Maximizing health and performance of dairy calves and heifers

Transcription

1 1

2 Maximizing health and performance of dairy calves and heifers PROF. MARCOS INÁCIO MARCONDES PROF. POLYANA PIZZI ROTTA DS. ALEX LOPES DA SILVA MS. BERNARDO MAGALHÃES MARTINS 2

3 Introduction Performance of calves Health of calves Nutrient requirements for calves Performance of heifers Health of heifers Nutrient requirements for heifers Conclusions and prospects 3

4 Cows Heifers Calves 4

5 5

6 Introduction Performance of calves Health of calves Nutrient requirements for calves Performance of heifers Health of heifers Nutrient requirements for heifers Conclusions and prospects 6

7 What are the greatest influencers of calves performance??? 7

8 Silva et al. (2015; J. Dairy Sci.) Rodrigues et al. (2016; Trop. Anim. Health Prod.) 8

9 Silva et al., 2018 (In review) 8 studies Almost 200 calves 9

10 P<0.05 Silva et al., 2018 (In review) 10

11 ADG, g/day 0,700 0,600 0,500 0,400 0,300 0, D's ADG response pattern 0,100 0, D 30-60D Met+Cys level Chagas et al., 2018 (JDS, Accepted)

12 Authors Average daily gain (g/day) Starter Starter + forage Kertz et al., Quigley et al., ,5 Coelho (1999) Plaza et al., Lizieire et al., Martuscello et al.,

13 Adapted of Castells et al., (2012; J. Dairy Sci.) Item Intake,kg/d Treatments CON AH RH OH BS TS CS P-value Starter 0.88 cd 0.76 d 0.99 abc 1.14 ab 1.06 ab 1.17 a 0.98 bc <0.001 ADG, kg/d Forage a b a b b b < c 0.76 bc 0.84 ab 0.93 a 0.88 a 0.88 a 0.82 ab <0.001 CON = control; AH = alfalfa hay; RH = rye-grass hay; OH = oat hay; BS = barley straw; TS = triticale silage; CS = corn silage 13

14 Introduction Performance of calves Health of calves Nutrient requirements for calves Performance of heifers Health of heifers Nutrient requirements for heifers Conclusions and prospects 14

15 (Salazar et al., in review) Control Monensin Probiotics Essential olis Probiotics + Essential oils 15

16 (Salazar et al., in review) 16

17 Fecal Score 0,9 0,8 0,7 P value Trat = Sem = Int = * * * 0,6 0,5 0,4 EO EOPROB PROB CO MON 0, Week (Salazar et al., in review) 17

18 10% BW milk supply With Symbiotic Without Symbiotic 20% BW milk supply With Symbiotic Without Symbiotic Marcondes et al. (2016), TAHP 48:

19 Marcondes et al. (2016), TAHP 48:

20 Marcondes et al. (2016), TAHP 48:

21 Marcondes et al. (2016), TAHP 48:

22 Marcondes et al. (2016), TAHP 48:

23 Habing et al., 2017 (JDS) Lactofferin x Garlic extract 628 dairy calves (fecal score 3) Commercial dairy farm

24

25

26 Lactoferrin reduced mortality and culling Garlic extract had not effect Additional studies are necessary

27 Abb-Schwedler et al. (2014) 27

28 Abb-Schwedler et al. (2014) 28

29 Introduction Performance of calves Health of calves Nutrient requirements for calves Performance of heifers Health of heifers Nutrient requirements for heifers Conclusions and prospects 29

30 Silva et al. (2017; J. Dairy Sci.)

31 TDN ranging from 75 to 80% Adapted from Marcondes & Silva (2015) 31

32 Study EBW (kg) Dietary requirements (g/d) Ca P K Mg Na Castro et al., (2018) NRC (2001) Castro et al., (2018) NRC (2001) Castro et al., (2018) NRC (2001) Castro et al., (2018; In preparation)

33 Introduction Performance of calves Health of calves Nutrient requirements for calves Performance of heifers Health of heifers Nutrient requirements for heifers Conclusions and prospects 33

34 ADG > g /d (prepubertal phase) Negative impact on mammary gland development SEJRSEN, 1978; FOLDAGER e SEJRSEN, 1987; JOHNSSON, 1988; TROCCON e PETIT, 1989; WALDO et al.,

35 Silva et al., (2002; J. Dairy Sci.) Holstein 35

36 Holstein Silva et al., (2002; J. Dairy Sci.) 36

37 ADG Protein Fat Parenchyma Fat pad 37

38 Holstein Parenchyma Fatpad ADG > 1 kg/d MP/ME > 41 g/mcal Albino et al., (2015; J. Dairy Res.) 38

39 What about crossbred Holstein Gyr heifers??? Maintenance ADG = 1,0 kg/d ADG = 0,5 kg/d Weller et al., (2016; J. Dairy Sci.) 39

40 What about crossbred Holstein Gyr heifers??? Treatments Man Low High P-value Initial BW, kg DMI, kg/d <0,001 ADG, kg/d 0,105c 0,5b 0,907a <0,001 Body fatl, g/kg BW 331,2b 390a 395,7a MG weight, kg 0,621b 1,210a 1,405a <0,001 Extraparenchymal fat, kg 0,313c 0,603b 1,027a <0,001 Parenchyma, kg 0,178b 0,356a 0,237b Weller et al., (2016; J. Dairy Sci.) 40

41 Adapted of Silva et al. (2018; In review) 41

42 What are the main issues for grazing heifers?? 42

43 Holstein heifers Panicum maximum Cv. Mombaça Supplement offered at 0.5% BW Treatments Control (Mineral salt) Protein supplement (25% CP) Energy supplement (9% CP) 43

44 Machado et al. (2018; In preparation) 44

45 Item Treatments CON PRO ENE SEM P-Value Intake, kg/day NDF 3.64 a 3.57 a 2.89 b CP 1.06 b 1.32 a 0.90 c <0.001 DE 4.03 b 4.82 a 3.39 b Digestibility, % DM 68.9 b 72.3 a 70.3 ab CP 80.1 a 81.7 a 76.1 b 1.31 <0.001 EE 84.7 a 83.6 ab 81.8 b NDF Machado et al. (2018; In preparation) 45

46 Machado et al. (2018; In preparation) 46

47 Panicum maximum Cv. Mombaça Supplement with 25% CP (0.5% BW) Heifers Holstein Holstein Gyr 47

48 00:00 01:10 02:20 03:30 04:40 05:50 07:00 08:10 09:20 10:30 11:40 12:50 14:00 15:10 16:20 17:30 18:40 19:50 21:00 22:10 23:20 00:00 01:20 02:40 04:00 05:20 06:40 08:00 09:20 10:40 12:00 13:20 14:40 16:00 17:20 18:40 20:00 21:20 22:40 Percetagne of animals waiting Percentage of animals consuming supplmement 00:00 01:10 02:20 03:30 04:40 05:50 07:00 08:10 09:20 10:30 11:40 12:50 14:00 15:10 16:20 17:30 18:40 19:50 21:00 22:10 23:20 00:00 01:10 02:20 03:30 04:40 05:50 07:00 08:10 09:20 10:30 11:40 12:50 14:00 15:10 16:20 17:30 18:40 19:50 21:00 22:10 23:20 Percentage of Animals grazing Percentage of animals ruminating Villanova et al. (In preparation) 100% 90% H HG 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 100% 90% H HG 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 100% 90% H HG 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 100% 90% H HG 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 48

49 Villanova et al. (In preparation) 49

50 Villanova et al. (In preparation) 50

51 Villanova et al. (In preparation) 51

52 Black oat + Ryegrass Supplement with 9% CP (0.5% BW) Heifers Holstein Holstein Gyr 52

53 Abreu (In preparation) 53

54 HEIFERS COWS a a b Pereira et al. (in preparation)

55 Pereira et al. (in preparation) Day of gestation Item P-value Intake, kg/d DM 7.83ᵇ ± ᵃ ± ᵃ ± OM 7.45ᵇ ± ᵃ ± ᵃ ± CP 1.23ᵇ ± ᵃ ± ᵃ ± <0.01 NDF 1.49ᵇ ± ᵃ ± ᵃ ± Ruminal outflow, kg/d DM 4.95 ± ± ± OM 4.86 ± ± ± CP 1.23 ± ± ± NDF 0.67 ± ± ± Ruminal digestibility, % DM ± ± ± OM ± ± ± CP 0.11 ± ± ± NDF ± ± ±

56 Pereira et al. (in preparation) a a b P=0.0005

57 Pereira et al. (in preparation) Item Days of gestation P-value Rates, % h - ¹ ¹DM ki 6.91 ± ± ± kd 2.96 ab ± 2.68ᵇ ± ᵃ ± kp 4.23 ± ± ± NDF ki 4.43 ± ± ± kd 2.41 ± ± ± kp 2.02 ± ± ± Rumen pool sizes, kg of DM 4.88 ± ± ± NDF 1.37 ± ± ±

58 Pereira et al. (in preparation) BCS = 3.75 ADG = 0.90 Item Days of gestation P-value Glucose 72.75a ± ab ± b ± Urea ± ± ± β-hidroxibutyrate 0.28b ± ab ± b ± NEFA 0.19b ± b ± a ±

59 Introduction Performance of calves Health of calves Nutrient requirements for calves Performance of heifers Health of heifers Nutrient requirements for heifers Conclusions and prospects 59

60 Mombaça grass Supplement with 25% CP (0.5% BW) HG crossbred heifers Control Phytotherapic 60

61 * Provazi et al. (preliminary data) 61

62 Percentage of animals standing 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Percentage of animals grazing Percentage of animals ruminating 100,00% 90,00% Without With 80,00% 70,00% 60,00% 50,00% 40,00% 30,00% 20,00% 10,00% 0,00% 100% 90% Without With 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Without With Grazing Ruminating Standing Without 28.4% 32.9% 31.2% With 28.2% 32.5% 31.6% Provazi et al. (preliminary data) 62

63 Machado and Bicalho, 2018 (JDS) 886 heifers in freestall barns 245 ± 3 d pregnant Internal teat sealant (ITS) or Intrammary amocillin (IA) Mammary Health impact in first lactation?

64 Item LSM (95% CI) P-Value CON ITS IA ITS + IA Treatment Month Treatment X Month SCC Linear score 2.4a 2.2a 1.9ab 1.8b < 0.01 < Milk (Kg/dia) < FCM (Kg/dia < ECM (kg/dia < Adapted from Machado and Bicalho, 2018

65 Introduction Performance of calves Health of calves Nutrient requirements for calves Performance of heifers Health of heifers Nutrient requirements for heifers Conclusions and prospects 65

66 Silva et al. (2015; SIMLEITE) ADG (kg/d) BR- Body weight (kg) NRC BR- NRC BR- NRC LEITE (2001) LEITE (2001) LEITE (2001) TDN (kg/d) CP (g/d)

67 67

68 Introduction Performance of calves Health of calves Nutrient requirements for calves Performance of heifers Health of heifers Nutrient requirements for heifers Conclusions and prospects 68

69 Calves performance mainly driven by milk intake Opportunities for additives for suckling calves Important updates of nutrient requirements for calves 69

70 Mammary gland development in Holstein vs Holstein-Gyr High potential for grazing crossbred supplementation New research needed focusing on heifers health Coherent data of energy and protein requirements for heifers (minerals data needed) 70

71 Marcos Inácio Marcondes Assistant professor in Dairy Cattle 71