Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T15:33:38.613Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Implications of feed concentrate reduction in organic grassland-based dairy systems: a long-term on-farm study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2017

F. Leiber ,
I. K. Schenk ,
A. Maeschli ,
S. Ivemeyer ,
J. O. Zeitz ,
S. Moakes ,
P. Klocke ,
P. Staehli ,
C. Notz  and
M. Walkenhorst
F. Leiber*
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Sciences, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), PO Box 219, 5070 Frick, Switzerland
I. K. Schenk
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Sciences, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), PO Box 219, 5070 Frick, Switzerland Institute of Animal Nutrition and Physiology, University of Giessen, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 26-32, 35392 Giessen, Germany
A. Maeschli
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Sciences, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), PO Box 219, 5070 Frick, Switzerland
S. Ivemeyer
Affiliation:
Farm Animal Behaviour and Husbandry Section, University of Kassel, Nordbahnhofstr. 1a, 37213 Witzenhausen, Germany
J. O. Zeitz
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Nutrition and Physiology, University of Giessen, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 26-32, 35392 Giessen, Germany
S. Moakes
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Sciences, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), PO Box 219, 5070 Frick, Switzerland
P. Klocke
Affiliation:
Bovicare, Hermannswerder Haus 14, 14473 Potsdam, Germany
P. Staehli
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Sciences, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), PO Box 219, 5070 Frick, Switzerland
C. Notz
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Sciences, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), PO Box 219, 5070 Frick, Switzerland
M. Walkenhorst
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Sciences, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), PO Box 219, 5070 Frick, Switzerland
*
†E-mail: florian.leiber@fibl.org
Get access

Abstract

In response to increasing efforts for reducing concentrate inputs to organic dairy production in grassland-rich areas of Europe, a long-term study was conducted, which assessed the impacts of concentrate reductions on cows’ performance, health, fertility and average herd age. In total, 42 Swiss commercial organic dairy cattle farms were monitored over 6 years (‘Y0’, 2008/09 until ‘Y5’, 2013/14). In comparison with overall data of Swiss herdbooks (including conventional and organic farms), the herds involved in the project had lower milk yields, similar milk solids, shorter calving intervals and higher average lactation numbers. During the first 3 project years farmers reduced the concentrate proportion (i.e. cereals, oilseeds and grain legumes) in the dairy cows’ diets to varying degrees. In Y0, farms fed between 0% and 6% (dietary dry matter proportion per year) of concentrates. During the course of the study they changed the quantity of concentrates to voluntarily chosen degrees. Retrospectively, farms were clustered into five farm groups: Group ‘0-conc’ (n=6 farms) already fed zero concentrates in Y0 and stayed at this level. Group ‘Dec-to0’ (n=11) reduced concentrates to 0 during the project period. Groups ‘Dec-strong’ (n=8) and ‘Dec-slight’ (n=12) decreased concentrate amounts by >50% and <50%, respectively. Group ‘Const-conc’ (n=5 farms) remained at the initial level of concentrates during the project. Milk recording data were summarised and analysed per farm and project year. Lactation number and calving intervals were obtained from the databases of the Swiss breeders’ associations. Dietary concentrate amounts and records of veterinary treatments were obtained from the obligatory farm documentations. Data were analysed with GLMs. Daily milk yields differed significantly between farm groups already in Y0, being lowest in groups 0-conc (16.0 kg) and Dec-to0 (16.7 kg), and highest in groups Dec-slight (19.6 kg) and Const-conc (19.2 kg). Milk yield decreases across the years within groups were not significant, but urea contents in milk decreased significantly during the course of the project. Milk protein, somatic cell score, fat–protein ratio, average lactation number, calving interval and frequency of veterinary treatments did not differ by group and year. In conclusion, 5 years of concentrate reduction in low-input Swiss organic dairy farms, affected neither milk composition, nor fertility and veterinary treatments. Milk yields tended to decline, but at a low rate per saved kilogram of concentrate.

Keywords

organic dairy cattleroughage-based dietsproductivityanimal fertilityanimal health
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 11 , Issue 11 , November 2017 , pp. 2051 - 2060
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

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

Bargo, F, Muller, LD, Delahoy, JE and Cassidy, TW 2002. Milk response to concentrate supplementation of high producing dairy cows grazing at two pasture allowances. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 1777–1792.Google Scholar
Beever, DE and Doyle, PT 2007. Feed conversion efficiency as a key determinant of dairy herd performance: a review. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 47, 645–657.Google Scholar
Berry, NR, Sutter, F, Bruckmaier, RM, Blum, JW and Kreuzer, M 2001. Limitations of high Alpine grazing conditions for early lactation cows: effects of energy and protein supplementation. Animal Science 73, 149–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bio Suisse 2016. Richtlinien für die Erzeugung, Verarbeitung und den Handel von Knospe-Produkten [Bio Suisse Standards]. Bio Suisse, Basel, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Dorn, K, Leiber, F, Sundrum, A, Holinger, M, Mayer, P and Walkenhorst, M 2016. A field trial on the effects of pure sodium propionate and a combination with herbal extracts on short term development of subclinical ketosis. Livestock Science 187, 87–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisler, MC, Lee, MRF, Tarlton, JF, Martin, GB, Beddington, J, Dungait, JAJ, Greathead, H, Liu, J, Mathew, S, Miller, H, Misselbrook, T, Murray, P, Vinod, VK, Van Saun, R and Winter, M 2014. Steps to sustainable livestock. Nature 507, 32–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ertl, P, Knaus, W and Steinwidder, A 2014. Comparison of zero concentrate supplementation with different quantities of concentrates in terms of production, animal health, and profitability of organic dairy farms in Austria. Organic Agriculture 4, 233–242.Google Scholar
Ertl, P, Zebeli, Q, Zollitsch, W and Knaus, W 2015. Feeding of by-products completely replaced cereals and pulses in dairy cows and enhanced edible feed conversion ratio. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 1225–1233.Google Scholar
Früh, B, Schlatter, B, Isensee, A, Maurer, V and Willer, H 2015. Report on organic protein availability and demand in Europe. Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Grandl, F, Amelchanka, SL, Furger, M, Clauss, M, Zeitz, JO, Kreuzer, M and Schwarm, A 2016. Biological implications of longevity in dairy cows: 2. Changes in methane emissions and efficiency with age. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 3472–3485.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hofstetter, P, Frey, HJ, Gazzarin, C, Wyss, U and Kunz, P 2014. Dairy farming: indoor v. pasture-based feeding. Journal of Agricultural Science 152, 994–1011.Google Scholar
Horn, M, Steinwidder, A, Gasteiner, J, Podstatzky, L, Haiger, A and Zollitsch, W 2013. Suitability of different dairy cow types for an Alpine organic and low-input milk production system. Livestock Science 153, 135–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, M, Steinwidder, A, Pfister, R, Gasteiner, J, Verstergaard, M, Larsen, T and Zollitsch, W 2014. Do different cow types respond differently to a reduction of concentrate supplementation in an Alpine low-input dairy system? Livestock Science 170, 72–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isensee, A, Leiber, F, Bieber, A, Spengler, A, Ivemeyer, S, Maurer, V and Klocke, P 2014. Comparison of a classical with a highly formularized body condition scoring system for dairy cattle. Animal 8, 1971–1977.Google Scholar
Ivemeyer, S, Smolders, G, Brinkmann, J, Gratzer, E, Hansen, B, Henriksen, BIF, Huber, J, Leeb, C, March, S, Mejdell, C, Nicholas, P, Roderick, S, Stöger, E, Vaarst, M, Whistance, IK, Winckler, C and Walkenhorst, M 2012. Impact of animal health and welfare planning on medicine use, heard health and production in European organic dairy farms. Livestock Science 145, 63–72.Google Scholar
Ivemeyer, S, Walkenhorst, M, Holinger, M, Maeschli, A, Klocke, P, Spengler Neff, A, Staehli, P, Krieger, M and Notz, C 2014. Changes in herd health, fertility and production under roughage based feeding conditions with reduced concentrate input in Swiss organic dairy herds. Livestock Science 168, 159–167.Google Scholar
Knaus, W 2009. Dairy cows trapped between performance demands and adaptability. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 89, 1107–1114.Google Scholar
Leiber, F, Dorn, K, Probst, JK, Isensee, A, Ackermann, N, Kuhn, A and Spengler Neff, A 2015a. Concentrate reduction and sequential roughage offer to dairy cows: effects on milk protein yield, protein efficiency and milk quality. Journal of Dairy Research 82, 272–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leiber, F, Ivemeyer, S, Perler, E, Krenmayr, I, Mayer, P and Walkenhorst, M 2015b. Determination of faeces particle proportions as a tool for the evaluation of the influence of feeding strategies on fibre digestion in dairy cows. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences 25, 153–159.Google Scholar
Leiber, F, Kreuzer, M, Jörg, B, Leuenberger, H and Wettstein, HR 2004. Contribution of altitude and Alpine origin of forage to the influence of Alpine sojourn of cows on intake, nitrogen conversion, metabolic stress and milk synthesis. Animal Science 78, 451–466.Google Scholar
Phuong, HN, Blavy, P, Martin, O, Schmidely, P and Friggens, NC 2016. Modelling impacts of performance on the probability of reproducing, and thereby on productive lifespan, allow prediction of lifetime efficiency in dairy cows. Animal 10, 106–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roche, JF 2006. The effect of nutritional management of the dairy cow on reproductive efficiency. Animal Reproduction Science 96, 282–296.Google Scholar
Røjen, BA, Lund, P and Kristensen, NB 2008. Urea and short-chain fatty acids metabolism in Holstein cows fed a low-nitrogen grass-based diet. Animal 2, 500–513.Google Scholar
Schader, C, Muller, A, El-Hage Scialabba, N, Hecht, J, Isensee, A, Erb, KH, Smith, P, Makkar, HPS, Klocke, P, Leiber, F, Schwegler, P, Stolze, M and Niggli, U 2015. Impacts of feeding less food-competing feedstuffs to livestock on global food system sustainability. Journal of the Royal Society Interface 12, 20150891.Google Scholar
Schweizerischer Bauernverband (SBV) 2012. Milchstatistik der Schweiz 2011. Sbv Statistik. Retrieved on 18 November 2016 from http://www.sbv-usp.ch/fileadmin/sbvuspch/05_Publikationen/Mista/Mista_2011.pdf.Google Scholar
Sehested, J, Kristensen, T and Soegaard, K 2003. Effect of concentrate supplementation level on production, health and efficiency in an organic dairy herd. Livestock Production Science 80, 153–165.Google Scholar
Smit, HJ, Metzger, MJ and Ewert, F 2008. Spatial distribution of grassland productivity and land use in Europe. Agricultural Systems 98, 208–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spek, JW, Dijkstra, J, van Duinkerken, G, Hendriks, WH and Bannink, A 2013. Prediction of urinary nitrogen and urinary urea nitrogen excretion by lactating dairy cattle in northwestern Europe and North America: a meta-analysis. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 4310–4322.Google Scholar
Spengler Neff, A and Ivemeyer, S 2016. Differences between dairy cows descending from artificial insemination bulls vs. dairy cows descending from natural service bulls on organic farms in Switzerland. Livestock Science 185, 30–33.Google Scholar
Steinshamn, H and Thuen, E 2008. White or red clover-grass silage in organic dairy milk production: grassland productivity and milk production responses with different levels of concentrate. Livestock Science 119, 202–215.Google Scholar
Tafaj, M, Kolaneci, V, Junck, B, Maulbetsch, A, Steingass, H and Drochner, W 2005. Influence of fibre content and concentrate level on chewing activity, rumminal digestion, digesta passage rate and nutrient digestibility in dairy cows in late lactation. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science 18, 1116–1124.Google Scholar
Weller, RF and Bowling, PJ 2004. The performance and nutrient use efficiency of two contrasting systems of organic milk production. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 22, 261–270.Google Scholar
Westwood, CT, Lean, IJ and Kellaway, RC 1998. Indications and implications for testing of milk urea in dairy cattle: a quantitative review. Part 2. Effect of dietary protein on reproductive performance. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 46, 123–130.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, JM 2011. Re-defining efficiency of feed use by livestock. Animal 5, 1014–1022.Google Scholar