Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-pkt8n Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-16T11:58:10.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relationship of diet, hoof type and locomotion score with lesions of the sole and white line in dairy cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

D. N. Logue ,
J. E. Offer  and
J. J. Hyslop
D. N. Logue
Affiliation:
Dairy Health Unit, Scottish Agricultural College (Veterinary Services), Auchincruive, Ayr KA6 5HW
J. E. Offer
Affiliation:
Dairy Health Unit, Scottish Agricultural College (Veterinary Services), Auchincruive, Ayr KA6 5HW
J. J. Hyslop
Affiliation:
Department of Grassland and Ruminant Science, SAC, Auchincruive, Ayr KA6 5HW
Get access

Abstract

Three groups of 16 cattle each comprising three multiparous Jersey cross Holstein-Friesian cows, seven primiparous and six multiparous Holstein-Friesian cattle were offered, ad libitum, a silage-based complete diet with different concentrate ingredients following an initial 3-week covariate period. The relationship between these three diets and other parameters with lesions of the weight-bearing surface of the hoof was studied by scoring mobility weekly (locomotion score) and examining all the feet of all cows for visual lesions particularly those involving the horn of the foot. In addition hoof angle, hardness and growth and wear were also recorded. The mean locomotion score during the initial 3-week covariate period was a significant covariate for the subsequent locomotion score, milk yield, and live weight (P < 0·001). Furthermore weekly locomotion score also proved a significant covariate for weekly milk yield (P < 0·05). There were no significant differences between dietary treatment groups for locomotion score, overall lesion score (despite significantly fewer ulcers of the sole in one dietary group: P < 0·001) but a significant (P < 0·05) difference between cow ‘type’ and there was also a significant (P < 0·05) diet × breed interaction for locomotion score and milk yield. It was concluded first that initial mobility was an important factor in subsequent mobility of the cow and so experimental design; secondly that while nutrition and genotype interacted to influence mobility, visual lesions of the hoof and lameness, the mechanisms involved were far from clear; and thirdly that the simple lesion score used required some adjustment or correction factor(s) to ensure that more severe lesions were given a greater weight than a simple unitary increase.

Keywords

dairy cattlefoot diseaseslocomotionmilk yield
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 59 , Issue 2 , October 1994 , pp. 173 - 181
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1994

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

Blowey, R. 1993. The causes and prevention of lameness in cattle. In Lameness and hoof care; an illustrated guide, pp. 62–80. Farming press books.Google Scholar
Chesterton, R. N., Pfeiffer, D. U., Morris, R. S. and Tanner, C. M. 1989. Environmental and behavioural factors affecting the prevalence of foot lameness in New Zealand dairy herds — a case-control study. Neiv Zealand Veterinary Journal 37: 135–142.Google Scholar
Enevoldsen, C., Gröhn, Y. T. and Thysen, J. 1991. Sole ulcers in dairy cattle: associations with season, cow characteristics, disease and production. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 1284–1298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenough, P. R. and Vermunt, J. J. 1991. Evaluation of subclinical laminitis in a dairy herd and observations on associated nutritional and management factors. Veterinary Record 128: 11–17.Google Scholar
Genstat 5 Committee. 1987. Genstat reference manual. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hyslop, J. J. 1991. The storage and nutritional value of wet malt distillers grains for ruminants. Ph.D. thesis, Glasgow University.Google Scholar
Kelly, E. F. and Leaver, J. D. 1990. Lameness in dairy cattle and the type of concentrate given. Animal Production 51: 221–227.Google Scholar
Kempson, S. A. and Logue, D. N. 1993. Ultrastructural observations of hoof horn from dairy cows: changes in the white line during first lactation. Veterinary Record 132: 524–527.Google Scholar
Leaver, J. D. and Webster, D. M. 1983. Assessment of lameness in dairy cattle on different systems of concentrate feeding. Scottish Agricultural College Crichton Royal Annual Report 1983, pp. 27–29.Google Scholar
Livesey, C. T. and Fleming, F. L. 1984. Nutritional influences on laminitis, sole ulcer, and bruised sole in Holstein-Friesian cows. Veterinary Record 114: 510–512.Google Scholar
Logue, D. N., Lawson, A., Roberts, D. and Hunter, E. A. 1989. The effect of two different protein sources in the diet upon the incidence and prevalence of lameness in dairy cattle. Animal Production 48: 636 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Logue, D. N., Offer, J. E. and 1993. Lameness in dairy cattle. Irish Veterinary Journal 46: 47–58.Google Scholar
McDaniel, B. T. and Wilt, J. C. 1991. Lameness in dairy cattle. Proceedings of the British Cattle Veterinary Association 1990-91, pp. 66–80.Google Scholar
Manson, F. J. 1986. A study of lameness in dairy cows with reference to nutrition and hoof shape. Ph.D. thesis, University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
Manson, F. J. and Leaver, J. D. 1988a. The influence of concentrate amount on locomotion and clinical lameness in dairy cattle. Animal Production 47: 185–190.Google Scholar
Manson, F. J. and Leaver, J. D. 1988b. The influence of dietary protein intake and hoof trimming on lameness in dairy cattle. Animal Production 47: 191–199.Google Scholar
Manson, F. J. and Leaver, J. D. 1989. The effect of concentrate: silage ratio and of hoof trimming on lameness in dairy cattle. Animal Production 49: 15–22.Google Scholar
Merritt, J. B., Manson, F. J., Russell, J. B. and Downham, D. Y. 1992. The effect of lameness on milk production in Friesian-Holstein cows. Animal Production 54: 479–480 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1990. UK tables of nutritive value and chemical composition of feedingstuffs (ed. Givens, D. I., and Moss, A. R.). Rowett Research Services Ltd, Aberdeen.Google Scholar
Nilsson, S. A. 1963. Clinical, morphological and experimental studies of laminitis in cattle. Acta Veterinaria Scandinaciva 4: suppl. 1, pp. 1–276.Google Scholar
Rowlands, G. J., Russell, A. M. and Williams, L. A. 1985. Effects of stage of lactation, month, age, origin and heart girth on lameness in dairy cattle. Veterinary Record 117: 576–580.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russell, A. M. and Rowlands, G. J. 1983. COSREEL: computerised recording system for herd health information management. Veterinary Record 112: 189–193.Google Scholar
Webster, J. 1987. Understanding the dairy cow, pp. 219–227. BSP Professional Books, Oxford.Google Scholar