Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T15:08:30.096Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predisposing factors for involuntary culling in Holstein–Friesian dairy cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2012

Daniel Chiumia ,
Mizeck G.G. Chagunda ,
Alastair I. Macrae  and
David J. Roberts
Daniel Chiumia
Affiliation:
Scotland's Rural College (SRUC), West Mains Road, Kings Building, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, Scotland
Mizeck G.G. Chagunda*
Affiliation:
Scotland's Rural College (SRUC), West Mains Road, Kings Building, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, Scotland
Alastair I. Macrae
Affiliation:
Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies and The Roslin Institute, Easter Bush, Midlothian, EH25 9RG, Scotland
David J. Roberts
Affiliation:
Scotland's Rural College (SRUC), West Mains Road, Kings Building, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, Scotland
*
*For correspondence; e-mail: Mizeck.Chagunda@sruc.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The objective was to identify predisposing factors for increased risk of involuntary culling in adult Holstein–Friesian dairy cows. Data were sourced from Scotland's Rural College (SRUC) Dairy Research Centre. Between September 2003 and August 2010 175 cows were culled, a herd culling rate of 33·7%. The major reasons for involuntary culling were fertility (27·4%) and udder problems (26·9%). In the analysis, the culled cows were matched with their cohorts that survived to a later lactation. To identify predisposing factors, a binary logistic model was applied. Cows with higher than average body condition score (BCS) at last service were five times [Odds Ratio (OR) = 4·8] more likely to be culled due to infertility. Cows with low protein yield on day 60 ± 5 in lactation were ten times less likely (OR = 0·1) to be culled. In first lactation heifers, only BCS at last service increased the risk of involuntary culling due to infertility (OR = 13·0). A high milk yield acceleration was a significant (P = 0·04) factor in increasing the risk, five times (OR = 5·2) more, of culling cows due to udder problems. In conclusion, a high BCS at last service, high milk protein yield at around day 60 in lactation and acceleration of milk yield after calving exposed cows to a risk of being culled involuntarily. In practice, monitoring of traits that indicate metabolic imbalance could assist identifying cows at high risk of being culled and contribute to reducing the associated risk through a more effective timely decision.

Keywords

Fertilityudder healthnegative energy balancebody condition score
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 80 , Issue 1 , February 2013 , pp. 45 - 50
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 2012

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

Banos, G, Coffey, MP, Wall, E & Brotherstone, S 2006 Genetic relationship between first-lactation body energy and later-life udder health in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 89 2222–2232Google Scholar
Bascom, SS & Young, AJ 1998 A Summary of the reasons why farmers cull cows. Journal of Dairy Science 81 2299–2305Google Scholar
Bell, MJ & Roberts, DJ 2006 Effect of twinning on the feed intake, performance and health of dairy cows. Livestock Science 107 274–281Google Scholar
Bell, MJ, Wall, E & Russell, G 2010 Risk factors for culling in Holstein–Friesian dairy cows. Veterinary Record 167 238–240Google Scholar
Bewley, JM & Schutz, MM 2008 Review: an interdisciplinary review of body condition scoring for dairy cattle. Professional Animal Scientist 24 507–529Google Scholar
Cejna, V & Chladek, G 2005 The importance of monitoring changes in milk fat to milk protein ratio in Holstein cows during lactation. Journal of Central European Agricultural 6 539–546Google Scholar
Chagunda, MGG, Friggens, NC, Rasmussen, MD & Larsen, T 2006 A model for detection of individual cow mastitis based on an indicator measured in milk. Journal of Dairy Science 89 2980–2998Google Scholar
Chagunda, MGG, Romer, DAM & Roberts, DJ 2009 Effect of genotype and feeding regime on enteric methane, non-milk nitrogen and performance of dairy cows during the winter feeding period. Livestock Science 122 323–332Google Scholar
Coffey, MP, Emmans, GC & Brotherstone, S 2001 Genetic evaluation of bulls for energy balance traits using random regression. Journal of Dairy Science 86 2205–2212Google Scholar
Cozler, YL, Peccatte, JR & Delaby, L 2009 A comparative study of three growth profiles during rearing in dairy heifers: effect of feeding intensity during two successive winters on performances and longevity. Livestock Science 127 238–247Google Scholar
Esslemont, RJ & Kossaibati, MA 1997 Culling in 50 dairy herds in England. Veterinary Record 140 36–39Google Scholar
Ferguson, JD, Galligan, DT & Thomsen, N 1994 Principal descriptors of body condition score in holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 77 2695–2703Google Scholar
Frelich, J, Slachta, M & Kobes, M 2010 Reasons for the culling of dairy cows on low-input mountain farms. Journal of Agrobiology 27 41–48Google Scholar
Gillund, P, Reksen, O, Grohn, YT & Karlberg, K 2001 Body condition related to ketosis and reproductive performance in norwegian dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 84 1390–1396Google Scholar
Hadley, GL, Wolf, CA & Harsh, SB 2006 Dairy cattle culling patterns, explanations, and implications. Journal of Dairy Science 89 2286–2296Google Scholar
Heuer, C, Straalen, WMV, Schukken, YH, Dirkzwager, A & Noordhuizen, JPTM 2000 Prediction of energy balance in high yielding dairy cows with test-day information. Journal of Dairy Science 84 471–481Google Scholar
Hovinen, M & Pyörälä, S 2010 Invited review: udder health of dairy cows in automatic milking. Journal of Dairy Science 94 547–562Google Scholar
Ingvartsen, KL, Dewhurst, RJ & Friggens, NC 2003 On the relationship between lactation performance and health: is it yield or metabolic imbalance that causes production diseases in dairy cattle? A position paper. Livestock Production Science 83 277–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knop, R & Cernescu, H 2009 Effect of negative energy balance on reproduction in dairy cows. Lucrari Stiintifice – Universitatea de Stiinte Agricole a Banatului Timisoara, Medicina Veterinara 42 198–205Google Scholar
Knight, CH, Beever, DF & Sørensen, A 1999 Metabolic load to be expected from different genotypes under different systems. British Society of Animal Science Occasional Publication 24 27–35Google Scholar
Kronfeld, D 1976 The potential importance of the proportions of glucogenic, lipogenic and amonigenic nutrients in regard to the health and productivity of dairy cows. Advanced Animal Physiology & Nutrition 7 5–26Google Scholar
Lopez, DME, Ugarte, E & Gonzalez-Recio, O 2007 Impact of calving ease on functional longevity and herd amortization costs in bosque holsteins using survival analysis. Journal of Dairy Science 90 4451–4457Google Scholar
Løvendahl, P & Chagunda, MGG 2006 Assesssment of fertility in dairy cows based on electronic monitoring of their physical activity. In 8th World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Brasil, Belo Horizonte, August 13–18Google Scholar
Mee, JF 2007 Prevalence and risk factors for dystocia in dairy cattle: a review. Veterinary Journal 176 93–101Google Scholar
Mulligan, FJ, Grady, LO, Gath, VP, Rice, DA & Doherty, ML 2007 Nutrition and Fertility in dairy cows. Irish Veterinary Journal 60 44–49Google Scholar
Orpin, PG & Esslemont, RJ 2010 Culling and wastage in dairy herds: an update on incidence and economic impact in dairy herds in the UK. Cattle Practice 18 163–172Google Scholar
Roche, JR, Friggens, NC, Kay, JK, Fisher, MW, Stafford, KJ & Berry, DP 2009 Invited review: body condition score and its association with dairy cow productivity, health, and welfare. Journal of Dairy Science 92 5769–5801Google Scholar
Rushen, J & de Passille, AM 2006 Effects of roughness and compressibility of flooring on cow locomotion. Journal of Dairy Science 89 2965–2972Google Scholar
SAS I.I. 2008 SAS Institute Inc (Cary, NC, USA)Google Scholar
Tena-Martinez, MJ, Val-Arreola, D, Hanks, JD & Taylor, NM 2009 The use of early lactation milk protein content to predict subsequent fertility performance and likelihood of culling, in commercial dairy cows. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences 18 209–220Google Scholar
Waiblinger, S, Menke, C, Korff, J & Bucher, A 2004 Previous handling and gentle interactions affect behaviour and heart rate of dairy cows during a veterinary procedure. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 85 31–42Google Scholar
Waltner, SS, McNamara, JP & Hillers, JK 1993 Relationships of body condition score to production variables in high producing holstein dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 76 3410–3419Google Scholar
Wathes, DC, Brickell, JS, Bourne, NE, Swali, A & Cheng, Z 2007 Factors influencing heifer survival and fertility on commercial dairy farms. Animal 2 1135–1143.Google Scholar