Animal Bioscience

  • 제35권1호
  • /
  • Pages.147-152
  • /
  • 2022
  • /
  • 2765-0189(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2765-0235(eISSN)
아세아태평양축산학회 (Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A comparative analysis of rumen pH, milk production characteristics, and blood metabolites of Holstein cattle fed different forage levels for the establishment of objective indicators of the animal welfare certification standard

  • Baek, Dong Jin (Animal Protection and Welfare Division, Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency) ;
  • Kwon, Hyoun Chul (Department of Animal Science, Jeonbuk National University) ;
  • Mun, Ah Lyum (Animal Protection and Welfare Division, Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency) ;
  • Lim, Joo Ri (Animal Protection and Welfare Division, Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency) ;
  • Park, Sung Won (Animal Protection and Welfare Division, Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency) ;
  • Han, Jin Soo (Department of Laboratory Animal Medicine and Institute for the 3Rs, College of Veterinary Medicine, Konkuk University)
  • 투고 : 2021.02.22
  • 심사 : 2021.05.12
  • 발행 : 2022.01.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Objective: This study was conducted to obtain an objective index that can be quantified and used for establishing an animal welfare certification standard in Korea. For this purpose rumen pH, ruminating time, milk yield, milk quality, and blood components of cows reared in farms feeding high forage level (90%) and farms feeding low forage level (40%) were compared. Methods: Data on rumen pH, rumination time, milk yield, milk fat ratio, milk protein ratio, and blood metabolism were collected from 12 heads from a welfare farm (forage rate 88.5%) and 13 heads from a conventional farm (forage rate 34.5%) for three days in October 2019. Results: The rumination time was longer in cattle on the welfare farm than on the conventional farm (p<0.01), but ruminal pH fluctuation was greater in the cattle on conventional farm than the welfare farm (p<0.01). Conventional farms with a high ratio of concentrated feed were higher in average daily milk yield than welfare farms, but milk fat and milk production efficiency (milk fat and milk protein corrected milk/total digestible nutrients) was higher in cattle on welfare farms. Blood test results showed a normal range for both farm types, but concentrations of total cholesterol and non-esterified fatty acid were significantly higher in cows from conventional farms with a high milk yield (p<0.01). Conclusion: The results of this study confirmed that cows on the animal welfare farm with a high percentage of grass feed had higher milk production efficiency with healthier rumen pH and blood metabolism parameters compared to those on the conventional farm.

키워드

과제정보

This work was supported by the Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency (Republic of Korea; No.F-1543071-2019-20-01).

참고문헌

  1. Animal welfare farm certification standards for dairy cattle [Internet]. Animal Protection Management System [cited 2021 Feb 4]. Available from: https://www.animal.go.kr/front/community/show.do?boardId=contents&seq=79&menuNo=3000000019
  2. Beauchemin KA. Invited review: Current perspectives on eating and rumination activity in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2018;101:4762-84. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13706
  3. RDA (Rural Development Administration). Korean feeding standard for Dairy Cattle. 3rd ed. Jeonju, Korea: National Institute of Animal Science; 2017.
  4. Aschenbach JR, Penner GB, Stumpff F, Gabel G. Ruminant nutrition symposium: Role of fermentation acid absorption in the regulation of ruminal pH. J Anim Sci 2011;89:1092107. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2010-3301
  5. Son HI, Baek SG, Moon JY, Ahn EY, Lee HJ, Son YS. Effect of subacute ruminal acidosis on plasma concentrations of lipopolysaccharide in dairy cattle. J Korean Soc Grassl Forage Sci 2013;33:313-8. https://doi.org/10.5333/KGFS.2013.33.4.313
  6. OIE [Internet]. Terrestrial Animal Health Code Chapter 7.11. Animal welfare and dairy cattle production systems [cited 2021 Feb 4]. Available from: https://www.oie.int/index.php?id=169&L=0&htmfile=chapitre_aw_dairy_cattle.htm
  7. Castillo-Gonzalez AR, Burrola-Barraza ME, Dominguez-Viveros J, Chavez-Martinz A. Rumen microorganisms and fermentation. Arch Med Vet 2014;46:349-61. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0301-732X2014000300003
  8. AWA (Animal Welfare Approved by AGW standard) [Internet]. Dairy Cattle Standards [cited 2021 Feb 4]. Available from: https://agreenerworld.org/certifications/animal-welfare-approved/standards/dairy-cattle-and-calves-standards/
  9. Antanaitis R, Juozaitiene V, Rutkauskas A, Televicius M, Stasiuleviciute I. Reticulorumen temperature and pH as indicators of the likelihood of reproductive success. J Dairy Res 2018;85:23-6. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022029918000018
  10. Stangaferro ML, Wijma R, Caixeta LS, Al-Abri MA, Giordano JO. Use of rumination and activity monitoring for the identification of dairy cows with health disorders: Part III. Metritis. J Dairy Sci 2016;99:7422-33. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2016-11352
  11. Elischer MF, Arceo ME, Karcher EL, Siegford JM. Validating the accuracy of activity and rumination monitor data from dairy cows housed in a pasture-based automatic milking system. J Dairy Sci 2013;96:6412-22. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2013-6790
  12. OIE. Animal Welfare and Dairy Cattle Production System. In Terrestrial Animal Health Code; Chapter 7.11. Paris, France: World Organization for Animal Health/OIE; 2015.
  13. Spigarelli C, Zuliani A, Battini M, Mattiello S, Bovolenta S. Welfare assessment on pasture: a review on animal-based measures for ruminants. Animals 2020;10:609. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10040609
  14. Lee WS, Lee BS, Oh YK, et al. Effects of concentrate to roughage ratios on duration and frequencies of rumination and chewing in Hanwoo steers. J Anim Sci Technol 2004;46:5560. https://doi.org/10.5187/JAST.2004.46.1.055
  15. Schirmann K, von Keyserlingk MA, Weary DM, Veria DM, Heuwieser W. Validation of a system for monitoring rumination in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2009;92:6052-5. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2361
  16. Soriani N, Trevisi E, Calamari L. Relationships between rumination time, metabolic conditions, and health status in dairy cows during the transition period. J Anim Sci 2012;90:4544-54. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2011-5064
  17. Jiang FG, Lin XY, Yan ZG, et al. Effect of dietary roughage level on chewing activity, ruminal pH, and saliva secretion in lactating Holstein cows. J Dariy Sci 2017;100:2660-71. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2016-11559
  18. Mao SY, Huo WJ, Zhu WY. Microbiome-metabolome analysis reveals unhealthy alterations in the composition and metabolism of ruminal microbiota with increasing dietary grain in a goat model. Environ Microbiol 2016;18:525-41. https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.12724
  19. Krause KM, Combs DK, Beauchemin KA. Effects of forage particle size and grain fermentability in midlactation cows. II. Ruminal pH and chewing activity. J Dairy Sci 2002;85:1947-57. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(02)74271-9
  20. Pitt R, Pell A. Modeling ruminal pH fluctuations: interactions between meal frequency and digestion rate. J Dairy Sci 1997;80:2429-41. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(97)76195-2
  21. Desnoyers M, Duvaux-Ponter C, Rigalma K, Roussel S, Martin O, Giger-Reverdin S. Effect of concentrate percentage on ruminal pH and time-budget in dairy goats. Animal 2008;2:1802-8. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731108003157
  22. Keady TWJ, Mayne CS, Fitzpatrick DA, McCoy MA. Effect of concentrate feed level in late gestation on subsequent milk yield, milk composition, and fertility of dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2001;84:1468-79. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)70180-4
  23. Jung SH, Jung YH, Choe C, et al. Reference intervals for blood metabolic profiles of Holstein cows in Korea. Korean J Vet Serv 2019;42:121-6. https://doi.org/10.7853/kjvs.2019.42.2.121
  24. Adewuyi AA, Gruys E, Van Eerdenburg FJCM. Non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA) in dairy cattle. A review. Vet Q 2005;27:117-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/01652176.2005.9695192
  25. Jozwik A, Strzalkowska N, Bagnicka E, et al. Relationship between milk yield, stage of lactation, and some blood serum metabolic parameters of dairy cows. Czech J Anim Sci 2012;57:353-60. https://doi.org/10.17221/6270-CJAS
  26. Mohebbi-Fani M, Nazifi S, Rowghani E, Bahrami S, Jamshidi O. Thyroid hormones and their correlations with serum glucose, beta hydroxybutyrate, nonesterified fatty acids, cholesterol, and lipoproteins of high-yielding dairy cows at different stages of lactation cycle. Comp Clin Pathol 2009;18:211-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00580-008-0782-7
  27. Lee BH, Nejad JG, Kim HS, Sung KI. Effect of forage feeding level on the milk production characteristics of Holstein lactating cows. J Korean Soc Grassl Forage Sci 2013;33:45-51. https://doi.org/10.5333/KGFS.2013.33.1.45
  28. De Vries A, Marcondes M. Overview of factors affecting productive lifespan of dairy cows. Animal 2020;14(S1):155-64. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731119003264