Animal Behavior and Well-Being II

Transcription

1 Animal Behavior and Well-Being II T1 Sample size estimates for assessing lameness, leg injuries, and body condition. J. M. C. Van Os* 1, D. M. Weary 1, J. H. C. Costa 1,2, M. J. Hötzel 2, and M. A. G. von Keyserlingk 1, 1 Animal Welfare Program, Faculty of Land and Food Systems, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2 Laboratório de Etologia Aplicada e Bem-Estar Animal (LETA), Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil. There is increased demand for herd-level animal welfare evaluations but little consensus on how best to sample for this purpose. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of different sample size approaches on farm classifications relative to thresholds of acceptability for animal-based measures. We predicted more accurate classifications when more cows were sampled and when selecting from all lactating cows compared with only the high-producing pen. On 38 freestall farms, we assessed all 12,375 lactating cows for lameness, injuries on the tarsal and carpal joints, and BCS and then compared these herd prevalence measures with 9 sampling strategies (using precision of 15, 10, or 5% applied to the high pen, all lactating cows, or the entire herd). For each sampling strategy, we selected cows randomly in 10,000 replicates, calculating the prevalence for each replicate and classifying farms as meeting (below) or failing to meet (above) 16 thresholds for cow-based measures. For each threshold, we determined how many farms were classified correctly in 95% of sample replicates. Across thresholds, the number of farms meeting the 95% target increased with the number of cows sampled (i.e., when using narrower precision values and when applying the formula to lactating cows rather than the total herd size). Contrary to predictions, sampling from the high pen resulted in similar accuracy to selecting from among all lactating cows. For example, with a threshold of < 10% severely lame cows, 33 farms met the 95% target when calculating sample size using 10% precision applied to lactating cows. This decreased to 32 or 26 farms when the formula was applied to the high pen or the whole herd, respectively. Using a precision of 15 or 5% changed the number of farms meeting the target by 4 to 7 and 4 to 8, respectively. Narrower precision greatly increases sample size requirements (e.g., by up to 183 cows when using 5 vs. 10% precision), and assessment programs will need to balance misclassification with feasibility constraints. Our findings suggest sampling high-producing cows can serve as a practical proxy for the larger population of lactating cows. Key Words: welfare assessment, sampling, validation T2 Farm-level housing and management factors associated with clinical lameness in freestall-housed dairy cows in the United States. K. M. Luchterhand*, L. Collings, C. Cook, K. Ito, J. Kelsey, M. Mouw, and K. Wood, Novus International Inc., St. Charles, MO. The objective of this study was to examine housing and management factors associated with clinical lameness in Holstein freestall housed dairy cattle across USA. Data were collected from 535 commercial freestall dairy farms from November 2012 to July Herd size averaged 1,434 (range ,000) lactating cows. The high production Holstein pen was scored for locomotion (LS; 1 = normal gait, 5 = severely lame; clinically lame, LS 3), hock injuries (hair loss and/ or swelling; %) and knee injuries (swollen; %). Accelerometers were placed on 40 randomly selected cows for pen 3 d averaged daily lying time. Lying time difference was calculated from longest and shortest 3 d averaged lying times of the pen. Lameness prevalence averaged (mean ± SD, %) 28.3 ± 13.2, pen lying time and pen lying time difference averaged (mean ± SD, h/d) ± 1.12 and 8.79 ± 1.92, respectively. Hock and knee injuries averaged (mean ± SD, %) 23.1 ± 21.5, 3.3 ± 2.9, respectively. Bedding type (manure solids, MS; none, NO; other organic, OR; or sand, SA) were associated with lameness (P = 0.01). Manure solids (lsmeans ± SE; 28.6 ± 1.5) were associated with lower lameness prevalence than SA (33.0 ± 1.4; P < 0.01) and tended to be lower than OR (32.0 ± 1.6; P = 0.06), but not different from NO. There we no differences among NO, OR and SA. The number of rows of stalls (2 row, 2R; 3 row, 3R; or 4 or greater rows, 4R) were associated with lameness prevalence (P = 0.01). There were no differences between 2R (28.5 ± 1.5) or 3R (30.0 ± 1.6), however 4R (38.6 ± 3.5) were associated with increased lameness than 2R (P < 0.01) and 3R (P < 0.01), respectively. Additional factors associated with lameness included hock and knee injury prevalence (P < 0.01, P = 0.02, respectively). Each additional unit increase in hock injury and knee injury prevalence was associated with an increased lameness by 0.2 ± 0.04 and 0.5 ± 0.2, respectively. Each additional hour of pen lying time difference were associated with an increase in lameness prevalence (1.0 ± 0.3; P < 0.01). The findings of this study suggest that by selecting fewer rows per pen and providing certain bedding types can reduce the prevalence of lameness. Key Words: freestall, lameness T3 The impact of episodic heat stress on lying behavior and lameness of lactating dairy cows on northern New York farms. A. R. Cate*, C. S. Ballard, M. D. Miller, M. G. Green, and R. J. Grant, William H Miner Agricultural Research Institute, Chazy, NY. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of heat stress on lying behavior and lameness of lactating dairy cows in northern New York, where episodic heat stress is more typical than prolonged heat stress. Four commercial dairy farms with varying housing conditions and heat abatement systems were selected and monitored for lying behavior and locomotion score from June to October, 2017: Farm A = sand-bedded freestall with natural ventilation; Farm B = sand-bedded freestall with fans over stall beds; Farm C = tiestall with sawdust covered rubber mats enlisting naturally assisted ventilation; Farm D = sawdust covered mattress freestall with fans over stall beds. Environmental conditions of animal housing were monitored in 10-min intervals using a data logger mounted in pen/barn at cow-level. Thirty early to mid-lactation focal animals were selected on each farm (not balanced for DIM) with a locomotion score <3 (not lame, 1 to 5 scale). Lying behavior was monitored continuously using data loggers. Locomotion score was measured at end of study period and classified as Lame or Not Lame. Four days of cool weather (mean THI <65, COOL) and 4 d of hot weather (mean THI >70, HOT) were selected and lying behavior summarized and analyzed by farm using Proc Mixed procedure in SAS to evaluate differences for COOL and HOT days. Lameness status from beginning to end of study period within farms were analyzed by Chi-squared analysis using Proc Freq. Each of the 4 farms, regardless of heat abatement system employed, experienced a decrease in lying time from cool to hot days of 20, 10, 13, and 16% (Farm A, B, C, and D respectively). Lying bouts (n/d) were greater on hot days for cows with only natural ventilation (Farm A; 9.5 vs 8.9 ± 0.53; P = 0.02), whereas cows with heat abatement systems showed no differences. While episodic heat events resulted in reduced lying time across all farms, increased incidence of lameness were significant for only Farm A and D (17 and 14% respectively, P < 0.05). Results are shown in Table 1. J. Dairy Sci. Vol. 101, Suppl

2 Table 1 (Abstr. T3). Item COOL HOT SE P-value THI (mean ± SD) 60.9 ± ± 1.1 Minutes THI 68 (mean ± SD) 74.0 ± 127 1,279.0 ± 155 Lying time (h/d) Farm A <0.01 Farm B <0.01 Farm C <0.01 Farm D <0.01 Key Words: heat stress, lameness, lying behavior T4 Effect of managment system on the lying behavior of organic dairy cows. V. L. Couture* 1, P. D. Krawczel 1, S. R. Smith 2, L. G. Schneider 1, A. G. RÍus 1, and G. M. Pighetti 1, 1 University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, 2 University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY. Lying behavior is often used to measure dairy cow welfare in confinement systems. However, grazing dairy cows spend more time foraging, which alters the time budget. The objective was to identify variations in the lying behavior of organic, grazing dairy cows. Lactating cows (n = 230) from certified organic dairy farms (n = 5) were enrolled. Farms were categorized by housing and feeding management. Low input (LI) farms (n = 3 farms; 171 cows; ± 92.8 DIM) used loose housing and relied on pasture for > 50% DMI. High input (HI) farms (n = 2 farms; 59 cows; ± 90.5 DIM) used tie-stalls and relied on pasture for 30 50% of DMI. Accelerometers were affixed to the cows rear leg for 28-d periods during the spring (P1), summer (P2), and fall (P3) on LI farms and during P1 and P3 on HI farms. Data were analyzed using the MEANS and MIXED procedures in SAS (v9.4). A linear mixed model was developed using backward manual elimination to test the effects of milk yield (MY), parity, and DIM on lying time in LI and HI farms. HI cows laid longer than LI cows (11.16 ± 0.06 vs 8.49 ± 0.03 h/d). Lying time of the LI cows increased from P1 to P3, but HI cows did not differ (P1: LI = 7.41 ± 0.07 h/d; P3: LI = 9.21 ± 0.05 h/d; P1: HI = ± 0.08 h/d; P3: HI = ± 0.09 h/d). On LI farms, increased MY was associated with decreased lying time and as DIM increased, so did lying time (P 0.01). LI primiparous cows laid less (7.62 h/d) than second (8.85 h/d; P = 0.001) or third (9.3 h/d; P = ) parity cows, but were did not differ from cows in their fourth or greater parity (8.21 h/d; P = 0.44). Lying time was also decreased for cows in the 4 or greater lactation compared with those in their third (P = 0.02). On HI farms, as DIM increased, lying time increased (P < 0.01), but MY and parity did not have an effect (P > 0.05). LI cows were more active overall and lying behavior was more sensitive to MY and parity in comparison to HI cows. Closer examination of the environmental factors effecting lying behavior on LI and HI systems will aid in formulating welfare and production recommendations for organic, grazing dairy cows. Key Words: dairy, grazing, lying behavior T5 Effect of outdoor space allowance on the behavior and preference of free-stall housed cows provided access to an outdoor bedded pack. A.-M. Smid*, D. Weary, and M. von Keyserlingk, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. Providing dairy cows access to pasture is desirable, but farmers can face a range of practical constraints including the lack of available pasture. A possible alternative to pasture is a bedded outdoor area that requires less space than pasture. However, little is known about space requirements for outdoor packs. This study investigated how space allowance on an outdoor open pack affected the number of agonistic interactions on the pack and the time cows spent outdoors. Seventy-two pregnant, lactating, healthy Holstein cows were assigned to 3 groups (24 animals/group). At the start of each group, animals were given 3 d to allow for the social dynamics of the group to stabilize. Thereafter, a habituation phase of 5 d followed in which animals were given access to the outdoor pack with a space allowance of 16 m 2 per cow. After this habituation period, 13 different space allowances were tested differing in 1-m 2 increments, ranging from 4 to 16 m 2 per cow. Each group was tested for 1 d on each treatment, with treatments allocated randomly without replacement. The location of animals (i.e., in the freestall barn or on the outdoor pack) and displacements from a lying position on the outdoor pack were scored using continuous video observations. Data of the effect of space on time spent outside were analyzed using a mixed model that specified cow within group as a random effect; the same model with group as random effect was used to analyze the effect of outdoor space on the amount of agonistic interactions on the pack. Cows spent on average (±S.D.) 4.7 (±0.8) h/d outside, and spent more time outside with increasing outdoor space allowances (3.3 ± 1.2 min/m 2 increase). On the outdoor pack, cows engaged in a total average of 0.11 (±0.05) interactions/h outside, and this was not influenced by space. These results suggest that a bedded pack can be used to provide freestall-housed cows free access to the outdoors, with cows spending an increasing amount of time outside with increasing outdoor space allowance. Key Words: animal welfare, free range, exercise yard T6 Impact of freestall neck-rail position on stall and cow hygiene. I. Robles 1, D. F. Kelton 2, H. W. Barkema 3, G. P. Keefe 4, J.-P. Roy 5, M. A. G. von Keyserlingk 6, and T. J. DeVries* 1, 1 Department of Animal Biosciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada, 2 Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada, 3 Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada, 4 Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PEI, Canada, 5 Faculté de Médecine Vétérinaire, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada, 6 Animal Welfare Program, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. The objective of this study was to determine how freestall design affects stall cleanliness and dairy cow hygiene. Four pens, including 30 lactating cows/pen (182.7 ± 92.8 DIM; parity = 2.5 ± 1.2), were exposed in a crossover design, with 2, 28-d treatment periods (February March; March April 2017), to each of 2 treatments: 1) neck rail 175 cm from the vertical plane above the rear curb, and 2) neck rail 20 cm closer to the rear of the stall; 155 cm. Stalls were 125cm wide and 259 cm long. Cow hygiene scoring (4-point scale; 1 = clean to 4 = dirty), was done 2x/wk. Cows were categorized as clean ( 2) or dirty ( 3), and proportion of cows with dirty lower legs, udder (DU), upper-legs and flank per pen were calculated. Freestalls (n = 30/pen) were raked and bedding leveled 2 /d. Base of the stalls were mattresses covered with chopped straw (~2cm deep), with additional bedding added 1 /wk. Stall cleanliness was assessed 2 /wk using a 1-m 2 metal grid, containing 88 squares (sq), centered between stall partitions of every fifth stall, and then counting the squares containing visible urine or fecal matter. Data were summarized by pen and analyzed using multivariable mixed-effect linear regression models. Treatment of stall length did not affect cow cleanliness (P = 0.46), and no associations were found between stall treatment and stall cleanliness (P = 0.62). Mean proportion of soiled sq/ stall per pen was 37.8 ± 7.7 (range = 21 56%). Number of days since bedding was added (2 ± 2 d) was associated with proportion of dirty sq/ stall (intercept = 33.3; β = 2.4; SE = 0.6; P < 0.001); for every 2 d since 218 J. Dairy Sci. Vol. 101, Suppl. 2

3 bedding was added, there was a 5 percentage point increase in mean proportion of soiled sq/stall. There was a tendency for an interaction between period and treatment (P = 0.07) for proportion of cows with DU; in the first period there were a lower proportion (P < 0.001) of cows with DU when the neck rail was closer to the rear of the stall (9.8 ± 1.9%) as compared with having the neck rail position further away (13.3 ± 2.1%). A greater proportion (P < 0.001) of cows with DU were reported in the second period (20.0 ± 1.1%) as compared with the first period (12.0 ± 1.4%), possibly due to seasonal differences. These results confirm that frequent bedding addition, as well as stall size, is important to maintain clean free-stalls and good cow hygiene. Key Words: hygiene, freestall T7 Improving welfare as a strategy to increase productivity and profitability in tiestall farms. M. V. Robichaud* 1,2, J. Rushen 2, A. Marie de Passillé 2, E. Vasseur 3, D. Haley 4, and D. Pellerin 1, 1 Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada, 2 University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 3 McGill University, Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, QC, Canada, 4 University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada. To stimulate dairy producers to invest in their animals comfort, it is essential to determine any associations between cow welfare and farm productivity and profitability. We evaluated those associations at the farm level. Animal welfare data were collected on 100 Canadian tiestall dairy farms, including animal-, environmental-, and management-based measures. The productivity indicators included average milk production, SCC, culling rate and proportion of cows in third lactation or greater. The profitability indicator margin over replacement costs (MORC) per cow was calculated for each farm using milk and culling revenues minus replacement and dead animal disposal costs. Univariable and multivariable linear regression models were used to analyze associations between farm productivity or profitability and welfare indicators. A 1-h increase in average daily lying time was associated with an increase of 273 kg in average yearly corrected milk production per cow (P = 0.003). The percentage of obviously lame cows was modified by the milk genetic index in its association with average yearly milk production, leading to greater improvement in milk production with increasing genetic index in farms with lower lameness prevalence. Farms with a greater proportion of cows with low body condition score and stalls mostly soiled with manure had higher average somatic cell count per year (5,000 and 3,680 per %; P 0.001). Farms with greater variability in their average herd lying time had lower proportion of cows in their third lactation or greater (6% per h; P = 0.007). Farms with higher average MORC per cow (higher benefits) had significantly lower prevalence of stalls soiled with manure ($7 per %; P = 0.001) and with very wet bedding ($16 per %; P = 0.018), and longer average daily lying time ($147 per h; P = 0.017). The farm s MORC per cow was also associated with the interaction between lameness prevalence and milk genetic index. These results show a complex relationship between farm profitability and animal welfare and that improving some aspects of animal welfare on tie-stall farms is beneficial for farm s productivity and profitability. Key Words: cow welfare, productivity, profitability T8 Lameness, injuries, and lying behavior on New York tiestall dairies. L. K. M. Ferlito* and B. J. Hicks, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. The objectives of this study were to measure lameness, injuries, and lying behavior of lactating cows on tiestall dairies, and to measure cow size and stall dimensions to determine if facilities are adequately sized. This was an observational study in which New York State dairies were evaluated during 2 farm visits in the spring and summer of A total of 10 facilities, 400 lactating cows (40 per herd), and 85 stalls were evaluated (8 to 9 stalls per herd). Cows were evaluated for lameness while standing in the stall and while moving, hock, knee, and neck injuries, and lying behavior. Facility evaluations included stall dimensions, bedding amount, and bedding cleanliness. On average, 20% of the stalls had no bedding, 39% had a little, 24% had 1 2 inches, and 17% had >2 inches of bedding covering the stall. The majority (62%) of stalls were clean, 21% slightly soiled, and 17% very soiled. Cows had an average rump height of 58.8 inches (range: 55.7 to 62.4), and an average hook width of 22.9 inches (range: 19.2 to 25.5). Stall length, width, and tie rail height averaged 67.9, 52.4, and 39.1 inches respectively. Based on cow size, only 4 farms met the size recommendations for stall length, 9 farms for stall width, and only 2 had adequate tie rail height. Locomotion score lameness prevalence averaged 24% (20% mild and 4% severe), with a range of 5% to 45%, and the in-stall lameness prevalence average was 14%, with a range of 3% to 25%, indicating the in-stall system underestimates lameness. Farms averaged 58% for hock injuries (49% mild and 9% severe), ranging from 20 to 88%; 4% for knee injuries, ranging from 0 to 10%; and 18% for neck injuries (11% mild and 7% severe), ranging from 3 to 50%. Lying time averaged 10.7 h/d (range: 7.7 to 12.7), with 10.3 bouts/day (range: 6.6 to 13.0), and a bout length of 68.1 min/bout (range: 54.4 to 81.4). While lameness and injuries are a challenge on individual tiestall dairies, some dairies were performing very well compared with industry benchmarks and guidelines. Additional research on more herds is needed to understand the relationship between housing and management factors with lameness and lying time to improve cow comfort on tiestall dairies. Key Words: dairy, tiestall, lameness T9 Assessing comfort of lactating dairy cows housed in tiestalls with recycled manure solids bedding. S. Oueslati* 1, M. Villettaz Robichaud 1, S. Godbout 2, S. Fournel 1, P. Ruel 3, E. Vasseur 4, and D. Pellerin 1, 1 Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada, 2 Institut de Recherche et de Développement en Agroenvironnement, Québec, QC, Canada, 3 Centre de Recherche en Sciences Animales de Deschambault, Deschambault, QC, Canada, 4 McGill University, Ste-Anne-de- Bellevue, QC, Canada. The use of recycled manure solids (RMS) as bedding in tie-stall housing has gained interest but its effect on the comfort of dairy cows has not yet been documented. The objective of this research was to assess the comfort of lactating cows housed in tie-stall with different RMS bedding depth. An experiment was conducted to compare cow cleanliness, lying time, and stall surface moisture when the bedding used was either straw (6 cm deep), RMS (6 cm deep) or RMS (15 cm deep). The 18 lactating Holstein cows enrolled in this experiment were blocked in groups of 3, according to parity and days in milk and housed for 3 weeks period on each treatment, using a crossover design. Flank, leg, udder, and teat cleanliness were assessed twice a week using a scoring chart based on a 4-point scale (1 = clean to 4 = very dirty). Stall surface moisture was also evaluated twice per week using the knee test and a 6-point scale (0 = dry to 6 = very wet). Finally, lying time was recorded during the last 14 d of each 3-week period using accelerometers. Mixed effects logistic regression models that included a random intercept for animal were used to analyze the effects of bedding treatment on the parameters monitored. Results showed that the use of RMS bedding led to increased odds of wet lying surface (knee test score 3) when compared with straw, for both the 6 cm depth (Odds ratio (OR) = 14; 95% Confidence interval (CI) = ; P = 0.012) and 15 cm depth (OR = 10; 95% J. Dairy Sci. Vol. 101, Suppl

4 CI = ; P = 0.029). Cows flank, leg, udder cleanliness and daily lying time were not influenced by the bedding treatments. However, the use of RMS lead to lower teat cleanliness (score 3) for both the 6 cm depth (OR = 5; 95% CI = 2 15; P = 0.003) and 15 cm depth (OR = 9; 95% CI = 3 26; P 0.001). Our results show that RMS could be a good bedding alternative for dairy cows kept in tie-stall, based on the comfort indicators measured, but its use may require greater attention to teat cleaning for milking. Key Words: recycled manure solids, tiestall housing, cow comfort T10 Would cows benefit from king-size beds? V. Boyer* 1, E. Edwards 2,1, M. F. Guiso 1,3, S. Adam 4, P. Krawczel 2, A.-M. de Passillé 5, and E. Vasseur 1, 1 McGill University, Animal Science, Montréal, QC, Canada, 2 University of Tennessee, Animal Science, Knoxville, TN, 3 Università degli Studi di Sassari, Sassari, Sardinia, Italy, 4 Valacta, Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, QC, Canada, 5 University of British Columbia, Dairy Research and Education Centre, Agassiz, BC, Canada. Tiestall dairy cows spend their whole days in the same space, which, therefore, must be designed to accommodate all the activities they conduct. Lying is a very important behavior for dairy cows and a critical response variable for assessing stall designs, to ensure that their needs for resting space are met. The objective of this study was to determine if increasing tie-stall width alters the lying behavior of lactating dairy cows. Two treatments were compared: the current recommendation (139 cm) and a double stall (284 cm). Stall length was of 188 cm. Sixteen cows were blocked by parity and lactation stage, then randomly allocated to a treatment and a stall within 1 of 2 rows in the barn, for a period of 6 wk. Leg-mounted accelerometers were used to record lying behaviors. Cows were recorded on video one full 24h/wk, using surveillance cameras positioned above the stalls. Video data from wk 1, 3 and 6 were recorded at a rate of 1 frame per minute, and analyzed by a trained observer to assess the position and the location of the cows body, head, and limbs during the lying hours. Lying behaviors, and frequency of each position and location were analyzed in SAS using a mixed model in which treatment, block and week were included as fixed factors, and cow and row, as random factors. Multiple comparisons were adjusted for using the Scheffé method. Results indicate that cows in the double stalls fully extended their hindlimbs more often than the control cows (21.7% vs 7.64%, P = 0.015). They also intruded in the neighboring stalls with their hindlimbs less often than the control cows [2.39 vs 16.3% for the left side (P = ), 0.14 vs 13.1% for the right side (P = )], instead favoring the second half of the double stall, in 38.3 ± 6.37% (P = ) and 29.2 ± 6.57% (P = 0.012) for the left and right hind legs, respectively. Total lying time did not differ (P = 0.24) between the double stall group (716.1 ± min/d) and the control group (670.8 ± min/d). These results suggest that dairy cows utilize the additional space they are granted with, and that they would likely benefit from stall widths larger than what is currently recommended for tiestall and freestall systems. Key Words: dairy cow, stall width, lying behaviour T11 Effect of prepartum lying time on stillbirth in transition dairy heifers and cows. B. T. Menichetti* 1, J. M. Piñeiro 1, A. A. Barragan 1, A. Relling 2, A. Garcia-Guerra 2, and G. M. Schuenemann 1, 1 Department of Veterinary Preventive Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 2 Department of Animal Sciences, The Ohio State University, Wooster, OH. The objective was to assess the effect of prepartum lying time (LT) on stillbirth in transition dairy heifers and cows. A total of 1,051 Holstein dairy cows (401 primiparous and 650 multiparous) from 3 commercial dairy herds were enrolled at 14 d before calving until 14 d post-calving. Weekly, a cohort of 10 to 15 cows was enrolled at each farm and electronic data loggers (IceQube, IceRobotics, Edinburgh, UK) were fitted to the hind leg of individual cows to assess their lying time. All heifers and cows were housed in similar prepartum freestall barns and moved into a contiguous individual maternity pen for parturition. Stillbirth was defined as a calf born dead or died within 24 h after birth, and with normal gestation length. Blood samples were collected at 7 d before (dpp) and at calving to assess NEFA and calcium (Hypocalcemia 0.8 mg/dl), respectively. Data were analyzed using MIXED procedure of SAS. Multiparous cows had greater (736 ± 20 min; P < 0.05) LT before parturition compared with primiparous cows (597 ± 30 min). Multiparous cows with a stillborn calf had reduced pre-partum LT (716 ± 28 min; P < 0.05), increased NEFA 7 dpp (416 ± 44 µeq/l) and increased hypocalcemia (56.7 ± 11%) at calving compared with cows with a calf born alive (762 ± 12 min, 313 ± 8 µeq/l, and 33.6 ± 6%, respectively). Primiparous cows with stillborn calf had reduced LT (570 ± 35 min) and increased hypocalcemia (45.4 ± 15%) at calving (P < 0.05) but NEFA did not differ compared with primiparous cows with a calf born alive (625 ± 25 min and 18.7 ± 9%, respectively). These results suggest that LT, prepartum energy status, and calcium at calving of dams are critical for calf survival. Key Words: stillbirth, lying time, dairy cattle T12 Effect of parity, season, and group size on dairy cows and heifers preferences for calving location. E. M. Edwards* 1, K. L. Proudfoot 2, H. M. Dann 3, L. G. Schneider 1, and P. D. Krawczel 1, 1 The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, 2 The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 3 The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute, Chazy, NY. Cows unable to cope with the challenges of calving often succumb to disease, negatively affecting their welfare. This may be improved by accommodating the cows preferences at calving. The objective was to determine the effects of parity, season, and group size on dairy cows and heifers preference for calving location when group housed and provided free access to pasture. This study was implemented using an observational study design. Multiparous Holstein cows (n = 33) and nulliparous Holstein heifers (n = 32) were dynamically enrolled 21 d before their expected calving date and removed on the day of calving. Cows had continuous access to a bedded-pack barn (area 1; m 2 ), open pasture (area 2; 1.82 ha), and an area of natural forage cover (i.e., trees and tall grasses; area 3; 0.24 ha). Video data were used to determine calving location. Cows calved from August to December Season was categorized as summer (August 6 to September 21), fall (September 22 to December 20) and winter (December 21 to December 28). For each cow, mean daily group size was calculated over the days she was enrolled, including at calving. Multinomial logistic regression (SAS 9.4) was used to test if factors were associated with the probability of calving in the 3 designated areas of the environment, and model selection was performed by backward manual elimination. Twenty-five calvings (38%) occurred in the barn, 17 calvings (26%) occurred on open pasture, and 23 calvings (35%) occurred in the area of natural forage cover. Parity was associated with the location of calving (P = 0.02); heifers were more likely to calve in the natural forage area compared with the barn (OR = 5.88; 95% CI = 1.69, 20.42). However, heifers and cows were equally as likely to calve in open pasture or the barn (OR = 2.89; 95% CI = 0.8, 10.53). Season, group size at calving, and mean daily group 220 J. Dairy Sci. Vol. 101, Suppl. 2

5 size were not associated with calving location preference (P > 0.25). These results suggest parity plays a role in preference for calving location when group housed. Calving areas that accommodate both heifers and cows environmental preferences for calving when grouped may improve calving outcomes. Key Words: dairy cow, calving location, parity T13 Lying behavior as an indicator of diarrhea and navel inflammation in veal calves. M. J. Studds 1, L. L. Deikun* 1,2, D. E. Sorter 1, and K. L. Proudfoot 1, 1 The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 2 Provimi, Brookville, OH. Many veal calves arrive at growing facilities with inadequate immunity, leaving them susceptible to diseases including diarrhea and navel inflammation. Observing calf behavior, such as lying behavior, can be used as a tool to understand calf health. The aim was to investigate the effect of navel inflammation and diarrhea on lying behavior in veal calves. A total of 125 calves from 3 cohorts were included in the study. Calves were housed individually on slatted flooring (Tenderfoot) in 3 rooms of a mechanically ventilated barn. On d 4 after arrival, calves were fitted with 3D accelerometers (HOBO Pendant Data Loggers) on their hind legs to continuously measure lying time, number of lying bouts, and lying bout duration. Health exams were conducted twice weekly for 2 wk starting on the day after arrival. Exams included a rectal temperature, a navel score (0 = normal, 1 = mildly inflamed, 2 = moderately inflamed, 3 = severely inflamed), and a fecal score (0 = normal, 1 = semi-formed, 2 = loose, 3 = watery). Calves were considered to have navel inflammation (n = 22) or diarrhea (n = 15) if they scored 2 during at least 3 of the 4 health exams. Normal calves (n = 18) had no signs of illness and rectal temperatures <39.4 C during 3 of the 4 health exams. Week 1 included d 4 to 9, and wk 2 included d 9 to 14. Data were analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA; the model included cohort, health status (normal, navel inflammation or diarrhea), week (1 or 2) and a health week interaction. There was an effect of health status on lying time (P = 0.03), whereby normal calves spent more time lying (18.9 ± 0.2 h/d) compared with calves with inflamed navels (18.0 ± 0.2; P = 0.01) and diarrhea (18.1 ± 0.2; P = 0.05). There was no effect of health status on the number of lying bouts per day (P = 0.62), nor on the duration of lying bouts (P = 0.36). There were no health week interactions. Results indicate that veal calves with navel inflammation and diarrhea may be less comfortable than calves without these conditions. Veal producers should consider changing their facilities to create more comfortable lying environments to help calves better cope with illness. Key Words: calf comfort, sickness behavior, housing T14 Impacts of wild birds on pathogen dissemination and behavioral interactions in dairy cattle. T. P. Caskin* 1, J. M. Gay 2, K. M. M. Steensma 3, J. H. Harrison 4, B. Garries 3, A. Sarchet 3, and A. L. Adams Progar 1, 1 Department of Animal Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, 2 Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, 3 Departments of Biology and Environmental Studies, Trinity Western University, Langely, BC, Canada, 4 Departments of Animal Science and Extension, Washington State University, Puyallup, WA. Feed loss and pathogen dissemination from wild birds may cost Washington dairy farmers $200,000 per year per farm. Wild birds may also alter cattle feeding, aggression, and aversion behaviors. The objectives of this study were to (1) record the number of birds present on Washington dairies; (2) observe behavioral changes in cattle feeding; and (3) determine the pathogens present in bird fecal matter on dairies. Based on bird migration patterns, fall and winter seasons were selected for data collection. Bird counts were recorded every 7 d over the course of 4 wk using direct observations on 11 dairies. Pathogen and behavior studies were conducted in 15 lactating pens on 5 farms, averaging 4 pens per farm. Bird fecal samples were collected for pathogen analysis. On-farm cameras recorded cattle and wild bird behaviors that included the number of cows eating, occurrences of cow intra-species aggressive and aversive behaviors, and incidences of aggressive and aversive behaviors between cows and birds at the feed bunk. Pathogen data were analyzed using PROC LOGISTIC and behavioral data were analyzed using PROC GENMOD in SAS. The number of birds observed at any specific time was 0 1,000 birds per farm. Escherichia coli was isolated from 34/88 samples, and Campylobacter jejuni was isolated from only one sample. No significant differences in the number of positive E. coli samples were found between locations (2.3 ± 0.4 samples; P = 0.17). Preliminary results suggest that the percentage of head gates used by cows (0.03 ± 0.005% vs. 0.8 ± 0.01%; P < 0.001), and the number of cows eating (1 ± 0.09 vs. 19 ± 0.3 cows; P < 0.001) differed among locations. Additionally, the number of birds present (1 ± 0.07 vs 41 ± 6.7 birds; P < 0.001) and the number of birds eating at the feed bunk (1 ± 0.03 vs. 28 ± 5.01 birds; P < 0.001) differed among locations. However, no significant relationship was detected between the number of birds and the number of cows eating at any given time (13 ± 0.4 cows; P = 0.91). Determining bird preferences for feeding location will aid in developing effective deterrence methods and minimize economic losses on farms. Key Words: fecal pathogen, feeding behavior, wild birds T15 Assessing human-conditioned sorting behavior in dairy cows in farm research trials. D. Manriquez* 1, L. Chen 2, G. Albornoz 2, J. Velez 2, and P. J. Pinedo 1, 1 Department of Animal Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, 2 Aurora Organic Dairy, Platteville, CO. Cow-human interactions can influence and modulate group and individual behaviors of dairy cows. Our objective was to test the effectiveness of human sorting to separate subgroups of lactating dairy cows in on-farm studies and to assess the level of conditioning to this activity. As part of a previous nutritional trial cows were sorted daily for 150 d into 2 contiguous sub-pens. Subsequently, we compared 3 sorting methods applied to the same cows: (1) human active sorting (AS) at the pen gate; (2) human presence as passive sorting (PS); and (3) nonhuman gate sorting (GS). We hypothesized that after a training period cows become conditioned to sorting. Holstein cows (n = 176; parity = 2.5 ± 1.3), were randomly assigned into 2 subgroups (A = 91 cows; B = 85 cows) to be sequentially separated by 3 sequentially applied sorting methods (AS; PS; and GS). Each sorting method was evaluated once per day after the morning milking during 5 d. The counts of correctly allocated cows and the error rate (misplaced-cows/d) of each subgroup were compared by sorting method. Additionally, an individual error index rate was calculated and analyzed considering treatment group, parity, and general activity ratio (daily rumination / daily activity). When AS was applied, the total proportion of animals correctly sorted was of 99.8%, whereas PS had 94.8% of sorting accuracy (P < 0.001). Non-human GS could not be accurately assessed because the cows lost the self-sorting behavior overcrowding one side of the pen making impossible the data collection. The average of animals correctly placed was greater in AS when compared with PS (175 ± 1.7 cows vs ± 3.5 cows; P = 0.005). Cows that had longer walking distance to their research sub pen had greater individual error rate, especially when PS was applied. No association was found between parity and general activ- J. Dairy Sci. Vol. 101, Suppl

6 ity ratio with the individual error index. Researchers observed a clear self-sorting behavior in response to human sorting, for both AS and PS, with average values for correct placement above 90%. Therefore, after a period of training, lactating dairy cows became operant conditioned to human sorting, which represent an opportunity for animal separation without intense human labor or stressing practices for the animals. Key Words: sorting, operant conditioning 222 J. Dairy Sci. Vol. 101, Suppl. 2