中国乳业 ›› 2024, Vol. 0 ›› Issue (11): 69-73.doi: 10.12377/1671-4393.24.11.12
李胜楠, 郭凯军*
LI Shengnan, GUO Kaijun*
摘要: [目的] 通过图像技术自动生成体况评分(BCS)的系统能够以高效且无应激的方式对奶牛的体能储备进行每日评估,并生成客观信息。高频BCS数据可用于分析特定的关注点,并在必要时快速调整饲养管理方式。本研究的目的是评估高产荷斯坦奶牛群体从干奶到产犊时的BCS动态与泌乳早期疾病之间的关联。使用2019年4月—2022年1月在美国科罗拉多州一家商业奶牛场产犊的7 626 头荷斯坦牛的12 042 次泌乳中收集的数据完成回顾性观察性研究。[方法] 选择干奶(BCSdry)和产犊(BCScalv)奶牛由BCS相机(DeLavalInternationalAB,瑞典Tumba)生成间隔0.1的评分,随后分别针对初产牛和经产牛进行四分位数分类(Q1=最低BCS)。从干奶时到产犊时的 BCS变化计算为BCScalv-BCSdry,并分配到四分位数类别,其中 Q1被视为损失最大的 25%的奶牛。奶牛被归类为健康(HLT;无健康事件)或产后 60 天内至少受一种健康疾病影响(SCK)。健康问题包括繁殖问题(胎衣不下、子宫炎和子宫囊肿),代谢问题(临床低钙血症、亚临床酮病和左侧真胃移位)和其他问题(跛行、临床乳房炎、消化问题、受伤和肺炎)。[结果] HLT与SCK之间的平均(SE)BCSdry为3.38(0.004)与3.42(0.004)(P<0.0001),而BCScalv为3.30(0.003)与3.33(0.003)(P<0.0001)。HLT与SCK之间的平均BCS在干奶时和产犊时之间的差异为-0.088(0.004)与-0.11(0.005)(P=0.008)。逻辑回归分析表明,相对于BCS值最高的类别(Q4),BCS值较低的干奶牛患病几率(95%CI)较低:Q1=0.78(0.65~0.94);Q2=0.75(0.62~0.90);Q3=0.79(0.65~0.96)。相反,BCScalv类别与泌乳早期疾病无关(P=0.48)。从干奶时到产犊时BCS降低与随后的疾病有关,BCS上升的奶牛(Q4)相比,BCS下降较多(Q1和Q2)的奶牛患病几率更高:Q1=1.32 (1.11~1.58)和 Q2=1.35(1.14~1.61)。[结论] 干奶时BCS以及干奶时至产犊时BCS的显著下降对早期泌乳期疾病的发生有显著影响。
[1] Ferguson J D,Galligan D T,Thomsen N.Principal descriptors of body condition score in Holstein cows[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1994,77(9):2695-2703. [2] Roche J R,Macdonald K A,Burke C R,et al.Associations among body condition score, body weight, and reproductive performance in seasonal-calving dairy cattle[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2007,90(1):376-391. [3] Roche J R,Friggens N C,Kay J K,et al.Invited review:Body condition score and its association with dairy cow productivity,health,and welfare[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2009, 92(12):5769-5801. [4] Hady P J,Domecq J J.and Kaneene J B.Frequency and precision of body condition scoring in dairy cattle[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1994,77(6):1543-1547. [5] Bewley J M,Boehlje M D,Gray A W,et al.Assessing the potential value for an automated dairy cattle body condition scoring system through stochastic simulation[J].Agricultural Finance Review,2010,70(1):126-150. [6] Edmondson A J,Lean I J,Weaver L D,et al.A body condition scoring chart for Holstein cows[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1989,72(1):68-78. [7] Leroy T,Aerts J M,Eeman J,et al.Automatic determination of body condition score of cowsbased on 2D images[A].Cox S.Precision Livestock Farming[C].Sweden:Wageningen Academic Publishers,2005. [8] Borchers M R and Bewley J M. An assessment of producer precision dairy farming technology use,prepurchase considerations,and usefulness[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2015,98(6):4198-4205. [9] Pinedo P,Manríquez D,Azocar J,et al.Dynamics of automatically generated body condition scores during early lactation and pregnancy at first artificial insemination of Holstein cows[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2022,105(5):4547-4564. [10] Pinedo P J,Manríquez D,Ciarletta C,et al.Association between body condition score fluctuations and pregnancy loss in Holstein cows[J]. Journal of Animal Science,2022, 100(10). [11] Carvalho P D,Souza A H,Amundson M C,et al.Relationships between fertility and postpartum changes in body condition and body weight in lactating dairy cows[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2014,97:3666-3683. [12] Chebel R C,Mendonca L G D,Baruselli P S,et al. Association between body condition score change during the dry period and postpartum health and performance[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2018,101:4595-4614. [13] Daros R R,Havekes C D,DeVries T J . Body condition loss during the dry period:Insights from feeding behavior studies[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2021,104:4682-4691. [14] Stevenson J S,Banuelos S,Mendonca L G D. Transition dairy cow health is associated with first postpartum ovulation risk,metabolic status,milk production,rumination,and physical activity[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2020,103(10):9573-9586. [15] Mullins I L,Truman C M,Campler M R,et al.Validation of a commercial automated body condition scoring system on a commercial dairy farm[J]. Animals(Basel),2019,9(6):287. [16] Truman C M,Campler M R,Costa J H C.Body condition score change throughout lactation utilizing an automated BCS system:A descriptive study[J]. Animals(Basel),2022,12(5):601. [17] Contreras L L,Ryan C M,Overton T R.Effects of dry cow grouping strategy and prepartum body condition score on performance and health of transition dairy cows[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2004,87(2):517-523. |
[1] | 王国骄, 洪青, 刘振民, 王吉栋, 雍靖怡. 益生菌发酵乳对机体健康作用的研究进展[J]. 中国乳业, 2024, 0(7): 106-110. |
[2] | 林清香, 王西耀, 刘冬梅. 补饲过瘤胃蛋氨酸对围产期奶牛健康及生产性能影响的研究进展[J]. 中国乳业, 2024, 0(3): 13-17. |
[3] | 姚秀丽. 发酵床对奶牛健康状况和生产性能的影响研究[J]. 中国乳业, 2024, 0(2): 20-24. |
[4] | 冯安学. 分群门技术在大型牧场中应用的前提条件与生产价值[J]. 中国乳业, 2024, 0(11): 35-39. |
[5] | 解妙妙, 郭凯军. 利用自动数据交换技术优化饲料效率的研究[J]. 中国乳业, 2024, 0(11): 61-63. |
[6] | 徐源, 郭凯军. 动物健康和福利传感器数据:现状和未来应用[J]. 中国乳业, 2024, 0(11): 74-79. |
[7] | 刘浩, 韩萌, 林立军, 王晶. 中国牧业60强奶牛健康养殖分析[J]. 中国乳业, 2023, 0(7): 57-63. |
[8] | 史文辉, 段丽琴. 《奶牛健康与牧场管理》实践课程改革研究[J]. 中国乳业, 2023, 0(6): 18-22. |
[9] | 朱栩漫, 朱泳. 新消费时代乳制品减糖的发展契机及策略研究[J]. 中国乳业, 2023, 0(5): 7-11. |
[10] | 巩立书, 张明凤. 乳制品营养价值与健康效益的研究进展[J]. 中国乳业, 2023, 0(11): 13-17. |
[11] | 尹红力, 刘慧, 佟丽丽, 杨雪, 李彤, 唐嘉瞳, 张洪涛. 乳制品与人类健康[J]. 中国乳业, 2023, 0(11): 18-22. |
[12] | 哈布拉. 羊乳制品营养价值和健康功能研究进展[J]. 中国乳业, 2023, 0(11): 23-26. |
[13] | 吴赫云, 郑玺, 解玲娜. 在极端温度条件下犊牛饲喂代乳粉的策略研究[J]. 中国乳业, 2022, 0(6): 28-30. |
[14] | 杨利基, 夏青, 张琴妹, 张晓慧, 赖霞, 葛鑫. 南方规模奶牛场胎衣滞留发病规律研究[J]. 中国乳业, 2022, 0(4): 61-67. |
[15] | 吴心华, 马晓霞, 蒲罡. 犊牛健康管理[J]. 中国乳业, 2022, 0(4): 23-27. |
|