Cargando…

Strategies to encourage freestall use in dairy heifers

Dairy cattle can experience problems adjusting to freestalls when first introduced, resulting in a marked reduction in lying time and increased abnormal behaviors such as lying in the alley or lying backward in a stall. Our objective was to evaluate 2 strategies to ease the transition of heifers to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Van Os, Jennifer M.C., Nemeth, Geoffrey S.S., Weary, Daniel M., von Keyserlingk, Marina A.G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9623790/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36337109
http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2021-0118
_version_ 1784822085054365696
author Van Os, Jennifer M.C.
Nemeth, Geoffrey S.S.
Weary, Daniel M.
von Keyserlingk, Marina A.G.
author_facet Van Os, Jennifer M.C.
Nemeth, Geoffrey S.S.
Weary, Daniel M.
von Keyserlingk, Marina A.G.
author_sort Van Os, Jennifer M.C.
collection PubMed
description Dairy cattle can experience problems adjusting to freestalls when first introduced, resulting in a marked reduction in lying time and increased abnormal behaviors such as lying in the alley or lying backward in a stall. Our objective was to evaluate 2 strategies to ease the transition of heifers to freestalls: using an older, experienced heifer as a social model [experiment (Exp.) 1] or using brushes mounted in the stalls as an attractant (Exp. 2). In Exp. 1, 44 naïve heifers (129 ± 37 d of age, mean ± standard deviation) were assigned in pairs (n = 11 pairs/treatment) to either the control or social model (with an older heifer, 200 ± 24 d of age, as an experienced social companion) treatments. In Exp. 2, 52 naïve heifers (146 ± 9 d of age) were preassigned in pairs (n = 13 pairs/treatment) to either control or brush treatments. In both studies, heifers were initially housed in pens with a bedded pack (for 5 and 7 d in Exp. 1 and 2, respectively) before moving to pens in the same barn with sand-bedded freestalls. On d −2, 0, and 4 relative to the move to the freestalls, standing, perching (with the front hooves on the bedding and rear hooves in the alley), and lying (location: bedding vs. alley; direction in stall on d 0 and 4: forward or backward) were recorded at 5-min intervals. In addition, starting on d 0 relative to the move, latency to first lie down in a stall was recorded continuously. In both studies, time budgets did not differ between treatments. On the day heifers were moved, they spent less time lying relative to d −2 [Exp. 1: −1.8 h/d, standard error (SE): 0.4 h/d; Exp. 2: −3.0 h/d, SE: 0.3 h/d] and more time standing and perching. By d 4, lying and standing returned to d −2 baseline levels, although heifers continued to spend more time perching. When heifers moved to freestalls, no treatment differences were observed in the latency to lie down in a stall, but latencies differed between Exp. 1 (averaging approximately 3.8 h across treatments) and Exp. 2 (averaging 31.4 h across treatments). After moving to freestalls, the percentage of total lying time that heifers spent facing forward in a stall increased (Exp. 2: 53 vs. 77%, SE: 7%) or tended to (Exp. 1: 84 vs. 92%, SE: 3%) between d 0 and 4 of exposure, with no effect of treatment. Although lying behavior improved with days of exposure to freestalls, some heifers continued to lie down in the alley or backward in a stall, suggesting the need for additional work to ease the adjustment to freestall housing.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9623790
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96237902022-11-04 Strategies to encourage freestall use in dairy heifers Van Os, Jennifer M.C. Nemeth, Geoffrey S.S. Weary, Daniel M. von Keyserlingk, Marina A.G. JDS Commun Health, Behavior, and Well-being Dairy cattle can experience problems adjusting to freestalls when first introduced, resulting in a marked reduction in lying time and increased abnormal behaviors such as lying in the alley or lying backward in a stall. Our objective was to evaluate 2 strategies to ease the transition of heifers to freestalls: using an older, experienced heifer as a social model [experiment (Exp.) 1] or using brushes mounted in the stalls as an attractant (Exp. 2). In Exp. 1, 44 naïve heifers (129 ± 37 d of age, mean ± standard deviation) were assigned in pairs (n = 11 pairs/treatment) to either the control or social model (with an older heifer, 200 ± 24 d of age, as an experienced social companion) treatments. In Exp. 2, 52 naïve heifers (146 ± 9 d of age) were preassigned in pairs (n = 13 pairs/treatment) to either control or brush treatments. In both studies, heifers were initially housed in pens with a bedded pack (for 5 and 7 d in Exp. 1 and 2, respectively) before moving to pens in the same barn with sand-bedded freestalls. On d −2, 0, and 4 relative to the move to the freestalls, standing, perching (with the front hooves on the bedding and rear hooves in the alley), and lying (location: bedding vs. alley; direction in stall on d 0 and 4: forward or backward) were recorded at 5-min intervals. In addition, starting on d 0 relative to the move, latency to first lie down in a stall was recorded continuously. In both studies, time budgets did not differ between treatments. On the day heifers were moved, they spent less time lying relative to d −2 [Exp. 1: −1.8 h/d, standard error (SE): 0.4 h/d; Exp. 2: −3.0 h/d, SE: 0.3 h/d] and more time standing and perching. By d 4, lying and standing returned to d −2 baseline levels, although heifers continued to spend more time perching. When heifers moved to freestalls, no treatment differences were observed in the latency to lie down in a stall, but latencies differed between Exp. 1 (averaging approximately 3.8 h across treatments) and Exp. 2 (averaging 31.4 h across treatments). After moving to freestalls, the percentage of total lying time that heifers spent facing forward in a stall increased (Exp. 2: 53 vs. 77%, SE: 7%) or tended to (Exp. 1: 84 vs. 92%, SE: 3%) between d 0 and 4 of exposure, with no effect of treatment. Although lying behavior improved with days of exposure to freestalls, some heifers continued to lie down in the alley or backward in a stall, suggesting the need for additional work to ease the adjustment to freestall housing. Elsevier 2021-10-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9623790/ /pubmed/36337109 http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2021-0118 Text en © 2021. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Health, Behavior, and Well-being
Van Os, Jennifer M.C.
Nemeth, Geoffrey S.S.
Weary, Daniel M.
von Keyserlingk, Marina A.G.
Strategies to encourage freestall use in dairy heifers
title Strategies to encourage freestall use in dairy heifers
title_full Strategies to encourage freestall use in dairy heifers
title_fullStr Strategies to encourage freestall use in dairy heifers
title_full_unstemmed Strategies to encourage freestall use in dairy heifers
title_short Strategies to encourage freestall use in dairy heifers
title_sort strategies to encourage freestall use in dairy heifers
topic Health, Behavior, and Well-being
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9623790/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36337109
http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2021-0118
work_keys_str_mv AT vanosjennifermc strategiestoencouragefreestalluseindairyheifers
AT nemethgeoffreyss strategiestoencouragefreestalluseindairyheifers
AT wearydanielm strategiestoencouragefreestalluseindairyheifers
AT vonkeyserlingkmarinaag strategiestoencouragefreestalluseindairyheifers