Association of bedding types with management practices and indicators of milk quality on larger Wisconsin dairy farms

Abstract

The objective of this study was to identify associations of bedding type and selected management practices with bulk milk quality and productivity of larger Wisconsin dairy farms. Dairy herds (n=325) producing ≥11,340 kg of milk daily were surveyed during a single farm visit. Monthly bulk milk SCC and total bacteria counts were obtained from milk buyers for 255 farms for a 2-yr period. Of farms with the same type of bedding in all pens during the study period, most used inorganic bedding (IB), followed by organic nonmanure bedding (OB) and manure products (MB). Almost all bulk milk total bacterial counts were <10,000 cfu/mL and total bacterial count was not associated with bedding type. Bulk milk somatic cell score (BMSCS) was least for farms using IB, varied seasonally, and was greatest in the summer. The BMSCS was reduced when new bedding was added to stalls at intervals greater than 1 wk and when teats were dried before attaching the milking unit. The BMSCS for farms using OB was reduced when bedding in the backs of stalls was removed and replaced regularly and when fewer cows with nonfunctioning mammary quarters were present. The BMSCS for farms using MB was reduced when the proportion of cows with milk discarded was less. The rolling herd average (RHA) of herds using IB was 761 and 1,153 kg greater than the RHA of herds using OB and MB, respectively. The RHA was 353 kg greater on farms where farmers understood subclinical mastitis and 965 kg greater on farms milking 3 times daily. Each 1% increase of cows with nonfunctioning mammary quarters was associated with a decrease of 57 kg of RHA. The BMSCS, proportions of cows with milk discarded and proportion of cows with nonfunctioning mammary quarters were least for herds using IB and were associated with increased productivity. Large Wisconsin dairy farms that used inorganic bedding had greater productivity and better milk quality compared with herds using other bedding types.

Effect of recycled manure solids as bedding on bulk tank milk and implications for cheese microbiological quality

“…This result corroborates that of Bradley et al (2018) who showed that the bedding type (not composted RMS, sand, and sawdust) did not affect the total bacterial count in bulk tank milk, even though counts in the bedding material itself were higher when RMS was used, compared with sand or sawdust. Rowbotham and Ruegg (2015) found similar results. In their study comparing the following bedding materials: inorganic, organic nonmanure, and manure-based, no association was observed between total bacterial count in bulk tank milk and bedding type.…”

Negatively controlled, randomized clinical trial to evaluate use of intramammary ceftiofur for treatment of nonsevere culture-negative clinical mastitis

“…Cows in the UW research herd had similar demographic characteristics and were exposed to management practices that were typical of modern conventional dairy farms in the same region (Rowbotham and Ruegg, 2015). Both milk production and SCC of enrolled cows were similar to those of commercial herds located in Wisconsin (Pinzón-Sánchez and Fuenzalida et al, 2015;Rowbotham and Ruegg, 2015).…”

Do volatile solids from bedding materials increase greenhouse gas emissions for stored dairy manure?

“…These differences in bedding materials may lead to differences in manure VS which may in turn affect CH 4 emissions. Many considerations influence the selection of bedding materials beyond availability including cost, barn design, cow health, and cow comfort (Norring et al 2008;Sheppard et al 2011;Husfeldt et al 2012;Rowbotham and Ruegg 2015). Overwhelmingly, inorganic bedding (i.e., sand) maintains better herd health (Norring et al 2008) as well as harbouring fewer bacteria than organic materials such as wood shavings and straw (Hogan et al 1989;Eckes et al 2001;Bey and Reneau 2002).…”

“…In addition, farms employing inorganic bedding have exhibited higher milk production than those employing other bedding types (Godden et al 2008). If dairy operation transitions away from more traditional organic bedding as a result of the lower costs (Rowbotham and Ruegg 2015) and these other positive attributes (Husfeldt et al 2012), it is important to consider the impact that this may have on GHG emissions.…”