Effect of low light intensity at night on cow traffic in automatic milking systems
Fanny Hjalmarsson A , Ingemar Olsson A , Sabine Ferneborg A , Sigrid Agenäs A and Emma Ternman A BA Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Kungsängen Research Centre, SE-753 23 Uppsala, Sweden.
B Corresponding author. Email: Emma.Ternman@slu.se
Animal Production Science 54(10) 1784-1786 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN14215
Submitted: 12 March 2014 Accepted: 27 June 2014 Published: 19 August 2014
Abstract
Several studies have shown benefits of long-day (16 h) photoperiod in lactating dairy cows, but have not identified a suitable light intensity for the dark hours. It is known that the locomotion pattern of dairy cows is altered at low light intensities and this may translate to reduced cow traffic and milking frequency, which would have a negative impact on system productivity. However, it is also recognised that a significant disturbance of rest may have a negative impact on the health and productivity of high-yielding dairy cows. This study examined the effect of three different night-time light intensities (LOW: 11 ± 3, MED: 33 ± 1 and HIGH: 74 ± 6 lx) on number of gate passages, milking frequency and milk yield in dairy cows in automatic milking systems. The study was conducted in Sweden during the winter of 2012–13 and the treatments were applied in a crossover design to three herds with an automatic milking system. Minimum day time light intensity was 158 lx. Data on gate passages, milking frequency and milk yield for 172 ± 49 (mean ± s.d.) cows during the last 22 days of each 34-day study period were analysed for treatment differences and differences in daily distribution over 24 h, during day time and night time. Light intensity did not affect total number of gate passages per 24-h period and cow, but number of gate passages per hour and cow was in all treatments lower during night time than during day time. Milking frequency was increased in MED compared with both HIGH and LOW (P < 0.05). Milk yield decreased with reduced light intensity, and differed significantly between HIGH and LOW treatments, 45 ± 1 kg and 44 ± 1 kg, respectively (P < 0.001). Our conclusion is that reducing light intensity to 11 lx at night time does not affect cows’ general activity as gate passages remained the same for all treatments. However, milk yield decreased with reduced light intensity, which might be related to a lower feed intake. We argue that providing night light for dairy cows, as required by many welfare acts, might be related to production level rather than welfare aspects and that the recommendations should be revised.
References
Dahl GE, Peticlerc D (2003) Management of photoperiod in dairy herd for improved production and health. Journal of Animal Science 3, 11–17.Dahl GE, Tao S, Thompson IM (2012) Lactation biology symposium: effects of photoperiod on mammary gland development and lactation. Journal of Animal Science 90, 755–760.
Dannenmann K, Buchenauer D, Flienger H (1985) The behaviour of calves under four levels of lighting. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 13, 243–258.
| The behaviour of calves under four levels of lighting.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
de Koning K, van de Vorst Y, Meijering A (2002) Automatic milking experience and development in Europe. In ‘Proceedings from the first North American conference on robotic milking, 20–22 March 2002’.
DeVries TJ, von Keyserlingk MAG, Beauchemin KA (2003) Short communication: diurnal feeding pattern of lactation. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 4079–4082.
Forsberg AM (2008) Factors affecting cow behaviour in a barn equipped with an automatic milking system. Licentiate thesis, Swedish University of Agricultural Science, Uppsala. Available at http://pub.epsilon.slu.se/1856/1/forsberg_a_081027.pdf [Verified 19 February 2014]
Harms J, Wendl G, Schön H (2002) Influence of cow traffic on milking and animal behaviour in a robotic milking system. In ‘Proceedings from the first North American conference on robotic milking, 20–22 March 2002’. (Eds J McLean, M Sinclair, B West) p. II-8-II-14. (Toronto, Canada)
Jacobs JA, Siegford JM (2012) Invited review: the impact of automatic milking systems on dairy cow management, behavior, health and welfare. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 2227–2247.
| Invited review: the impact of automatic milking systems on dairy cow management, behavior, health and welfare.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC38XlvFygtL0%3D&md5=2aefa88f992a0930b5f0c487a83d2197CAS | 22541453PubMed |
Marcek JM, Swanson LV (1984) Effect of photoperiod on milk production and prolactin of Holstein dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science 67, 2380–2388.
Munksgaard L, Rushen J, de Passillé AM, Krohn CC (2011) Forced versus free traffic in an automated milking system. Livestock Science 138, 244–250.
| Forced versus free traffic in an automated milking system.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Muthuramalingam P, Kennedy AD, Berry RJ (2006) Plasma melatonin and insulin-like growth factor-1 responses to dim light at night in dairy heifers. Journal of Pineal Research 40, 225–229.
| Plasma melatonin and insulin-like growth factor-1 responses to dim light at night in dairy heifers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD28XislKkt7Y%3D&md5=579f9eae0b61dc3a804326835bef0e90CAS | 16499558PubMed |
Nicks B, Dechamps P, Canart B, Istasse L (1988) Resting behaviour of Friesian bulls maintained in a tie-stall barn under two patterns of lighting. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 19, 321–329.
| Resting behaviour of Friesian bulls maintained in a tie-stall barn under two patterns of lighting.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Peters RR, Chapin LT, Emery RS, Tucker HA (1980) Growth and hormonal response of heifers to various photoperiods. Journal of Animal Science 51, 1148–1153.
Phillips CJC, Morris ID, Lomas CA, Lockwood SJ (2000) The locomotion of dairy cows in passageways with different light intensities. Animal Welfare (South Mimms, England) 9, 421–431.
Prescott NB, Mottram TT, Webster AJF (1998) Relative motivations of dairy cows to be milked or fed in a Y-maze and an automatic milking system. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 57, 23–33.
| Relative motivations of dairy cows to be milked or fed in a Y-maze and an automatic milking system.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Reksen O, Tverdal A, Landsverk K, Kommisrud E, Bøe KE, Ropstad E (1999) Effects of photointensity and photoperiod on milk yield and reproductive performance of Norwegian red cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 82, 810–816.
| Effects of photointensity and photoperiod on milk yield and reproductive performance of Norwegian red cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DyaK1MXitlGitLc%3D&md5=53d462fefa309f6859ced72d09e2a765CAS | 10212469PubMed |
Rodenburg J, Wheeler B (2002) Strategies for incorporating robotic milking in North American herd management. In ‘Proceedings from the first North American conference on robotic milking, 20–22 March 2002’. (Eds J McLean, M Sinclair, B West) p. III-18-III-32. (Toronto, Canada)
Svennersten-Sjaunja KM, Pettersson G (2008) Pros and cons of automatic milking in Europe. Journal of Animal Science 86, 37–46.
| Pros and cons of automatic milking in Europe.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD1c3lsV2itA%3D%3D&md5=4af4e1c07d650f446b6c1405f4dce018CAS | 17998423PubMed |
