Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
8882824 | Applied Animal Behaviour Science | 2018 | 6 Pages |
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate whether reducing the milk flow and increasing the milk portion size of a computer-controlled milk feeder would lead to less cross-sucking and fewer unrewarded feeder visits in dairy calves. Five groups, each with 9 or 10 calves (n = 48), were housed in pens with one milk feeder in each pen, and exposed to four milk-feeding treatments in a cross-over design with four periods of 1 week. All four treatments involved a daily allowance of 8 L of whole milk, with variation in the maximum portion size and the rate at which milk entered the teat of the milk feeder. The treatments were: 1) 1 L/Low flow (1 l portions at a flow of 300 ml/min); 2) 2 l/Low flow (2 l portions at a flow of 300 ml/min); 3) 1 l/High flow (1 l portions at a flow of 600 ml/min); 4) 2 l/High flow (2 l portions at a flow of 600 ml/min). When the calves were fed milk in 2 l portions, they had fewer rewarded visits (P < 0.001) than when they were fed 1 l portions. When the calves were fed the milk in 2 l portions with a low flow, they spent more time on rewarded visits during which they did not ingest the whole portion (P < 0.05) and had more (P < 0.001) and longer (P < 0.001) rewarded visits during which they ingested less than 0.5 l of the portion. The treatments had no effect on the occurrence of cross-sucking. A higher number of bull calves were subject to cross-sucking than heifer calves (P < 0.001), and in total they also received more cross-sucking events than heifer calves (P < 0.001). Heifer calves initiated a higher frequency of cross-sucking than bull calves (P < 0.001). We concluded that when calves are given milk in 2 l portions, a very low flow should be avoided, as this may reduce the calves' milk intake. The finding that bull calves were subject to cross-sucking more often than heifers, while heifer calves initiated more cross-sucking than bulls warrants further studies on these gender effects.
Related Topics
Life Sciences
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Animal Science and Zoology
Authors
Per Peetz Nielsen, Margit Bak Jensen, Ulrich Halekoh, Lena Lidfors,