Association between resting behaviour and live weight gain in dairy heifers housed in pens with different space allowance and floor type

Mogensen, Lisbeth; Krohn, Christian; Sørensen, Jan Tind; Hindhede, Jens; Nielsen, Lone Harder

doi:10.1016/s0168-1591(97)00041-5

Cited by 39 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In accordance with observations that the quality of standingup and lying-down movements change according to the quality of the lying-area (dairy cows: Sambraus (1971), Lidfors (1989), Mogensen et al (1997); beef cattle: Konrad (1988)) and assuming that space was restricted before enlargement, we hypothesized that the bulls would have fewer lying bouts in the smaller cubicles, in order to avoid standing up and lying down, and that they would interrupt standing-up and lying-down movements more often, show intensified preparations for standing up and lying down, and bump into the cubicle boundaries (partitions, neck rail) more frequently. On the other hand, we expected dirtier animals and lying surfaces in the larger cubicles.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Assessing cubicle dimensions for finishing bulls based on animal behaviour and cleanliness

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Finishing bulls need increasingly large cubicles throughout their growth, and optimal cubicle dimensions may differ from those used for dairy cows. The space requirements of finishing bulls was investigated by observing standing-up anddown and standing-up movements in dairy cows when cubicle size varied from about 2·3 m to 2·5 m in length, and from about 1·1 m to 1·2 m in width. In cubicles measuring 229 cm long by 112 cm wide as opposed to larger cubicles measuring 274 cm long by 132 cm wide, dairy cows spent less time lying and more time standing with only the front hooves on the lying surface ( Tucker et al., 2004). On the other hand, if cubicles are too large, the lying surface may get dirty (Bickert, 1999; Tucker et al., 2004), which could adversely affect skin and udder health as well as milk quality in dairy cattle.There are different approaches to defining cubicle size for cattle. Firstly, there is the trial-and-error approach, in which cubicles are built to a size based on an intuitive understanding of how much space cattle need for lying, lying down and standing up. Secondly, several attempts have been made to

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Assessing cubicle dimensions for finishing bulls based on animal behaviour and cleanliness

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The increase of the agonistic behavior, as a consequence of a reduction in space allowance is reported by several authors (Kondo et al, 1989;Napolitano et al, 2004;Gygax et al, 2007), but in the present work it does not seem a valid explanation as there was a high space availability in all treatments as compared to European welfare legislation (European Union Council, 2008) and published references, e.g. Mogensen et al (1997); Gygax et al (2007); Gupta et al (2007).…”

Section: Social Behaviorcontrasting

confidence: 52%

Social Behavior and Productive and Stress Parameters in Holstein Steers Fattened in Three Contrasting Production Systems

Blumetto¹,

Ruggia²,

Pyñeyrúa³

et al. 2017

JAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Beef production with Holstein male calves is becoming more intensive in Uruguay. Some of the new systems with confined animals could improve productivity but also could compromise animal welfare. The aim of this study was to compare animal welfare, stress evidence and productivity of castrated young males reared in three different productive systems. The traditional pastoral system (T3) was compared with, a confined fattening system (T1) and an alternative one with confinement and six hours diary access to pastures (T2). The experiment was performed for evaluating the first phase of fattening period (initial mean live weight 93±20.3 kg; and 112±11 days of age). No differences (p = 0.1254) between treatments were detected for live weight gain 0.756±0.829, 0.757±0.676 and 0.730±0.762 kg day -1 for T1, T2 and T3, respectively. There was no evidences of increasing stress or health problems in any production system, according to the obtained serum profile of enzymes and hormones, however permanent confined animals increased agonistic behavior, which could reflect some welfare problems that might increase in the following phases of the fattening process.

show abstract

“…Some data suggests that several physiological changes are associated with reduced lying time in cattle; these include a reduction in growth rates (Mogensen et al, 1997), a short-term increase in plasma cortisol levels Fisher, Verkerk, Morrow, & Matthews, 2002) and increased incidence of lameness (Leonard, O'Connell, & O'Farrell, 1994). However, to date there has been no evidence of these effects in calves.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dairy calves’ preference for rearing substrate

Worth

Schütz

Stewart³

et al. 2015

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Association between resting behaviour and live weight gain in dairy heifers housed in pens with different space allowance and floor type

Cited by 39 publications

References 1 publication

Assessing cubicle dimensions for finishing bulls based on animal behaviour and cleanliness

Assessing cubicle dimensions for finishing bulls based on animal behaviour and cleanliness

Social Behavior and Productive and Stress Parameters in Holstein Steers Fattened in Three Contrasting Production Systems

Dairy calves’ preference for rearing substrate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About