| Livestock Research for Rural Development 23 (10) 2011 | Guide for preparation of papers | LRRD Newsletter | Citation of this paper |
Thirty primiparous and 30 multiparous buffaloes were used to study the effect of udder massage on feed intake, digestibility, milk yield and composition, feed conversion and economic efficiency. They were divided into two similar groups to receive treatments of: with or without udder massage and fed the basil ration consisted of 55% concentrate feed mixture (CFM), 22% berseem hay (BH) and 23% rice straw (RS) on DM basis.
Multiparous buffaloes showed significantly higher NFE digestibility, average daily intake of CFM, BH, RS, DM, TDN and DCP, the yield of actual and 7% FCM, percentages of fat and TS, Average daily feed cost, price of daily 7% FCM yield and economic efficiency and lower percentages of lactose and SNF, amounts of DM, TDN and DCP per one kg 7% FCM and feed cost / kg 7% FCM compared with primiparous buffaloes. The digestibility coefficients of DM, OM and NFE and subsequently TDN value, average daily intake of DM and TDN, actual and 7% FCM, average daily feed cost, price of daily 7% FCM yield and economic efficiency increased significantly, however, the amounts of DM, TDN and DCP per one kg 7% FCM and feed cost / kg 7% FCM decreased significantly with udder massage.
The interaction between parity and udder massage showed that multiparous buffaloes with udder massage recorded significantly the highest digestibility coefficients of DM, OM and NFE and subsequently TDN value, average daily intake of CFM, BH, RS, DM, TDN and DCP, actual milk and 7% FCM yield, the percentages of fat and total solids in milk, average daily feed cost, income of daily 7% FCM yield and economic efficiency and the lowest amounts of DM, TDN and DCP per one kg 7% FCM and feed cost / kg 7% FCM, however primiparous buffaloes without udder massage had the opposite trend.
Keywords: digestibility, feed intake, feed conversion
In Egypt, buffaloes produce about 60% of the milk versus 40% for cattle, because buffaloes are the first choice of most Egyptian farmers. The milk is highly preferred by the public as well as by creameries due to its high fat percentage. Buffalo cows have a small udder cistern and almost 95% of the milk is stored in the alveolar compartment (Thomas et al 2003). As a result, pre-milking stimulation is of extreme importance for optimal milk ejection response in buffalos. Different from cows, the buffaloes’ cistern compartment is more prominent in the teats than in the gland (Thomas et al 2003). The stimulation for milk letdown in buffaloes requires more time compared to cows - on average 2 minutes (Svennersten-Sjaunja 2000). For this purpose, the calf is used in most cases, when milking is done by hand. However, the practice of using calves is not adopted in some herds where buffalo cows are milked by machine in “walk-through” parlors (Svennersten-Sjaunja 2000). Not only is udder massage effective in helping heifers to adapt to the noise and action of milking machines, but it also has favorable effects on udder development and increases milk yield (Valitskii 1990 and Kitaev 1991).
This experiment was planned to investigate the effect of massage of the udder of primiparous and multiparous buffaloes on feed intake, digestibility, milk yield and composition and feed conversion.
Thirty primiparous and 30 multiparous buffaloes were divided into two similar groups according to age, body weight and milk yield in the previous lactation (15 primiparous and 15 multiparous in each). One group received a daily massage of the udder in the morning and evening for 5 minutes starting in the last two months of pregnancy for heifers and before the morning and evening milking for primiparous and multiparous during lactation. The other group received no udder massage
All animals were fed a ration consisting of a mixture of 50% concentrate, 20% berseem hay and 30% rice straw (DM basis). The concentrate was given twice daily at 8 a.m. and 3 p.m. Berseem hay was given at 11 a.m. and the rice straw throughout the day. Drinking water was available freely in build basin. The chemical composition of the feeds is shown in Table 1.
|
Table 1. Chemical composition of feedstuffs and basal ration. |
||||
|
Item |
Concentrate* |
Berseem hay |
Rice straw |
Basal ration |
|
DM % |
91.5 |
89.5 |
89.4 |
90.5 |
|
Composition of DM% |
||||
|
OM |
91.8 |
87.5 |
84.2 |
86.5 |
|
CP |
16.3 |
14.2 |
1.41 |
11.4 |
|
CF |
15.0 |
25.1 |
34.0 |
22.7 |
|
EE |
3.09 |
2.60 |
1.00 |
2.36 |
|
NFE |
57.4 |
34.6 |
47.8 |
50.0 |
|
Ash |
8.23 |
12.5 |
15.8 |
13.6 |
|
* Concentrate feed mixture consisted of 32% undecorticated cotton seed cake, 24 wheat bran, 22% yellow corn, 12% rice bran, 5% line seed cake, 3% molasses, 1% limestone and 1% sodium chloride. |
||||
A digestibility trial was conducted to determine nutritive values using 3 primiparous and 3 multiparous buffaloes from each group. Fecal samples were taken from the rectum twice daily with 12 hours interval for 7 days collection period. Acid insoluble ash was used as a neutral marker according to Van Keulen and Young (1977). Samples of feedstuffs and faeces were dried at 65 oC for 48 hours, and then mixed, ground and representative sample were chemically analyzed according to AOAC (1995). Digestibility coefficients were calculated from the equations given by Schneider and Flatt (1975).
The animals were hand-milked and daily milk yield was recorded for each animal and the 7% FCM for each cow was calculated from daily milk yield and the percentage of milk fat using the formula of Raafat et al (1963): 7% FCM = [0.265´ milk yield (kg)] + [10.5 ´ fat yield (kg)]. Milk samples from consecutive evening and morning milkings were taken from each animal in the 4th week of each period and mixed in proportion to milk yield. Composite milk samples were analyzed for fat, protein, lactose, solids not fat (SNF), and total solids (TS) by Milko-Scan (model 133B), and ash by difference.
Feed conversion was calculated as the amounts of DM, TDN (kg) and DCP (g) required to produce 1 kg 7 % FCM.
Economic efficiency was expressed as the daily feed cost, price of 7 % FCM, feed cost per kg 7 % FCM and the ratio between daily feed cost and price of 7 % FCM.
The obtained data were analyzed using general liner models procedure adapted by SPSS (2008). The sources of variation in the model were parity, massage, interaction parity*massage and error. The Duncan multiple range test within SPSS was used to compare differences between primiparous and multiparous buffaloes with or without udder massage.
Apaprent digestibility coefficients and nutritive values are presented in Table 2.
|
Table 2. Digestibility coefficients and nutritive values. |
||||||||
|
Item |
Digestibility coefficients % |
Nutritive values % |
||||||
|
DM |
OM |
CP |
CF |
EE |
NFE |
TDN |
DCP |
|
|
Parity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primiparous |
66.3 |
67.6 |
61.9 |
67.9 |
63.9 |
69.9 |
60.8 |
7.08 |
|
Multiparous |
67.2 |
68.4 |
60.8 |
67.1 |
67.7 |
71.8 |
61.7 |
6.95 |
|
P-value |
0.274 |
0.319 |
0.561 |
0.495 |
0.104 |
0.059 |
0.202 |
0.560 |
|
Udder massage |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No massage |
65.9 |
67.2 |
60.5 |
66.4 |
64.7 |
69.9 |
60.3 |
6.91 |
|
Massage |
67.7 |
68.8 |
62.3 |
68.5 |
66.8 |
71.8 |
62.1 |
7.12 |
|
P-value |
0.012 |
0.011 |
0.335 |
0.044 |
0.403 |
0.057 |
0.001 |
0.336 |
|
Interaction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primip. x no massage |
65.2b |
66.7b |
60.8 |
66.5 |
62.5 |
68.7b |
59.7c |
6.95 |
|
Primip. x massage |
67.4a |
68.6a |
63.0 |
69.2 |
65.2 |
71.0ab |
61.9ab |
7.20 |
|
Multip. x no massage |
66.5ab |
67.7ab |
60.1 |
66.2 |
66.9 |
71.0ab |
60.9b |
6.87 |
|
Multip. x massage |
67.9a |
69.1a |
61.5 |
67.9 |
68.4 |
72.7a |
62.4a |
7.03 |
|
P-value |
0.038 |
0.050 |
0.751 |
0.212 |
0.356 |
0.037 |
0.002 |
0.751 |
|
SEM |
0.4 |
0.4 |
0.9 |
0.6 |
1.2 |
0.5 |
0.3 |
0.1 |
|
a, b, c: Values in the same column with different superscripts differ significantly. |
||||||||
Only NFE digestibility was significantly higher for multiparous than primiparous buffaloes. The digestibility coefficients of DM, OM and NFE and subsequently TDN value increased with udder massage. The interaction between parity and udder massage showed that multiparous buffaloes with udder massage recorded the highest digestibility coefficients of DM, OM and NFE and subsequently TDN value, however, the primiparous buffaloes without udder massage had the lowest values. The digestibility coefficients of CP, CF and EE and subsequently DCP value were similar for primiparous and multiparous buffaloes with or without udder massage. These results may be attributed to that udder massage stimulates prolactin and oxytocin hormone production, which makes animals relax and process the rumination. These results agree with those obtained by Uvnas-Moberg (1998) who found that repeated oxytocin injections caused lowered blood pressure, decreased cortisol levels and increased withdrawal latency, increased release of vagally controlled gastrointestinal hormones. Bar-Peled et al (1998) reported that digestibility variables were positively correlated with oxytocin and prolactin concentrations.
Feed intake by primiparous and multiparous buffaloes with or without udder massage is shown in Table 3. Average daily intake of concentrate feed mixture (CFM), berseem hay (BH), rice straw (RS), DM, TDN and DCP by multiparous buffaloes were significantly higher than for primiparous buffaloes. While, average daily intake of DM and TDN increased with udder massage. The interaction between parity and udder massage showed that multiparous buffaloes with udder massage had the highest average daily intake of CFM, BH, RS, DM, TDN and DCP, but primiparous buffaloes without udder massage had the lowest feed intake. Feed intake by multiparous buffaloes was higher due to the higher body weight and milk yield compared to primiparous buffaloes.
|
Table 3. Average daily feed intake (kg/head/day on DM basis). |
||||||
|
Item |
CFM |
BH |
RS |
DM |
TDN |
DCP |
|
Parity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primiparous |
7.87 |
3.22 |
4.84 |
14.4 |
8.77 |
1.02 |
|
Multiparous |
9.18 |
3.75 |
5.64 |
16.8 |
10.4 |
1.17 |
|
P-value |
0.001 |
0.001 |
0.001 |
0.001 |
0.002 |
0.017 |
|
Udder massage |
|
|
|
|
||
|
No massage |
8.20 |
3.35 |
5.04 |
15.0 |
9.06 |
1.04 |
|
Massage |
8.85 |
3.62 |
5.44 |
16.2 |
10.1 |
1.15 |
|
P-value |
0.150 |
0.151 |
0.152 |
0.015 |
0.018 |
0.082 |
|
Interaction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primip. x no massage |
6.9d |
2.8d |
4.1d |
13.8d |
8.3d |
0.96c |
|
Primip. x massage |
7.5c |
3.0c |
4.5c |
15.0c |
9.3c |
1.08bc |
|
Multip. x no massage |
8.1b |
3.2b |
4.9b |
16.2b |
9.9b |
1.11ab |
|
Multip. x massage |
8.7a |
3.5a |
5.2a |
17.4a |
10.9a |
1.22a |
|
P-value |
0.004 |
0.005 |
0.007 |
0.006 |
0.008 |
0.013 |
|
SEM |
0.2 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.4 |
0.3 |
0.03 |
|
a, b, c, d: Values in the same column with different superscripts differ significantly. |
||||||
The effects of udder massage on actual and 7% FCM yield are shown in Table 4. Average daily yields of actual and 7% FCM were significantly higher for multiparous than primiparous buffaloes and increased significantly with udder massage. The interaction between parity and udder massage indicated that multiparous buffaloes with udder massage had the highest actual milk and 7% FCM yield; however, primiparous buffaloes without udder massage had the lowest yield. Udder massage led to increased actual and 7% FCM yield by 29.2 and 30.8% for primiparous and by 20.5 and 21.1% for multiparous buffaloes, respectively. The percentage increases in actual and 7% FCM yield due to udder massage were higher in primiparous than in multiparous buffaloes. The percentages of fat and TS were significantly higher, but the percentages of lactose and SNF were significantly lower for multiparous compared with primiparous buffaloes. However, all the milk constituents except ash were not affected by udder massage. The interaction between parity and udder massage showed that milk composition was not affected by udder massage and was similar for both primiparous and multiparous buffaloes except fat and total solids (TS) which were higher in multiparous than primiparous buffaloes. These results agree with those obtained by Gorewit and Gassman (1985) who found that udder stimulation resulted in higher peak milk flow rate as compared to no stimulation, while milk composition was not affected by stimulation. Tancin et al (2007) reported that pre-stimulation positively influenced the parameters of milk flow and therefore the efficiency of milk removal and contributed to better distribution of components in milk fractions during milking.
|
Table 4. Average daily milk yield and composition. |
||||||||
|
Item |
Milk yield kg/day |
Milk composition % |
||||||
|
Actual |
7% FCM |
Fat |
Protein |
Lactose |
SNF |
TS |
Ash |
|
|
Parity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primiparous |
5.84 |
5.36 |
6.21 |
4.28 |
5.05 |
9.98 |
16.2 |
0.65 |
|
Multiparous |
10.4 |
10.4 |
6.97 |
4.26 |
4.90 |
9.83 |
16.8 |
0.66 |
|
P-value |
0.002 |
0.002 |
0.001 |
0.702 |
0.040 |
0.067 |
0.002 |
0.447 |
|
Udder massage |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No massage |
6.71 |
6.46 |
6.55 |
4.28 |
4.97 |
9.92 |
16.5 |
0.67 |
|
Massage |
9.52 |
9.26 |
6.63 |
4.26 |
4.98 |
9.88 |
16.5 |
0.64 |
|
P-value |
0.012 |
0.015 |
0.773 |
0.622 |
0.899 |
0.653 |
0.872 |
0.043 |
|
Interaction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primip. x no massage |
5.10d |
4.65d |
6.15b |
4.29 |
5.04 |
10.0 |
16.2b |
0.67 |
|
Primip. x massage |
6.59c |
6.08c |
6.26b |
4.27 |
5.06 |
9.96 |
16.2b |
0.63 |
|
Multip. x no massage |
10.3b |
10.2b |
6.90a |
4.28 |
4.90 |
9.86 |
16.8a |
0.68 |
|
Multip. x massage |
12.5a |
12.4a |
6.95a |
4.25 |
4.90 |
9.80 |
16.8a |
0.65 |
|
P-value |
0.015 |
0.018 |
0.010 |
0.950 |
0.286 |
0.357 |
0.020 |
0.194 |
|
SEM |
0.8 |
0.9 |
0.13 |
0.02 |
0.04 |
0.04 |
0.11 |
0.01 |
|
a, b, c, d: Values in the same column with different superscripts differ significantly. |
||||||||
Feed conversion as presented in Table 5 revealed that udder massage improved feed conversion and it was better for multiparous than primiparous buffaloes. The amounts of DM, TDN and DCP per one kg 7% FCM were significantly lower for multiparous than primiparous buffaloes and decreased significantly with udder massage. The interaction between parity and udder massage showed that multiparous buffaloes with udder massage recorded significantly the lowest amounts of DM, TDN and DCP per one kg 7% FCM, however primiparous buffaloes without udder massage had the highest amounts.
|
Table 5. Feed conversion and economic efficiency. |
|||||||
|
Item |
Feed conversion/kg 7% FCM |
Economic efficiency* |
|||||
|
DM kg |
TDN kg |
DCP g |
Feed cost (LE/day) |
Feed cost (LE)/ kg 7% FCM |
Income of 7% FCM (LE/day) |
Economic efficiency |
|
|
Parity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primiparous |
2.73 |
1.65 |
193.1 |
18.6 |
3.53 |
21.5 |
1.15 |
|
Multiparous |
1.68 |
1.04 |
116.6 |
21.7 |
2.18 |
41.4 |
1.90 |
|
P-value |
0.001 |
0.001 |
0.001 |
0.001 |
0.001 |
0.002 |
0.002 |
|
Udder massage |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No massage |
2.47 |
1.49 |
171.4 |
19.4 |
3.20 |
25.8 |
1.31 |
|
Massage |
1.94 |
1.20 |
138.3 |
21.0 |
2.51 |
37.0 |
1.73 |
|
P-value |
0.017 |
0.028 |
0.023 |
0.015 |
0.014 |
0.010 |
0.016 |
|
Interaction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primip. x no massage |
2.98a |
1.78a |
208.2a |
17.9d |
3.86a |
18.6d |
1.04d |
|
Primip. x massage |
2.47b |
1.53b |
178.0a |
19.4c |
3.20b |
24.3c |
1.25c |
|
Multip. x no massage |
1.59c |
0.97c |
108.6b |
21.0b |
2.05c |
40.9b |
1.95b |
|
Multip. x massage |
1.41d |
0.88d |
98.6c |
22.5a |
1.82d |
49.5a |
2.20a |
|
P-value |
0.005 |
0.007 |
0.010 |
0.006 |
0.004 |
0.008 |
0.007 |
|
SEM |
0.18 |
0.11 |
13.4 |
0.53 |
0.23 |
3.59 |
0.14 |
|
a, b, c, d: Values in the same column with different superscripts differ significantly. *The price of one ton was 2000 LE for concentrate feed mixture, 750 LE for berseem hay, 100 LE for rice straw and 4000 LE for 7% FCM according to prices of year 2010. |
|||||||
Results of economic efficiency are shown in Table 5. Average daily feed cost, income of daily 7% FCM yield and economic efficiency were significantly higher, while feed cost / kg 7% FCM was significantly lower for multiparous than primiparous buffaloes. Average daily feed cost, income of daily 7% FCM yield and economic efficiency increased significantly, but feed cost / kg 7% FCM decreased significantly with udder massage. The interaction between parity and udder massage showed that multiparous buffaloes with udder massage revealed significantly the highest average daily feed cost, income of daily 7% FCM yield and economic efficiency and the lowest feed cost / kg 7% FCM, however primiparous buffaloes without udder massage had the opposite trend. Udder massage led to increased economic efficiency by 20.2 and 12.8% for primiparous and multiparous buffaloes, respectively.
From these results it could be concluded that udder massage led to significant improvement in feed intake, milk yield, feed conversion and economic efficiency and its effects were higher in primiparous than multiparous buffaloes.
Udder massage led to increased actual and 7% FCM yield and the effects were greater for primiparous than multiparous buffaloes.
Economic efficiency was higher for multiparous than primiparous buffaloes.
Animal Production Research Institute 1997 Animal Nutrition Scientifically and Practically. 1st Ed. Animal Production Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Ministry of Agriculture, Dokki, Giza, Egypt (In Arabic).
Bar-Peled U, Aharoni Y, Robinzon B, Bruckental I, Lehrer R, Maltz E, Knight C, Kali J, Folman Y, Voet H, Gacitua H and Tagari H 1998 The effect of enhanced milk yield of dairy cows by frequent milking or suckling on intake and digestibility of the diet. Journal of Dairy Science, 81: 1420-1427. http://biblioteca.sp.san.gva.es/biblioteca/publicaciones/MATERIAL/METABUSQUEDAS/MUJER_INFANTIL/9621246.PDF
Gorewit R C and Gassman K B 1985 Effects of duration of udder stimulation on milking dynamics and oxytocin release. Journal of Dairy Science, 68: 1813-1818. http://download.journals.elsevierhealth.com/pdfs/journals/0022-0302/PIIS0022030285810316.pdf
Kitaev E A 1991 The influence of preparation of buffalo heifers for calving on the development of milking ejection characteristics and behaviour of cows milking. Doklady Rossiskai Akademii Selskkhozyaistrennykh Nauk, 5: 60-64.
Knight C H, Flint D J and Taylor E 1995 Growth hormone, prolactin interaction in lactation redents and ruminants. Yearbook, 73-78.
Raafat M A, Abou Raya A K, Abou Hussein E R M and Darwish M 1963 The suitable level of feeding dairy animals. 1. The effect of reducing the maintenance level for the buffalo cows and local cows. Proceedings of Second Animal Production Conference, Cairo, 1: 195.
Schneider B H and Flatt W P 1975 The evaluation of feeds though digestibility experiments. The University of Georgia press Athens, 3: 602.
SPSS 2008 Statistical Package for the social sciences. Release 16, SPSS INC, Chicago, USA.
Svennersten-Sjaunja K 2000 The buffalo is important for milk production. AgriBizChina web-site: http://www.agribizchina.com
Tancin V, Uhrinca M, Macuhov L and Bruckmaier R M 2007 Effect of pre-stimulation on milk flow pattern and distribution of milk constituents at a quarter level. Czech Journal of Animal Science, 52(5): 117–121.
Thomas C S, Svennersten-Sjaunja K, Bhosrekar M R and Bruckmaier R M 2003 Mammary cisternal size, cisternal milk and milk ejection in Murrah buffaloes. Journal of Dairy Research, 71: 162-168.
Uvnas-Moberg K 1998 Antistress Pattern Induced by Oxytocin. News in Physiological Sciences, 13: 22-25.
Valitskii N 1990 Vacuum massage of buffalo heifers udder and their productivity at first lactation. Molochnoe Myasnoe Skotovodstov, 2: 22-24.
Van Keulen J and Young P A 1977 Evaluation of acid insoluble ash as a natural marker in ruminant digestibility studies. Journal of Animal Science, 44: 282-287. http://jas.fass.org/cgi/reprint/44/2/282
Received 8 January 2011; Accepted 21 May 2011; Published 10 October 2011