Effects of cubicle characteristics on animal welfare indicators in dairy cattle

被引:17
|
作者
Gieseke, D. [1 ,3 ]
Lambertz, C. [2 ]
Gauly, M. [2 ]
机构
[1] Georg August Univ Gottingen, Dept Anim Sci, Albrecht Thaer Weg 3, D-37075 Gottingen, Germany
[2] Free Univ Bolzano, Fac Sci & Technol, Univ Pl 5, I-39100 Bolzano, Italy
[3] Univ Kassel, Fac Organ Agr Sci, Nordbahnhofstr 1a, D-37213 Witzenhausen, Germany
关键词
dairy cows; housing system; cubicle design; Welfare Quality (R) protocol; well-being; RISK-FACTORS; LEG INJURIES; COW COMFORT; LYING TIME; LAMENESS; SYSTEMS; CLEANLINESS; QUALITY(R); BEHAVIOR; HOCK;
D O I
10.1017/S1751731120000609
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
Cubicle characteristics such as cubicle dimensions or management factors such as cow-to-cubicle ratio could affect health and behaviour of dairy cows. The objective of this study was to estimate effects of cubicle characteristics on animal welfare indicators in dairy cattle. A total of 64 loose housing farms in Germany were assessed once during the winter housing period by one experienced assessor. Nearly 15% of the dairy cows had access to pasture during summer months for <6 h/day, whereas 85% were zero-grazing farms. Selected animal welfare indicators (duration of the lying down process, collisions of cows with cubicles, cows lying outside cubicles, cow cleanliness, integument alterations, lameness and subclinical mastitis incidence) of the Welfare Quality (R) protocol and cubicle characteristics such as cow-to-cubicle ratio and cubicle dimensions were recorded. Data were statistically analysed using a multiple linear regression approach. Pasture access and cubicle type were considered as potential influencing factors. Wider cubicles positively affected the proportion of dairy cows with dirty flanks (-18.5% per 10 cm increase) but increased the number of cows with severe integument alterations (+8.9% per 10 cm increase). Larger lying areas reduced the percentage of cows with dirty udders (-2.9% per 10 cm(2) increase). Longer distances from neck rail to curb were associated with higher prevalence of cows with dirty flanks (+3.1% per 10 cm increase) and subclinical mastitis incidence (+1.2% per 10 cm increase). With increasing neck rail height, the duration of the lying down process (-0.1 s per 10% increase), the percentages of cows with dirty legs (-8.4% per 10 cm increase), dirty udders (-7.0% per 10 cm increase) and severe lameness (-3.0% per 10 cm increase) decreased. Compared with rubber mat-equipped cubicles, deep-bedded cubicles showed a reduction in the lying down duration (-0.8 s), percentages of cows with dirty legs (-34.2%), dirty udders (-30.5%) and lesions and swellings (-13.1%). Compared with farms that did not provide any summer grazing, pasture access was associated with an increase of cows with severe lameness (+5.6%). Contrastingly, the number of cows with subclinical mastitis incidence was lower when cows had access to pasture in summer (-5.4%). Findings of the present study indicate several associations between cubicle characteristics and animal welfare in dairy cattle. Bedding type was found as the most influencing factor in terms of health and behaviour. Results of this study are valuable for farmers to identify the optimal cubicle design and improve the animal welfare level.
引用
收藏
页码:1934 / 1942
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Knowledge and Perception on Animal Welfare in Chilean Undergraduate Students with Emphasis on Dairy Cattle
    Vargas-Bello-Perez, Einar
    Obermoller-Bustamante, Consuelo
    Faber, Ilona
    Tadich, Tamara
    Toro-Mujica, Paula
    ANIMALS, 2021, 11 (07):
  • [42] CATTLE WELFARE Claw trimming of dairy cattle
    Burnell, Mark
    Reader, Jon
    Alcock, Phil
    VETERINARY RECORD, 2015, 177 (16)
  • [43] Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor, Kynurenine Pathway, and Lipid-Profiling Alterations as Potential Animal Welfare Indicators in Dairy Cattle
    Favole, Alessandra
    Testori, Camilla
    Bergagna, Stefania
    Gennero, Maria Silvia
    Ingravalle, Francesco
    Costa, Barbara
    Barresi, Sara
    Curti, Piercarlo
    Barberis, Francesco
    Ganio, Sandra
    Orusa, Riccardo
    Costassa, Elena Vallino
    Berrone, Elena
    Verne, Marco
    Scaglia, Massimo
    Palmitessa, Claudia
    Gallo, Marina
    Tessarolo, Carlotta
    Pederiva, Sabina
    Ferrari, Alessio
    Lorenzi, Valentina
    Fusi, Francesca
    Brunelli, Laura
    Pastorelli, Roberta
    Cagnotti, Giulia
    Casalone, Cristina
    Caramelli, Maria
    Corona, Cristiano
    ANIMALS, 2023, 13 (07):
  • [44] Invited review: Effects of heat stress on dairy cattle welfare
    Poisky, Liam
    von Keyserlingk, Marina A. G.
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2017, 100 (11) : 8645 - 8657
  • [45] Evaluating the concept of iceberg indicators for on-farm welfare assessment of dairy cattle by farmers
    Collins, S.
    Burn, C. C.
    Cardwell, J. M.
    Bell, N. J.
    CATTLE PRACTICE, 2015, 23 : 300 - 301
  • [46] Refinement of international recommendations for cubicles, based on the identification of associations between cubicle characteristics and dairy cow welfare measures
    Lardy, Romain
    des Roches, Alice de Boyer
    Capdeville, Jacques
    Bastien, Renaud
    Mounier, Luc
    Veissier, Isabelle
    JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2021, 104 (02) : 2164 - 2184
  • [47] Effects of husbandry practices and animal welfare on reproductive indicators in sheep
    Veksler, Hess J.
    Schuh, A.
    Coppola, M.
    Decaminada, E.
    Miralles, M.
    Ghirardi, M.
    REPRODUCTION IN DOMESTIC ANIMALS, 2008, 43 : 209 - 209
  • [48] Behavior indicators and stunning signs used to assess animal welfare during cattle slaughter
    Romero Penuela, Marlyn Hellen
    Fernando Uribe-Velasquez, Luis
    Sanchez Valencia, Jorge Alberto
    VETERINARIA Y ZOOTECNIA, 2013, 7 (02): : 8 - 27
  • [49] Sustainable Concepts for the Breeding and Keeping of Dairy Cattle in Terms of Animal Welfare, Ecology and Economy
    Breves, Gerhard
    ZUCHTUNGSKUNDE, 2020, 92 (02): : 57 - 75
  • [50] Positive Welfare Indicators in Dairy Animals
    Papageorgiou, Maria
    Simitzis, Panagiotis E.
    DAIRY, 2022, 3 (04) : 814 - 841