, R. C., Spencer, D. S., Wilkin, A. L., Mottram, T. T. and Allen, C. J. 1992. Design principles for the Silsoe automatic milking system. In Prospects for automatic milking: proceedings of the international symposium on prospects for automatic milking (ed. Ipema, A. H., Lippus, A. C., Metz, J. H. M. and Rossing, W.), pp. 40–48. Pudoc Scientific Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Svennersten, K., Gorewit, R. C., Sjaunja, L. O. and Unvas-Moberg, K. 1995. Feeding during milking enhances milking-related oxytocin secretion and milk production in dairy cows whereas food deprivation decreases it. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica 153: 309–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, J. 1995. Animal welfare — a cool eye towards Eden, pp. 167–194. Blackwell Science, Oxford.Google Scholar
Whipp, J. I. 1992. Design and performance of milking parlours. In Machine milking and lactation (ed. Bramley, A. J., Dodd, F. H., Mein, G. A., Bramley, J. A.), pp. 285–310. Insight Books, Burlington, USA.Google Scholar
Wilde, C. J. and Peaker, M. 1990. Autocrine control of milk production. Journal of Agricultural Science 114: 235–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winter, A. and Hillerton, J. E. 1995. Behaviour associated with feeding and milking of early lactation cows housed in an experimental automatic milking system. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 46: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winter, A., Teverson, R. M. and Hillerton, J. E. 1992. The effect of increased milking frequency and automated milking systems on the behaviour of the dairy cow. In Prospects for automatic milking: proceedings of the international symposium on prospects for automatic milking (ed. Ipema, A. H., Lippus, A. C., Metz, J. H. M. and Rossing, W.), pp. 261–269. Pudoc Scientific Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar