Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T23:46:09.539Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relationship of goat milk flow emission variables with milking routine, milking parameters, milking machine characteristics and goat physiology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2017

G. Romero ,
R. Panzalis  and
P. Ruegg
G. Romero*
Affiliation:
Departamento de Tecnología Agroalimentaria, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Ctra Beniel km. 3,2, 03312 Orihuela, Spain
R. Panzalis
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria, Università di Sassari, Sassari, Italy
P. Ruegg
Affiliation:
Dairy Science Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1675 Observatory Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA
*
†E-mail: gemaromero@umh.es
Get access

Abstract

The aim of this paper was to study the relationship between milk flow emission variables recorded during milking of dairy goats with variables related to milking routine, goat physiology, milking parameters and milking machine characteristics, to determine the variables affecting milking performance and help the goat industry pinpoint farm and milking practices that improve milking performance. In total, 19 farms were visited once during the evening milking. Milking parameters (vacuum level (VL), pulsation ratio and pulsation rate, vacuum drop), milk emission flow variables (milking time, milk yield, maximum milk flow (MMF), average milk flow (AVMF), time until 500 g/min milk flow is established (TS500)), doe characteristics of 8 to 10 goats/farm (breed, days in milk and parity), milking practices (overmilking, overstripping, pre-lag time) and milking machine characteristics (line height, presence of claw) were recorded on every farm. The relationships between recorded variables and farm were analysed by a one-way ANOVA analysis. The relationships of milk yield, MMF, milking time and TS500 with goat physiology, milking routine, milking parameters and milking machine design were analysed using a linear mixed model, considering the farm as the random effect. Farm was significant (P<0.05) in all the studied variables. Milk emission flow variables were similar to those recommended in scientific studies. Milking parameters were adequate in most of the farms, being similar to those recommended in scientific studies. Few milking parameters and milking machine characteristics affected the tested variables: average vacuum level only showed tendency on MMF, and milk pipeline height on TS500. Milk yield (MY) was mainly affected by parity, as the interaction of days in milk with parity was also significant. Milking time was mainly affected by milk yield and breed. Also significant were parity, the interaction of days in milk with parity and overstripping, whereas overmilking showed a slight tendency. We concluded that most of the studied variables were mainly related to goat physiology characteristics, as the effects of milking parameters and milking machine characteristics were scarce.

Keywords

milking machinemilking routinemilk flowmilking parametersdairy goat
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 11 , Issue 11 , November 2017 , pp. 2070 - 2075
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

Alejandro, M, Roca, A, Romero, G and Díaz, JR 2014. Effects of overmilking and liner type and characteristics on teat tissue in small ruminants. Journal of Dairy Research 81, 215–222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Billon, P, Ronningen, O, Sangiorgi, E and Shuiling, E 1999. Quantitative requirements of milking installations for small ruminants. A survey in different countries. Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on the Milking of Small Ruminants. Milking and milk production of dairy sheep and goats, 26 September to 1 October 1998, Athens, Greece, pp. 209–215.Google Scholar
Bruckmaier, RM, Ritter, C, Schams, D and Blum, JW 1994. Machine milking of dairy goats during lactation: udder anatomy, milking characteristics, and blood concentrations of oxytocin and prolactin. Journal of Dairy Research 61, 457–466.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bueso-Ródenas, J, Romero, G, Roca, A and Díaz, JR 2014. Effect of one automatic cluster remover (ACR) setting on milking efficiency on Murciano–Granadina goats. Livestock Science 161, 193–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrotte, G 1983. La normalisation des machines a traire pour chèvres et brebis. 3th Symposium Internacional de Ordeño Mecánico de Pequeños Rumiantes, 16–20 May 1983, Valladolid, Spain, pp. 367–379.Google Scholar
Cicogna, M and Sangiorgi, F 1983. Comparaison des caracteristiques de traite des chevres avec six types de faisceaux trayeurs. 3th Symposium Internacional de Ordeño Mecánico de Pequeños Rumiantes, 16–20 May 1983, Valladolid, Spain, pp. 485–489.Google Scholar
Darracq, J, Le Mens, P, Perrot, C 1978. Caractéristiques des machines à traire les chèvres utilisées en France et leur contròle en ferme. 2ème Symp. Int. Traite Mécanique Petits Ruminants, Alghero, Italie. Ed. F.N.O.C.L. Paris: 324.Google Scholar
Gleeson, DE, Jilroy, D, O’Callaghan, EJ, Fitzpatrick, E and Rath, MV 2003. Effect of machine milking on bovine teat sinus injury and teat canal keratin. Irish Veterinary Journal 56, 46–50.Google Scholar
Hillerton, J, Pankey, J and Pankey, P 2002. Effect of over-milking on teat condition. Journal of Dairy Research 69, 81–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ilahi, H, Chastin, P, Bouvier, F, Arhainx, J, Ricard, E and Manfredi, E 1999. Milking characteristics of dairy goats. Small Ruminant Research 34, 97–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ISO 5707 2007. Milking machine installations – construction and performance.Google Scholar
Komara, M, Giger-Reverdin, S, Marnet, PG, Roussel, S and Duvaux-Ponter, C 2010. The combined effects of milking frequency and feeding level on dairy goat welfare and milk emission characteristics in late lactation. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 127, 96–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komara, M and Marnet, PG 2009. Endocrine responses and milk emission characteristics in high yielding Alpine dairy goats under once daily milking management. Small Ruminant Research 87, 64–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Du, J 1985. Functional parameters affecting the efficiency of milking machines adapted to ewes. Complement on goats milking. 36th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, 30 September to 3 October 1985, Kallithea, Greece, p. 16.Google Scholar
Le Du, J 1987. Facilities and equipment for hand and machine milking of goats. 4th International Conference on Goats, 8–13 March 1987, Brasilia, Brazil, pp. 269–282.Google Scholar
Le Du, J 1989. La traite mécaniques des chèvres. INRA Productions Animales 2, 31–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Du, J, De la Chevalerie, FA, Combaud, JF and Lambion, P 1983. Comparaison d’un lactoduc en ligne haute et en ligne basse. Incidence sur la traite des brebis de races Lacaune et Manech. Annales de Zootechnie 32, 43–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Jaouen, JC 1981. Milking and the technology of milk and milk products. In Goat production (ed. C Gall), pp. 345–377. Academic Press, London, UK.Google Scholar
Lu, CD, Potchoiba, MJ and Loetz, ER 1991. Influence of vacuum level, pulsation ratio and rate on milking performance and udder health in dairy goats. Small Ruminant Research 5, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manzur, A, Díaz, JR, Mehdid, A, Fernández, N and Peris, C 2012. Effect of mid-line or low-line milking systems on milking characteristics in goats. Journal of Dairy Research 79, 375–382.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mein, GA, Williams, D and Reinemann, DJ 2003. Effects of milking on teat-end hyperkeratosis: 1 Mechanical forces applied by the teatcup liner and responses of the teat. 42nd Annual Meeting of the National Mastitis Council, 26–29 January 2003, Fort Worth, TX, USA, pp. 114–123.Google Scholar
Peris, C, Díaz, JR, Segura, C, Martí, A and Fernández, N 2003. Influence of pulsation rate on udder health and teat thickness changes in dairy ewes. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 530–537.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peris, C, Mehdid, MA, Martínez, B and Gómez, EA 2010. Efecto del número y estado de lactación sobre la cinética de emisión de leche en el ganado caprino de raza murciano-granadina. Producción ovina y caprina, 35. XXXV Jornadas de la Sociedad Española de Ovinotecnia y Caprinotecnia, 22–24 September 2010, Valladolid, Spain, pp. 102–106.Google Scholar
Peris, S, Such, X and Caja, G 1996. Milkability of Murciano-Granadina dairy goats. Milk partitioning and flow rate during machine milking according to parity, prolificacy and mode of suckling. Journal of Dairy Research 63, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rasmussen, MD 2004. Overmilking and teat condition. Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of National Mastitis Council, February 2004, Charlotte, NC, USA, pp. 169–175.Google Scholar
SAS Institute Inc 2002. SAS V.9.1. User’s guide. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Sinapsis, E, Hatziminaoglou, I, Marnet, PG, Abas, Z and Bolou, A 2000. Influence of vacuum level, pulsation rate and pulsation ratio on machine milking efficiency in local Greek goats. Livestock Production Science 64, 175–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, SB 1992. Machine milking systems collection: goat handbook. In Milk and milk handling (ed. DL Ace), pp. 6–11.Google Scholar