مطالعه بازده خوراک براساس شاخص مازاد مصرف خوراک و بازدهی خوراکی براساس شیر تصحیح‌شده برای 4 درصد چربی در گاوهای شیرده نژاد هلشتاین

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری تغذیه نشخوارکنندگان، گروه علوم دامی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

2 گروه علوم دامی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

3 گروه علوم دامی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

4 مرکز تحقیقات ایمنولوژی، پژوهشگاه بوعلی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

چکیده

زمینه مطالعاتی: بررسی بازده خوراک در گاوهای شیرده از اهمیت ویژه‌ای برخوردار است. هدف: مطالعه دینامیک بازدهی خوراک براساس شاخص مازاد مصرف خوراک (RFI) و شیر تصحیح‌شده برای 4 درصد چربی (FCM4/DMI) در گاوهای شیرده نژاد هلشتاین بود. روش کار: تعداد 30 راس گاو شیرده در اواسط شیردهی به مدت 60 روز تغذیه شد‌ند. ماده خشک مصرفی (DMI)، تولید شیر، وزن زنده بدن، نمره وضعیت بدنی، افزایش وزن روزانه و ترکیبات شیر رکورد‌برداری شد. همچنین انرژی خروجی شیر، انرژی تغییرات بدنی و وزن متابولیکی براساس داده‌های اولیه و معادلات انرژی (NRC, 2001) محاسبه گردید. RFI به‌وسیله 4 مدل مختلف رگرسیونی خطی چند متغیره برای دو فاصله 30 و 60 روزه مدل‌سازی شد. نتایج: در جامعه مورد مطالعه، RFI قابل اندازه‌گیری است. ضریب تبیین مدل‌ها برای دوره 60 روزه برای مدل 1، 2، 3 و 4 به ترتیب توانست 51/88، 82/78، 05/80 و 41/64 درصد از تغییرات متغیر وابسته (DMI) توسط متغیرهای مستقل را تبیین نماید. میانگین و انحراف معیار RFI برای دوره 60 روزه برای مدل 1، 2، 3 و 4 به ترتیب 86/0 ± 0، 25/1 ± 0، 18/1 ± 0 و 68/1 ± 0 کیلوگرم ماده خشک در روز بود. همین روند برای دوره 30 روزه نیز مشاهده شد. ضریب همبستگی پیرسون برای DMI بین دوره 30 و 60 روزه 994/0 و RFI براساس مدل 1 بین دوره 30 و 60 روزه 882/0 بود. همبستگی بین DMI، FCM4/DMI و RFI با دیگر صفات عملکردی و تولیدی، روابط منطقی بین متغیرها مشاهده شد. رابطه منفی معنی‌دار بین FCM4/DMI با درصد پروتئین خام شیر (P<0.001) و روند معنی‌داری بین RFI با درصد چربی و پروتئین شیر (P<0.1) بسیار مهم بود. نتیجه‌گیری نهایی: اندازه‌گیری بازده خوراک براساس RFI حداقل در یک دوره 30 روزه قابل اندازه‌گیری است. همچنین اگر چه مدل‌ 1 و متغیرهای آن به خوبی متغیر وابسته (DMI) را تبیین نموده‌اند، اما تلاش علمی براساس رویکرد کل‌نگرانه برای یافتن دیگر متغیرها موثر برای بهبود ضریب تبیین مدل‌ها پیشنهاد می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Study of feed efficiency based on residual feed intake and fat corrected milk in Iranian Holstein dairy cows

نویسندگان [English]

  • Reza Lotfi 1
  • Abdolmansur Tahmasebi 2
  • Seyed Hadi Ebrahimi 3
  • Maryam Rastin 4
1 PhD student, Department of Animal Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
2 Professor, Department of Animal Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
3 Assistant professor, Department of Animal Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
4 Assistant professor, Immunology Research Center, Faculty of Medicine, Buali Research Institute, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction: Understanding feed efficiency (FE) in dairy cows and its improvement is essential. Dry matter intake (DMI) is fundamentally important in nutrition because it establishes the amount of nutrients available to an animal for health and production. Residual feed intake (RFI) is calculated as the residual in the linear model to predict feed intake of individual animals and thus is essentially the difference between an individual’s observed feed consumption and its predicted feed consumption. An animal with a negative RFI consumes less than expected for its level of production and thus is more efficient when RFI is used to define feed efficiency. Because RFI is independent of production level, recent attention has been given to using RFI as a tool to assess feed efficiency in dairy cattle for purposes of genetic selection. Also, feed efficiency based fat-corrected milk (FCM4) dived DMI (FCM4/DMI) is another factor to depict feed efficiency. Therefore, this research aimed to investigate the dynamics of RFI and FCM4/DMI in Iranian Holstein dairy cows.

Material and methods: Lactating Iranian Holstein cows (n = 30; 10 primiparous and 20 multiparous), averaging (mean ± standard deviation, SD) 594 ± 62.6 kg of body weight, 38.81 ± 6.22 kg of milk/d, and 94.5 ± 21.5 day postpartum, were fed a diet balanced with CPM Dairy V3 ration software. Diet consisted of 40 % forage and 60 % concentrate and fed as total mixed ration (TMR). Cows were fed once per day a fresh diet and orts were removed and weighed daily before feeding. Milk yield was recorded electronically at each milking, and milk samples were obtained from 3 consecutive milkings per week. Milk samples were analyzed for fat, true protein, and lactose with infrared spectroscopy. Body weight (BW) for each cow was recorded 2 consecutive days per month immediately after the morning milking. Daily weight gain was calculated based on body weight for each cow at the beginning and end of each period (30 and 60-days period). Body condition score (BCS) was determined on a 5-point scale in 0.25 increments by a trained investigator and recorded for each cow at the beginning and end of each period (30 and 60-days period). Also, milk energy output (MilkE; Mcal/d), metabolic body weight for a cow (MBW), and energy expended for body tissue gain (ΔBodyE; Mcal/d) were estimated based on NRC 2001 equations. Dry matter intake for an individual cow during each 30 and 60-days period was regressed as a function of major energy sinks through the four different models (Model 1, Model 2, Model, and Model 4) using Mintab software (version 19). To define RFI, DMI was modeled as follows:

〖Model 1: DMI〗_i= β_0+ β_1 ×MILKE_i+ β_2 × MBW_i+ β_3 × ∆BodyE_i+〖β_4 × 〖Weight G〗_i +β〗_5 × Parity_i+ β_6 × 〖Lactation W〗_i+ ε_i
〖Model 2: DMI〗_i= β_0+ β_1 ×〖FCM4〗_i+ β_2 × MBW_i+ β_3 × 〖Weight G〗_i+ ε_i
〖Model 3: DMI〗_i= β_0+ β_1 ×MILKE_i+ β_2 × MBW_i+ β_3 × ∆BodyE_i+β_4 × Parity_i+ ε_i
〖Model 4: DMI〗_i= β_0+ β_1 ×MILKE_i+ ε_i

Where DMIi was the observed DMI, MilkEi was the observed milk energy output, MBWi was the average BW0.75, ΔBodyEi was the estimated change in body energy, based on measured BW and BCS, Weight Gi was daily weight gain, Parityi was the parity, Lactation Wi was week of lactation, and FCM4i was fat-corrected milk for ith cow. RFI was defined as the error term (ε_i) in the model. Also, we reported Pearson correlation coefficient between DMI, FCM4/DMI, and RFI with measured and estimated traits for a 30-days and 60-days period.

Results and discussion: The results showed that RFI was observed and measured in our study population and it is possible to classify animals based on RFI. The model adjusted R2 for models 1, 2, 3 and 4 were 88.51, 78.82, 80.05, and 64.41 respectively, in a 60-days period. The mean ± SD for models 1, 2, 3 and 4 were 0 ± 0.86, 0 ± 1.25, 0 ± 1.18, and 0 ± 1.68 (kg DM per a day), respectively. For model 1 (in 60-days period, full model), milk energy output (MilkE), metabolic body weight for a cow (MBW), energy expended for body tissue gain (ΔBodyE), daily weight gain, and week of lactation were significant (P<0.05) except for parity which showed a significant trend (P<0.1). Partial regression coefficients for MilkE, MBW, ΔBodyE, daily weight gain, parity, and week of lactation for the model 1 used to predict DMI were 0.566, 0.1, 3.46, -9.51, 4.13, and 0.1771, respectively. For model 3 (in 60-days period), milk energy output (MilkE), metabolic body weight for a cow (MBW), and energy expended for body tissue gain (ΔBodyE) were significant (P<0.05) except for parity. Partial regression coefficients for MilkE, MBW, ΔBodyE, and parity in the model 3, were 0.429, 0.1381, 0.791, and 0.229, respectively. Pearson correlation coefficient for RFI between model 1 with 2, 3 and 4 was 0.817, 0.728, and 0.515, respectively (P<0.01). The same trend was observed for a 30-days period. Pearson correlation coefficient for DMI between 60-days and 30-days period was 0.994 and for RFI between 60-days and 30-days period was 0.882. Also, based on Pearson correlation coefficient for DMI, FCM4/DMI, and RFI with other biological parameters, we observed that there were the reasonable correlations, significant at the P=0.01. Surprisingly, there was a negative correlation between FCM4/DMI and milk protein percentage (P<0.0001). Also, negatively significant trend between RFI with milk fat and protein percentage (P<0.1) was observed.

Conclusion: Measuring feed efficiency through RFI in a 30-days period is predictable. Although the model 1 used in this study and its parameters explained DMI in accurate manner, scientific exploration for finding other parameters for improvement of model R2 is suggested. Therefore, finding the effective models would result in an accurate estimation of RFI for individual dairy cows, classifying efficient and inefficient dairy cows correctly and clarifying the reasons for these differences through a holistic approach. Also, the study of the reasons for the significant negative correlation between FE and RFI with milk protein and fat percentage as a novel observation in our study is recommended in the future.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • dairy cows
  • Fat-corrected milk
  • Feed efficiency
  • Holistic approach
  • Milk protein percentage
  • Residual feed intake
AOAC. 2000. Official methods of analysis, Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC).
Arndt C, Powell J, Aguerre M, Crump P, Wattiaux M. 2015. Feed conversion efficiency in dairy cows: Repeatability, variation in digestion and metabolism of energy and nitrogen, and ruminal methanogens. Journal of Dairy Science. 98(6):3938-3950.
Asher A, Shabtay A, Haim A, Aharoni Y, Miron J, Adin G, Tamir A, Arieli A, Halachmi I, Moallem U. 2014. Time required to determine performance variables and production efficiency of lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. 97(7):4340-4353.
Bauman D. 2012. Optimizing Dairy Cow Genetics Through Nutrition. Department of Animal Science at the New York State College of Agriculture and Life Sciences (A Statutory College of the State University of New York) Cornell University.1.
Connor E. 2015. Invited review: Improving feed efficiency in dairy production: Challenges and possibilities. Animal. 9(3):395-408.
Connor E, Hutchison J, Norman H, Olson K, Van Tassell C, Leith J, Baldwin R. 2013. Use of residual feed intake in Holsteins during early lactation shows potential to improve feed efficiency through genetic selection. Journal of Animal Science. 91(8):3978-3988.
Connor E, Hutchison J, Van Tassell C, Cole J. 2019. Defining the optimal period length and stage of growth or lactation to estimate residual feed intake in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. 102(7):6131-6143.
Council NR. 2001. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle: 2001. National Academies Press.
De Souza Rd, Tempelman R, Allen M, VandeHaar M. 2019. Updating predictions of dry matter intake of lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. 102(9):7948-7960.
Elolimy A, Arroyo J, Batistel F, Iakiviak M, Loor J. 2018. Association of residual feed intake with abundance of ruminal bacteria and biopolymer hydrolyzing enzyme activities during the peripartal period and early lactation in Holstein dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology. 9(1):1-10.
Herd R, Arthur P. 2009. Physiological basis for residual feed intake. Journal of Animal Science. 87(suppl_14):E64-E71.
Jewell K, McCormick C, Odt C, Weimer P, Suen G. 2015. Ruminal bacterial community composition in dairy cows is dynamic over the course of two lactations and correlates with feed efficiency. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 81(14):4697-4710.
Johnson JR, Carstens GE, Krueger WK, Lancaster PA, Brown EG, Tedeschi LO, Anderson RC, Johnson KA, Brosh A. 2019. Associations between residual feed intake and apparent nutrient digestibility, in vitro methane-producing activity, and volatile fatty acid concentrations in growing beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science. 97(8):3550-3561.
Koch R, Swiger L, Chambers D, Gregory K. 1963. Efficiency of feed use in beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science. 22(2):486-494.
Lancaster P, Carstens G, Michal J, Brennan K, Johnson K, Davis M. 2014. Relationships between residual feed intake and hepatic mitochondrial function in growing beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science. 92(7):3134-3141.
Løvendahl P, Difford G, Li B, Chagunda M, Huhtanen P, Lidauer M, Lassen J, Lund P. 2018. Selecting for improved feed efficiency and reduced methane emissions in dairy cattle. Animal. 12(s2):s336-s349.
Lynch J, Barbano D, Schweisthal M, Fleming J. 2006. Precalibration evaluation procedures for mid-infrared milk analyzers. Journal of Dairy Science. 89(7):2761-2774.
Mäntysaari P, Liinamo A, Mäntysaari E. 2012. Energy efficiency and its relationship with milk, body, and intake traits and energy status among primiparous Nordic Red dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science. 95(6):3200-3211.
Manzanilla-Pech C, Veerkamp R, Tempelman R, van Pelt M, Weigel K, VandeHaar M, Lawlor T, Spurlock D, Armentano L, Staples C. 2016. Corrigendum to “Genetic parameters between feed-intake-related traits and conformation in 2 separate dairy populations—the Netherlands and United States”(J. Dairy Sci. 99: 443–457). Journal of Dairy Science. 99(5):4095.
Naderi M, Sarvari A, Milanifar A, Boroujeni S, Akhondi M. 2012. Regulations and ethical considerations in animal experiments: international laws and islamic perspectives. Avicenna Journal of Medical Biotechnology. 4(3):114.
Potts S, Boerman J, Lock A, Allen M, VandeHaar M. 2015. Residual feed intake is repeatable for lactating Holstein dairy cows fed high and low starch diets. Journal of Dairy Science. 98(7):4735-4747.
Rius A, Kittelmann S, Macdonald K, Waghorn G, Janssen P, Sikkema E. 2012. Nitrogen metabolism and rumen microbial enumeration in lactating cows with divergent residual feed intake fed high-digestibility pasture. Journal of Dairy Science. 95(9):5024-5034.
Shetty N, Løvendahl P, Lund M, Buitenhuis A. 2017. Prediction and validation of residual feed intake and dry matter intake in Danish lactating dairy cows using mid-infrared spectroscopy of milk. Journal of Dairy Science. 100(1):253-264.
Thornhill J, Marett L, Auldist M, Greenwood J, Pryce J, Hayes B, Wales W. 2014. Whole-tract dry matter and nitrogen digestibility of lactating dairy cows selected for phenotypic divergence in residual feed intake. Animal Production Science. 54(9):1460-1464.
Vandehaar M. 1998. Efficiency of nutrient use and relationship to profitability on dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Science. 81(1):272-282.
Vranković L, Aladrović J, Octenjak D, Bijelić D, Cvetnić L, Stojević Z. 2017. Milk fatty acid composition as an indicator of energy status in Holstein dairy cows. Archives Animal Breeding. 60(3):205-212.
Wang X, Kadarmideen H. 2019. Metabolomics analyses in high-low feed efficient dairy cows reveal novel biochemical mechanisms and predictive biomarkers. Metabolites. 9(7):151.
Wildman E, Jones G, Wagner P, Boman R, Troutt Jr H, Lesch T. 1982. A dairy cow body condition scoring system and its relationship to selected production characteristics. Journal of Dairy Science. 65(3):495-501.
Xi Y, Wu F, Zhao D, Yang Z, Li L, Han Z, Wang G. 2016. Biological mechanisms related to differences in residual feed intake in dairy cows. Animal. 10(8):1311-1318.
Xie Y, Wu Z, Wang D, Liu J. 2019. Nitrogen partitioning and microbial protein synthesis in lactating dairy cows with different phenotypic residual feed intake. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology. 10(1):1-8.
Zahmatkesh D, Zeinali M, Mirzaei Alamooti H, Mahboobi E, Sefidpari P. 2019. Assessment of input and energy consumption in dairy farms with different housing systems. Journal of Animal Science Research. 28(4):99-112.