Effect of freestall housing on prevalence of lameness and milk somatic cell count in industrial dairy farms of Mazandaran province

Authors

1 Assistant professor of Animal Science, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, University of Gonbad Kavoos

2 Jahad Keshavarzi Organization

3 Assistant Professor. Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, University of Gonbad Kavoos

Abstract

Background and objectives: Over the past few decades, milk production has increased dramatically by employing breeding, feeding and management techniques and during this period, several studies have reported that the level of animal production is significantly affected by animal welfare status and type of housing system. Two of the most important factors influencing the production and economy of dairy farms are the presence or absence of abnormalities of the limbs and mastitis. Disturbance in animal comfort and welfare has increased the odds ratio of development of these abnormalities. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the occurrence of lameness and somatic cell count in milk in free stall and non-fossil stall systems in industrial dairy farms of Mazandaran province.
Materials and methods: In this study, 4 Holstein dairy farms in Mazandaran province with freestall or non-freestall housing system were used to evaluate the effect of housing system type on the incidence of lameness and somatic cell count of milk, during 2013 and 2014. To investigate the lameness incidence Logical regression (Proc logistic) method was used because of binary nature of data and the Proc Mixed procedure was used to investigate the somatic cell score (SCS). Herd, year and season of calving, parity and type of housing were used as fixed factors and age of first calving for both and days in milk for SCS were considered as Co-variates in the model.
Results: The difference of SCS means in freestall and non-freestall systems was significant P<0.05). The greatest difference in SCS was found between two herds with freestall and non-freestall systems (2.2 ± 0.23). Also parity had a significant effect on SCS (P<0.05). With an increase in the parity, SCS was increased from 1.99 to 3.2 in average. All of the factors in the model had significant effect on lameness incidence (P<0.05). The results showed that use of freestall compared to the non-freestall system can decrease the odds ratio of lameness significantly (1.82 (1.52- 2.16)) and the incidence rate of lameness from 13.58 in freestall to 20.55% in non-freestall system.
Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded that the use of the freestall system in dairy cattle farms, can result in a significant decrease in the incidence of mastitis and lameness. Hence, the use of this system, with respect to the size and cow number to stall number ratio, can improve the welfare and health status of the cows and therefore can make a significant contribution to improve the economic indices and profitability of the dairy herds.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1. Alban, L., Agger, J.F. and Lawson, L.G. 1996. Lameness in tied Danish dairy cattle: the
possible influence of housing systems, management, milk yield and prior incidents of
lameness. Prev Vet. Med. 29:135-149.
2. Ali, A. K.A. and Shook, G. E. 1980. An optimum transformation for somatic cell
concentration in milk. J. Dairy. Sci. 63(3): 487-490.
3. Bramley, A.J. 1985. The Control of Coliform Mastitis. In Proc. Annu. Meet. Natl. Mastitis
Counc. Las Vegas, N.V. National Mastitis Council Inc., Verona, WI. Pp: 4-17.
4. Clark, J.A. 1981. Environmental Aspects of Housing for Animal Production. England:
University of Nottingham, Pp: 19-35.
5. Clarkson, M.J., Downham, D.Y., Faull, W.B., Hughes, J.W., Manson, F.J., Merritt, J.B.,
Murray, R. D., Russell, W.B., Sutherst, J.E. and Ward, W.R. 1996. Incidence and prevalence
of lameness in dairy cattle. Vet. Rec. 138: 563–567.
6. Cook, N.B. and Nordlund, K.V. 2009. Review: The influence of the environment on dairy
cow behavior, claw health and herd health lameness dynamics. Vet. J. 179:360–369.
7. Cook, N.B., Bennett, T.B. and Nordlund, K.V. 2004. Effect of Free Stall Surface on Daily
Activity Patterns in Dairy Cows with Relevance to Lameness Prevalence. J. Dairy. Sci.
87:2912-2922.
8. Fitzpatrick, J.L., Logan, K.E., Young, F.J., Stear, M.J., Platt, D.J., and McGuirk, B.J. 1999.
Breeding cattle for mastitis resistance. In: Proceedings of the British Mastitis Conference,
Compton, UK. Pp: 47.
9. Gamroth, M.J. and Moor, J.A. 1993, Designing Dairy Free Stalls, A Pacific Northwest
Extension Publication: Oregon state university, Washington state university and the
University of Idaho. PNW321.
10. Ghasemi-khani, P., Sadeghi-Sefidmazgi, A., Ghiasi, H. and Mahdavi, A.H. 2015. Study of
milk somatic cell count pattern associations with some of environmental factors in Holstein
dairy cattle of Iran, J. Livestock. Res. 3(3): 47-56 (in Persian).
11. Ito, K., Weary, D.M. and von Keyserlingk, M.A.G. 2009. Lying behavior: Assessing withinand
betweenherd variation in free-stall-housed dairy cows. J. Dairy. Sci. 92: 4412–4420.
12. Kafilzadeh, F., and Farivar,F. 2008. The use of freestall in dairy cattle breeding. Razi
University.Press.Pp:146. (In Persian).
13. Kafilzadeh, F. and Farivar, F. 2007. Cattle behavior and welfare. 2nd ed. Razi
University.Press.Pp:277-289. (in Persian)
14. Leach, K.A., Whay, H.R., Maggs, C.M., Barker, Z.E., Paul, E.S., Bell, A.K. and Main,
D.C.J. 2010. Working towards a reduction in cattle lameness: 1. Understanding barriers to
lameness control on dairy farms. Res. Vet. Sci. 89: 311–317.
15. Martins, A.M., Silvestre, A.M., Petim-Batista, M.F. and Colaço, J. A. 2011. Somatic cell
score genetic parameter estimates of dairy cattle in Portugal using fractional polynomials. J.
Anim. Sci. 89(5): 1281-1285.
16. Miltenburg, J.D., de Lange, D., Crauwels, A.P.P., Bongers, J.H., Tielen, M.J.M., Schukken,
Y.H., and Elbers, A.R.W. 1996. Incidence of clinical mastitis in dairy cows in a random
sample of dairy herds in the southern Netherlands. Vet. Rec. 139: 204-207.
17. Nebel, R.L., and Mcgilliard, M.L. 1993. Interaction of high milk yield and reproductive
performance in dairy cows. J. Dairy. Sci. 76: 3257-3268.
18. Oltenacu, P.A., and Broom, D.M. 2010. The impact of genetic selection for increased milk
yield on the welfare of dairy cows. Animal Welfare. 19: 39-49.
19. Palmer, R.W., and Wagner-Storch, A.M. 2003. Cow Preference for Different free stall Bases
in Pens with Different Stocking Rates. Proc. 5th International Dairy Housing Conference.
ASAE, St. Joseph, MI. Pp: 155-164.
20. Phillips, C. 2002. Cattle Behavior and Welfare. 2nd ed. Malden, MA. : Blackwell
Publishing. 10-23 p.
21. Rodenburg, J. 1996. Mastitis Prevention: Environmental Control”. OMAFRA Factsheet.
22. Ruud, L.E., Bøe, K.E., and Østerås, O. 2010. Risk factors for dirty dairy cows in Norwegian
freestall systems. J. Dairy. Sci. 93: 5216–5224.
23. Sadeghi-Sefidmazgi, A. and Rayatdoost-Baghal, F. 2014. Effects of herd management
practices on somatic cell counts in an arid climate. R. Bras Zootec. 43(9): 499-504.
24. Sadeghi-Sefidmazgi, A., Moradi-Shahrbabak, M., Nejati-Javaremi, A., Miraei-Ashtiani,
S.R., and Amer, P.R. 2011. Estimation of economic values and financial losses associated
with clinical mastitis and somatic cell score in Holstein dairy cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 5(1):33-42.
25. Smith, U.W. and Ely, LO. 1997. The Influence of Feeding and Housing Systems on
Production, Reproduction, and Somatic Cell Count Scores of Southern Holstein Herds, The
Proff. J. Anim. Sci, 13 (3): 155-161.
26. Solano, L., Barkema, H.W., Pajor, E.A., Mason, S., LeBlanc, S.J., Nash, C G.R., and Haley,
D.B. 2015. Associations between lying behavior and lameness in Canadian Holstein-Friesian
cows housed in free stall barns. J. Dairy. Sci. 99: 2086–2101.
27. Spencer, H. 1998. Free Stall and Corral Management as Related to Mastitis Control. In Proc.
Mastitis Council Regional Meeting. Bellvue, WA. National Mastitis Council. Pp: 60.
28. Van Gastelen, S., Westerlaan, B., Houwers, D.J., and van Eerdenburg, F.J.C.M. 2011. A
study on cow comfort and risk for lameness and mastitis in relation to different types of
bedding materials. J. Dairy. Sci. 94: 4878–4888.
29. Von Keyserlingk, M.A.G., rushen, J., De passillé, A.M., and Weary, D.M. 2009. Invited
review: the welfare of dairy cattle-Key concepts and the role of science. J. Dairy. Sci.
92:4101–4111.
30. Wathes, C. and Charles, D. 1994. Livstock Housing, CAB International Publishing, UK.
31. Whay, H.R., Main, D.C.J., Green, L.E., and Webster, A.J.F. 2003. Assessment of the welfare
of dairy cattle using animal-based measurements: Direct observations and investigation of
farm records. Vet. Rec. 153:197–202.
32. Zdanowicz, M. Shelford, J.A., Tucker, C.B., Weary, D.M. and Von Keyserlink, M.A.G.
2004. Bacterial Populations on Teat Ends of Dairy Cows Housed in Freestalls and Bedded
with Either Sand or Sowdust. J. Dairy. Sci. 87: 1694-1701.
Journal of Ruminant Research
Volume 5, Issue 4
March 2018
Pages 35-46

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics