Effect of Animal Grouping on Feeding Behavior and Intake of Dairy Cattle

Abstract

Although data are scarce, it is clear that grouping strategy can have a significant impact on the feeding behavior and feed intake of dairy cattle. Feed intake is controlled by ruminoreticular fill and physiological mechanisms, but grouping is a component of the cow's feeding environment that can modulate intake as a result of its impact on cow comfort, competition for feed and other resources, and herd health. Social dominance and competition for feed impact feeding behavior and proper grouping strategy will minimize the negative impact of excessive competition on intake and enhance beneficial effects of group feeding such as social facilitation. Primiparous cows benefit from separate grouping from older animals by increased intake and productivity. Bunk space, accessibility of feed, and type of feeding system must be considered when determining the optimal group size. There appears to be no problem with large (>200 cows) groups of cows per se, but management decisions such as overcrowding with insufficient head gates or manger space play a role in determining cow well-being and feeding behavior. Research with group sizes larger than 400 cows needs to evaluate productivity, feeding and other behavior, and animal well-being. Significant overcrowding appears to reduce feeding activity, alter resting behavior, and decrease rumination activity. Negative social consequences of moving cows between groups last 3 to 7 d. Although the effect of grouping on feeding behavior remains largely unquantitated at this point, the effect is potentially large and requires further research to describe the impact of cow dynamics within a group on feed intake.

Effects of parity and body condition at parturition on endocrine and reproductive parameters of the cow

“…All these parameters could indeed be related to the high body lipid mobilization (Verité & Chilliard 1992), BCS loss (Rémond et al 1991) and higher plasma NEFA (Cissé et al 1991, Fig. 3) that were observed in primiparous cows vs multiparous cows, despite the fact that the former yielded less milk. In this study, parity was a more important effect for reproductive performance than BCS at parturition; it should be noted that these animals were under grazing conditions where an effect such as dominance for food availability is present (Grant & Albright 2001).…”

Model to evaluate welfare in dairy cow farms

“…However, further indicators of the space availability aspect are the total area available per each animal and the area available for resting (number of cubicles per animal or area available per animal). Overcrowding and therefore the competition for the available area, for cubicles and feeding spaces can affect social interactions (Grant and Albright, 2000), dry matter intake, rumination activity and milk yield; furthermore, cows with a previous history of mastitis have shown a higher susceptibility to high stocking density (Grant and Albright, 2001). The effects of high stocking density on feeding space are considered less critical when the feeds are continuously available, as when the TMR technique is used (Grant and Albright, 2001).…”

“…Overcrowding and therefore the competition for the available area, for cubicles and feeding spaces can affect social interactions (Grant and Albright, 2000), dry matter intake, rumination activity and milk yield; furthermore, cows with a previous history of mastitis have shown a higher susceptibility to high stocking density (Grant and Albright, 2001). The effects of high stocking density on feeding space are considered less critical when the feeds are continuously available, as when the TMR technique is used (Grant and Albright, 2001). Among the indicators of the microclimatic conditions, greater weighted scores have been assigned to the indicators concerning the adequacy of the barn in order to maintain adequate microclimatic conditions, in particular evaluating the risk of heat stress.…”

“…In the former component four aspects have been included: building (score of 6), space availability (score of 4), microclimatic conditions (score of 4) and equipment (score of 4). In the building aspect indicators barn characteris- tics have been considered, and the indicator with the greater weighted score concerns the adequacy of the resting area, considering that the cows require approximately 10 h/d lying or resting time (Grant and Albright, 2001). The judgment of the adequacy of resting area has been obtained comparing the actual cubicle dimensions, considering the estimated live weight of lactating cows, with the standards proposed by McFarland (2003) and the indications of Veissier et al (2004).…”

“…Because animal regrouping affects agonistic behaviour (Bouissou et al, 2001), the collection of these data, included in the IDSW, could be an indirect measurement of social behaviour. Improperly grouping of dairy cows may disturb their normal behavioural routines and time budgets (Grant and Albright, 2001). …”