Author Archives: admin

  • 0

  • 0

Effects of Dietary Supplementation of Scutellaria baicalensis Extract During Early Lactation on Milk Production of Dairy Cattle

Effects of Dietary Supplementation of Scutellaria baicalensis Extract During Early Lactation on Milk Production of Dairy Cattle K. Olagaray Kansas State University, Manhattan, kolagaray@k-state.edu Michael Brouk Kansas State University, mbrouk@k-state.edu F. Robert Groupe CCPA, Janzé, France E. Dupuis Groupe CCPA, Janzé, France

See next page for additional authors
Follow this and additional works at:http://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr Part of theDairy Science Commons

This report is brought to you for free and open access by New Prairie Press. It has been accepted for inclusion in Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports by an authorized administrator of New Prairie Press. Copyright 2017 Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service. Contents of this publication may be freely reproduced for educational purposes. All other rights reserved. Brand names appearing in this publication are for product identification purposes only. K-State Research and Extension is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Recommended Citation Olagaray, K.; Brouk, Michael; Robert, F.; Dupuis, E.; and Bradford, B. (2017) “Effects of Dietary Supplementation of Scutellaria baicalensis Extract During Early Lactation on Milk Production of Dairy Cattle,”Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports: Vol. 3: Iss. 8.https://doi.org/10.4148/2378-5977.7525
Effects of Dietary Supplementation of Scutella

ria baicalensis Extract During Early Lactation on Milk Production of Dairy Cattle
Abstract Multiparous Holstein cows (n = 122) were used in a randomized block design to determine the effect of shortterm and long-term postpartum administration ofScutellaria baicalensisextract (SBE) on 305-day milk yield, 120-day milk component yield, and early lactation milk markers of inflammation and metabolic function. Treatments were (1) control, (2) short-term (5-day) administration of the SBE (SBE5), and (3) longterm (60-day) administration of the SBE (SBE60). Treatments were included in a treatment pellet that was identical to the control pellet in ingredient source and composition except for the extract, and both pellets were provided via an automated milking system. Milk samples were collected on day 1, 3, and once during days 5–12 of lactation, followed by weekly sampling for the remainder of the 120 days collection period. Milk samples collected in the first 2 weeks were used for biomarker analysis (haptoglobin and β-hyroxybutyrate [BHBA]), and all samples were used for composition analysis. Cows were scored for body condition every 2 weeks prepartum and postpartum. Milk production, programmed pellet allocation, and actual provision of both pelleted feeds were recorded daily. There was no difference in daily treatment pellet feeding between SBE5 and SBE60 for the first 5 days of lactation. Total pellet intake was greater for SBE60 than SBE5 and control cows during the treatment period (weeks 1–9), but not during the carryover period (weeks 10–36). No treatment effects were observed for body condition, milk haptoglobin, or milk BHBA. Whole-lactation milk yield was increased for SBE60 compared to control, but SBE5 did not differ from control. Milk lactose and fat yields were significantly greater and milk protein yield tended to be greater for SBE60 than control. Treatment SBE60 decreased somatic cell count (SCC) compared to control during weeks 3–5 and 8, whereas SBE5 did not affect SCC. Mastitis incidence was lesser for both SBE5 and SBE60 compared to control. Time to pregnancy did not differ, but retention in the herd tended to be greater for SBE60 than control. In conclusion, despite no detected treatment effects on BCS or milk biomarkers of inflammation and metabolic status, supplementation of postpartum dairy cows withScutellaria baicalensisextract for 60 days was effective at decreasing mastitis incidence and increasing milk yield.
Keywords polyphenol, dairy cow, transition, inflammation
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under aCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Authors K. Olagaray, Michael Brouk, F. Robert, E. Dupuis, and B. Bradford
This Dairy Cattle: Nutrition and Feeding article is available in Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports: http://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol3/iss8/10
Dairy Research 2017
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension

Service 1

Effects of Dietary Supplementation of Scutellaria baicalensis Extract During Early Lactation on Milk Production of Dairy Cattle K.E. Olagaray, M.J. Brouk, F. Robert,1 E. Dupuis,1 and B.J. Bradford Summary Multiparous Holstein cows (n = 122) were used in a randomized block design to determine the effect of short-term and long-term postpartum administration of Scutellaria baicalensis extract (SBE) on 305-day milk yield, 120-day milk component yield, and early lactation milk markers of inflammation and metabolic function. Treatments were (1) control, (2) short-term (5-day) administration of the SBE (SBE5), and (3) longterm (60-day) administration of the SBE (SBE60). Treatments were included in a treatment pellet that was identical to the control pellet in ingredient source and composition except for the extract, and both pellets were provided via an automated milking system. Milk samples were collected on day 1, 3, and once during days 5–12 of lactation, followed by weekly sampling for the remainder of the 120 days collection period. Milk samples collected in the first 2 weeks were used for biomarker analysis (haptoglobin and β-hyroxybutyrate [BHBA]), and all samples were used for composition analysis. Cows were scored for body condition every 2 weeks prepartum and postpartum. Milk production, programmed pellet allocation, and actual provision of both pelleted feeds were recorded daily. There was no difference in daily treatment pellet feeding between SBE5 and SBE60 for the first 5 days of lactation. Total pellet intake was greater for SBE60 than SBE5 and control cows during the treatment period (weeks 1–9), but not during the carryover period (weeks 10–36). No treatment effects were observed for body condition, milk haptoglobin, or milk BHBA. Whole-lactation milk yield was increased for SBE60 compared to control, but SBE5 did not differ from control. Milk lactose and fat yields were significantly greater and milk protein yield tended to be greater for SBE60 than control. Treatment SBE60 decreased somatic cell count (SCC) compared to control during weeks 3–5 and 8, whereas SBE5 did not affect SCC. Mastitis incidence was lesser for both SBE5 and SBE60 compared to control. Time to pregnancy did not differ, but retention in the herd tended to be greater for SBE60 than control. In conclusion, despite no detected treatment effects on BCS or milk biomarkers of inflammation and metabolic status, supplementation of postpartum dairy cows with Scutellaria baicalensis extract for 60 days was effective at decreasing mastitis incidence and increasing milk yield.
1 Groupe CCPA, Janzé, France.
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension

Service 2

Dairy Research 2017
Introduction Inflammation during the transition period has been well established and is associated with reduced milk yield and reproductive performance. Previous research demonstrated that short-term postpartum administration (3 days) of the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) sodium salicylate and meloxicam increases whole-lactation milk and protein yields. The fact that use of NSAIDs during early lactation is considered off-label drug use, has encouraged investigation of plant extracts as a natural alternative. Extracts from the Scutellaria baicalensis plant, containing several flavonoids, have shown anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties in cell culture experiments.
The objective of this study was to determine the effect of short-term (5-day) and long-term (60-day) administration of Scutellaria baicalensis extract (SBE) after calving on milk yield and milk markers of inflammation and metabolic function. Secondary outcomes examined were effects of SBE on milk components, somatic cell count, time to pregnancy, disease incidence, and retention in the herd.
Experimental Procedures Multiparous Holstein cows (n = 122) on a commercial farm were used in a randomized block design to determine the effects of short-term (5-day) and long-term (60-day) postpartum administration of SBE on 305-day milk yield and early lactation milk markers of inflammation and metabolic function. Cows were blocked by parity (2 and 3+), calving date, and risk factors (high risk block: calving difficulty score ≥ 3 or twins), then randomly assigned within block to one of three treatments. Upon calving, cows were moved into a fresh pen where they had free access to an automatic milking system (AMS; Austronaut A3, Lely Ltd., Maassluis, The Netherlands), but were encouraged through the AMS if their voluntary attendance was less than 3 visits that day. Cows were managed per site standard operating procedures.
Cows were fed a partial mixed ration (PMR) twice daily and were provided with pelleted concentrate feed in the AMS. S. baicalensis extract (Groupe CCPA, Janze, France) was combined with the dairy’s standard robot feed formulation and pelleted. The control and treatment pelleted feeds were stored in two feed bins that independently supplied the milking robots. Treatments were (1) control (n = 39), (2) shortterm (5-day) administration after calving of the SBE pellet (n = 42; SBE5), and (3) long-term (60-day) administration after calving of the SBE pellets (n = 40; SBE60). Treatments began within 24 hours after calving. All cows received the control pellet, with the amount based on stage of lactation and milk production. Treatment cows were allocated 1.8 kg of the treatment pellet (delivering 100 g test material/day) in place of an equal amount of control pellet across all milkings for either 5 or 60 days. Pellet allocation was based solely on days in milk (DIM) during the first 50 days of lactation, then from day 51 until 2 weeks prior to dry off, total pellet allocation was based on a feed table, which incorporated milk production. The feeding program distributed the target amount of treatment feed across the average number of daily milkings per cow. Due to the nature of AMS, voluntary deviations from a cow’s average number of milkings resulted in slight excesses or shortfalls in actual provision of pellet compared to the targeted allocation, and instances when not all the feed allocated for that particular
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension

Service 3

Dairy Research 2017
milking was dispensed were recorded as rest feed. Reported pellet intake is the difference between total pellet allowance and rest feed.
The PMR, control pellets, and treatment pellets were sampled every 2 weeks and composited by month for nutrient analysis by Dairy One Forage Laboratory (Ithaca, NY). Nutrient analyses are reported as averages across the study for the PMR in Table 1 and the pelleted feeds in Table 2.
Milk samples were collected on days 1, 3, and once during days 5–12 of lactation, followed by weekly sampling for the remainder of the 120-day collection period. Milk samples collected during the first 2 weeks of lactation were used for both biomarker analysis (haptoglobin and β-hydroxybutyrate [BHBA]) and component analysis; subsequent samples were used only for composition analysis. Milk composition was analyzed by MQT Lab Services (Kansas City, MO).
Cows were scored every 2 weeks for body condition score (BCS) on a 5-point scale (1 = extremely thin to 5 = extremely obese) from week -3 to week 17 relative to calving. Daily milk production, DIM, number of milkings per day, programmed feed daily allocated and feed provided for both pelleted feeds, and rumination data were recorded on an individual cow basis and collected using the management software, Time for Cows (T4C, Lely Ltd., Maassluis, The Netherlands). Culling data were reported in PC Dart by the farm staff.
Results and Discussion Treatment Provision and Total Pellet Offered Test material delivered for the first 5 DIM was not different between SBE5 and SBE60 (P = 0.41; 80.8 and 83.1 ± 0.34 g/day, respectively). Mean test material provision for SBE60 ranged between 92 and 98 g/d during weeks 1–9 of lactation. Pellet feeding records (T4C) confirmed that no treatment feed was allocated to control cows nor to SBE5 cows after day 5 of lactation. Total pellet offered over the first 63 DIM (Table 3) differed by treatment and week, and had a treatment × week interaction (all P < 0.001; Figure 1). Pellet offered was greater for SBE60 cows compared to control cows during week 1–9 (P < 0.001) and tended to be increased across week 1–36 (P < 0.10). Daily rumination time through 120 DIM was not different for control cows compared to either SBE5 or SBE60 over weeks 1–9 or 10–17 (all P > 0.55) and no treatment × week interaction was observed (P = 0.39; Table 3). Milk Production and Composition Milk yield did not differ between SBE5 and control, during the treatment period (weeks 1–9; P = 0.35) or the carryover period (weeks 10–43; P = 0.73). Milk yield tended to increase for SBE60 compared to control during weeks 1–9 (P = 0.07) and was significantly increased during week 10–43 (P = 0.04; Figure 2). Whole-lactation milk yields (305-day) were 24,795, 25,596, and 27,924 ± 1,026 lb for control, SBE5, and SBE60; significant differences were detected between SBE60 and control (P = 0.03), but not between SBE5 and control (P = 0.60). Milking frequency was not affected by either SBE5 (P = 0.60) or SBE60 (P = 0.19) during the first 63 DIM, but milking frequency was increased for SBE60 during the carryover period compared
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension

Service 4

Dairy Research 2017
to control (P = 0.04) whereas no difference was detected between SBE5 and control (P = 0.48). As expected, milking frequency differed by week (P < 0.001), but no overall treatment × week interaction was observed (P = 0.11). Despite the difference in milking frequency, milk yield per milking did not differ by treatment during the treatment or carryover periods (all P > 0.65).
Milk composition data during the first 17 weeks of lactation are summarized in Table 4. There were no treatment effects on milk fat or protein concentration during the treatment or carryover periods (all P ≥ 0.15). Milk lactose concentration tended to be increased for SBE60 compared to control during the treatment period (P = 0.06), but not the carryover period (P = 0.25), and was not affected by SBE5. Milk fat yield was increased in SBE60 during both the treatment and carryover period compared to control (both P = 0.04), whereas SBE5 was not different from control in either period (both P ≥ 0.50). Milk protein yield tended to be increased for SBE60 compared to control in the treatment period (P = 0.09) and was statistically greater during the carryover period (P = 0.01), but again did not differ between SBE5 and control (P ≥ 0.13). Milk lactose yield was increased for SBE60 but not SBE5 compared to control during the treatment period (P = 0.03 and 0.26, respectively). During the carryover period, milk lactose yield continued to be greater for SBE60 compared to control (P = 0.02), and SBE5 tended to increase milk lactose yield compared to control (P = 0.07).
Somatic cell count was decreased by SBE60 compared to control during the treatment period (P = 0.02) with a tendency for a difference in week 3 and significant effects in weeks 4–6 and 8 (Figure 3). Treatment SBE5 did not affect SCC (P = 0.37) during weeks 1–9, and neither SBE5 or SBE60 affected SCC during the carryover period (P = 0.29 and 0.13, respectively).
Overall there was no treatment effect on BCS (P = 0.44) with means being 3.40, 3.30, and 3.31 ± 0.06 for control, SBE5, and SBE60. As anticipated, body condition score differed by week (P < 0.001), but there was no treatment effect on prepartum or postpartum BCS (treatment × week: P = 0.57). Milk Markers of Inflammation and Metabolism Neither milk haptoglobin nor milk BHBA showed significant treatment effects (P = 0.97 and 0.89, respectively; Table 5) or treatment × DIM effects (P = 0.45 and 0.47). Milk haptoglobin concentrations were greatest the day after calving (when inflammation is greatest) and subsequently declined for day 3 and day 5–12 milk samples (P < 0.001). The BHBA concentration also had a DIM effect (P < 0.0001), increasing from day 1 to day 5–12 samples.
Time to Pregnancy, Disease Incidence, and Herd Retention Survival analyses through 305 DIM were completed for time to pregnancy and removal from the herd. There was no treatment effect on time to pregnancy (P = 0.34). At 365 days after treatment initiation, 13 of 40 control, 15 of 44 SBE5, and 6 of 38 SBE60 cows had left the herd, and after accounting for other risk factors, SBE60 tended to decrease the risk of removal from the herd by 64% compared to control (P = 0.07; risk ratio for removal: 0.41, 95% confidence interval: 0.11, 0.99). Treatment SBE5 did not affect retention in the herd. Incidence of several diseases are reported in Table 6. The
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension

Service 5

Dairy Research 2017
only disease incidence affected by treatment was mastitis, being lesser for both SBE5 and SBE60 compared to control (P = 0.04 and 0.05, respectively). Treatment SBE60 tended to decrease the hazard of leaving the herd compared to control and SBE5 (P = 0.07). Conclusions Supplementation of dairy cows with Scutellaria baicalensis for 60 days increased wholelactation milk yield compared to control cows. Milk fat, protein, and lactose yields increased through 120 DIM and SCC was decreased during the treatment period for the 60-d treatment compared to control cows. Milk production parameters were not different for short-term administration (5-day) compared to control cows. Other than milk SCC and reduced incidence of mastitis, there were no suggestions of impacts on health outcomes. Time to pregnancy was unaffected, but retention in the herd was increased. Overall, long-term administration of S. baicalensis effectively increased milk production, although the mechanism by which this was achieved is unknown.
Table 1. Nutritional composition of the partial mixed ration (PMR) Nutrient % of dry matter (DM) Standard deviation DM, % as-fed 57.06 0.27 Crude protein 18.71 0.37 Acid detergent fiber 20.89 1.54 Neutral detergent fiber 31.96 2.31 Net energy for lactation, Mcal/kg 1.65 0.04
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension

Service 6

Dairy Research 2017
Table 2. Ingredient and nutritional composition of the control and treatment pellet Item Control pellet Treatment pellet Standard deviation Ingredient, % of dry matter (DM) Ground corn 42.47 42.44 Wheat middlings 27.76 27.23 Wheat flour 15.16 10.10 Soybean meal (47.5%) 10.92 10.92 Molasses 3.16 3.16 Super bind1 0.53 0.53 Test feed premix2 — 5.62
Nutrient, analyzed, % of DM (unless otherwise specified) DM, % as-fed 87.60 87.44 0.81 Crude protein 17.33 17.30 0.38 Acid detergent fiber 6.77 5.30 0.70 Neutral detergent fiber 15.33 14.52 0.94 NEL,3 Mcal/kg 1.94 1.94 0.02 1Modified lignin sulfonate pellet binder (Bonaventure Chemicals, Inc., Weston, FL). 2Test feed premix included wheat flour, calcium carbonate, natural flavoring and Scutellaria baicalensis extract. 3Net energy for lactation.
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension

Service 7

Dairy Research 2017
Table 3. Treatment means for weekly total pellet offered, milk yield, and milking frequency for cows fed control or S. baicalensis extract for either 5 days (SBE5) or 60 days (SBE60) following calving P-values
Control SBE5 SBE60 SEM1
Con vs. SBE5
Con vs. SBE60
Total pellet offered, lb/d d 1-63 11.6 11.7 12.5 0.31 0.77 < 0.01 d 64–301 11.0 11.4 11.6 0.33 0.13 0.02 Milk yield, lb/d d 1–63 93.6 99.1 104.1 4.4 0.35 0.07 d 64–301 78.0 79.9 88.2 4.2 0.73 0.04 Milking frequency, d-1 d 1–63 3.24 3.34 3.48 0.21 0.60 0.19 d 64–301 2.56 2.67 2.84 0.18 0.48 0.04 Milk per visit, lb d 1–63 30.6 31.2 31.1 1.65 0.70 0.75 d 64–301 31.0 30.6 31.0 1.39 0.92 0.99
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension

Service 8

Dairy Research 2017
Table 4. Rumination time through 120 DIM and milk composition for the first 17 weeks of lactation of control cows and cows supplemented with S. baicalensis extract (SBE) for either 5 days (SBE5) or 60days (SBE60) following calving P-values
Control SBE5 SBE60 SEM
Con vs. SBE5
Con vs. SBE60
Rumination, min/d d 1–63 429.9 427.3 429.0 8.20 0.76 0.92 d 64–120 410.3 405.8 409.9 7.30 0.58 0.95 Milk fat, % d 1–63 3.84 3.84 3.84 0.17 0.95 0.99 d 64–120 3.24 3.08 3.29 0.18 0.28 0.77 Milk protein, % d 1–63 3.16 3.10 3.12 0.06 0.40 0.54 d 64–120 2.97 2.89 2.97 0.05 0.15 0.99 Milk lactose, % d 1–63 4.87 4.89 4.95 0.04 0.54 0.06 d 64–120 4.92 4.95 4.97 0.04 0.46 0.25 Milk fat, lb/d d 1–63 3.55 3.68 3.90 0.18 0.50 0.04 d 64–120 2.98 3.04 3.33 0.18 0.73 0.04 Milk protein, lb/d d 1–63 2.95 3.09 3.22 0.13 0.42 0.09 d 64–120 2.71 2.95 3.11 0.11 0.13 0.01 Milk lactose, lb/d d 1–63 4.63 4.92 5.20 0.22 0.26 0.03 d 64–120 4.56 5.03 5.18 0.20 0.07 0.02 SCC, log10 cells/mL d 1–63 2.19 2.07 1.86 0.13 0.37 0.02 d 64–120 2.13 1.98 1.91 0.14 0.29 0.13 SCC = somatic cell count.
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension

Service 9

Dairy Research 2017
Table 5. Milk haptoglobin and BHBA on days 1, 3, and 5–12 of lactation for control cows and cows receiving S. baicalensis extract (SBE) for either 5 days (SBE5) or 60 days (SBE60) after calving P-values1
Control SBE5 SBE60 SEM Trt DIM
Trt × DIM Haptoglobin, µg/mL 0.97 < 0.001 0.45 d 1 4.98 3.54 5.47 1.04 d 3 1.53 1.70 1.44 0.35 d 5–12 0.59 0.69 0.50 0.13 BHBA, µM 0.89 < 0.001 0.47 d 1 264.0 265.3 249.4 23.6 d 3 639.7 609.7 632.2 22.6 d 5–12 729.1 746.7 717.8 18.6 1Treatment: P-value for treatment effect; DIM: P-value for time (days in milk) effect.
Table 6. Disease incidence through 250 DIM for control cows and cows receiving S. baicalensis extract (SBE) for either 5 days (SBE5) or 60 days (SBE60) after calving Control SBE5 SBE60 At-risk 39 43 40 Fever 3 1 1 Milk fever 1 2 2 Displaced abomasum 0 0 0 Retained placenta 2 5 4 Metritis 3 4 6 Lame 2 2 0 Off feed 3 2 1 Mastitis1 13 6* 6* Other 0 1 2 1Mastitis incidence tended to differ by treatment (P = 0.06). *Control vs. SBE5: P = 0.04. *Control vs. SBE60: P = 0.05.
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service 10
Dairy Research 2017
Control SBE5 SBE60
Total pellet offered, lb/d
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
Week 43753 21191715 4113 39373511 3331299 272523 Figure 1. Weekly total pellet offered (control + treatment) of control cows and cows supplemented with S. baicalensis during the first 5 day (SBE5) or 60 day (SBE60) of lactation. Data were analyzed by treatment period (weeks 1–9) and carryover period (weeks 10–36). Total pellet offered was increased for SBE60 compared to control during the weeks 1–9 (P < 0.01) and from weeks 10–43 (P = 0.02). Total pellet offered was not different between SBE5 and control during either weeks 1–9 (P = 0.77) or weeks 10–43 (P = 0.13). A treatment × week interaction was detected (P < 0.001), and differences between SBE60 and control are indicated by * (P < 0.05) and † (P < 0.10).
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service 11
Dairy Research 2017
Control SBE5 SBE60
Milk yield, lb/d
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1
Week 43753 21191715 4113 39373511 3331299 272523 Figure 2. Milk yield of control cows and cows supplemented with S. baicalensis extract (SBE) during the first 5 days (SBE5) or 60 days (SBE60) of lactation. Data were analyzed by treatment period (weeks 1–9) and carryover period (weeks 10–43). Milk yield tended to be increased for SBE60 compared to control from weeks 1–9 (P = 0.07) and was significantly increased from weeks 10–43 (P = 0.04). Milk yield was not different between SBE5 and control during weeks 1–9 (P = 0.35) or weeks 10–43 (P = 0.73). A treatment × week interaction was detected (P < 0.03), and differences between SBE60 and control are indicated by * (P < 0.05) and † (P < 0.10).
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service 12
Dairy Research 2017
Control SBE5 SBE60
SCC, log10 cells/mL
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
1
Week 17432 11109876 16 155 141312 Figure 3. Somatic cell count (SCC) of control cows and cows supplemented with S. baicalensis extract (SBE) during the first 5 days (SBE5) or 60 days (SBE60) of lactation. Data were analyzed for the treatment period (weeks 1–9) and carryover period (weeks 10–17). Somatic cell count was not different between SBE5 and control during weeks 1–9 (P = 0.37) or weeks 10–17 (P = 0.29). Somatic cell count was decreased for SBE60 compared to control during weeks 1–9 (P = 0.02), but not during weeks 10–17 (P = 0.13). No treatment × week interaction was detected (P = 0.16). Differences between SBE60 and control are indicated by * (


  • 0

Nutritionist for an exciting position at Nutristar in SA

We required a exciting Nutritionist for an exciting position at Nutristar in SA = mail CV to info@maywoodharper.co.za.


  • 0

“whats new”

Brio Mite P maintains laying performances during mite infestations. Read more…
“ Newly registered Brio mite to manage mite.”

 


  • 0

“ Animal feed nutritionist required for Nutristar in South Africa”

Category : Uncategorized

“ Animal feed nutritionist required for Nutristar in South Africa”

Please send detail VC to Tiaan@maywoodharper.co.za.


  • 0

Better digestibility and a more efficient use of feed in pig fattening

Category : Uncategorized

If the decrease of the production cost is a constant challenge, feed cost is one of its major components. Indeed, knowing that feed represents from 65-70% of the total cost of production and that energy represents 86% of the cost in swine diets, working on feed efficiency, and improving the Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR), is definitely a significant economic issue and a major challenge for pig producers.

by Pierre Montnach, Pig Product Manager, CCPA, France. www.groupe-ccpa.com

To improve this indicator, it can be interesting to work on several aspects, both on feed and animal levels, such as: l Optimising the feed digestibility by the choice of adapted raw materials free from anti-nutritional factors. l Improving the feed digestibility by cooking or pelleting processes. l Enhancing the physiological digestive abilities of the pigs, with special nutrients or a combination of them. For more than 15 years, the advanced research on plant extracts has been at the centre of the knowhow of the CCPA Group for all animal species and, in particular, for pigs, to drive towards a more efficient feed use and reduced total production costs. Through this phyto-expertise, the deep knowledge of the actions of a large number of plant extracts has enabled CCPA to select those with a physiological action on digestion, and specifically some stimulating the production of enzymes.

The benefits of spices

Among the nutritional specialties resulting from the R&D of the CCPA Group, one of them, called Crea Advance, can optimise the digestive process of swine for an optimal use of the nutrients (proteins, energy and lipids), from post weaning to the fattening period. Its originality lies in its composition based on a synergistic association of vegetable extracts and spices. The three spices in its formulation act in synergy and have complementary effects on the various segments of the digestive tract (see Table 1), leading to a better digestibility of the feed and, more generally, of the organic matter. Moreover, these spices influence the structure of the intestinal barrier favourably. Furthermore, by its original mode of action, this new solution enables a release of energy and amino acids. Several trials in CCPA experimental farms evaluated and attributed a nutritional value of the amount of these released nutrients. These measures obtained during in vivo trials in farms were confirmed with laboratory in vitro experimentations (Artemis Laboratory, France). The crossed results established an objective evaluation of the energy and protein savings, as follows: l +1.3% on energy digestibility. l +2% on total protein digestibility. l +1.3% on organic matter digestibility. As far as feed cost is concerned, that represents a saving of about €2.5 per ton of complete feed. In pig farms, these values would be similar to a FCR improved from 3.0 to 4.2%.

The proof in the field

These good results have been successfully checked in field conditions, by varying different criteria: l Animal weight (12-120kg). l Feed program (single or combined). l Raw materials used in the feed (cereals, co-products). l Levels of energy and proteins (high or low). l Genetics used (more or less muscular). These trials were led in three European countries, with a total of 3,500 pigs in breeding systems allowing an accurate measure of performance (especially the FCR), with a product incorporation into liquid or dry feed (Table 2).
It is important to note that the improvement of the FCR did not adversely impact the other performance criteria: daily weight gain, carcase quality, mortality, etc.

Conclusion

In conclusion, acting on digestive enzyme secretion appears as a good way to significantly improve the FCR. The farm trials results of Crea Advance confirmed the scientific data and enabled the technical response of this natural combination of plant extracts and spices to be predicted precisely. In a market more and more receptive to money saving and respect for the environment, CCPA Group’s new approach is definitely an interesting way to improve breeding profitability. n
Better digestibility and a more efficient use of feed in pig fattening
Table 1. Crea Advance has a formulation combining three spices with complementary effects.
Table 2. The synthesis of Crea Advance in field trials with 3,500 pigs.
Several trials were led in field conditions to evaluate the FCR improvement


  • 0

Minimize consequences of heat stress on dairy cows with natural complementation

Tags :

Category : Uncategorized

Heat stress is a major concern in the management of dairy herds which adversely impacts welfare, performances and farm profitability. Moreover, considering the global climate change – with an estimated average rise of temperature on earth, between 0.5 to 4.8°C by 2100 – the heat stress episodes should become more common in farms.

To measure heat stress, the best indicator remains the Temperature and Humidity Index (THI). Dairy cows struggle with heat stress when THI rises above 72 units. This level is reached, for example, from a temperature of 24°C and a humidity of 68% (see graph1).

Low heat stress

THI 68-71

 

Mild heat stress

THI 72-79

 

Mild to severe heat stress

THI 80-89

 

Extreme heat stress

THI 90-99

 

Death

>THI 99

 

Graph1: Heat stress diagram for dairy cows, Burgos Zimbelman and Collier, 2011

Above a 72-THI, each unit of supplementary THI will cause a fall of 0.2kg of milk/cow.

In Northern Europe, heat stress situations may even occur below this gradient. For example, a recent study in Scotland following the performance levels of a dairy herd during several years shows a decrease in milk production from a 60-THI (Hill and Wall, 2014).

 

Multiple consequences of heat stress

Heat stress has different consequences on dairy cows:

  • Above 71 °F (22°C), voluntary feed intake decreases, deteriorated by high humidity (table 1). To compensate this feed intake fall, there is an increase in body reserve mobilization.
Feed Intake (%) Relative Humidity (%)
50 60 70 80
Temperature (°F) 68 100 100 99 99
71.6 98 97 97 96
75.2 96 95 94 93
78.8 94 92 91 89
82.4 91 90 82 86
86 89 87 85 83

Table 1: Voluntary feed intake decreases with raising temperatures and humidity (Garcia and Diaz-Royon, South Dakota University, 2014).

  • There is also a redistribution of blood to the periphery to maximize radiant heat dissipation, while vasoconstriction occurs in the gastrointestinal tract. As a result, the exchanges at intestinal level are impaired in both ways: there is less nutrient assimilation in blood and there are potential risks of damage of the intestinal barrier.
  • Besides, panting increases heart rate and the excretion of carbonic gas. To maintain blood pH animal eliminates bicarbonates through kidney, leading to a metabolic acidosis. Moreover, the reduction of salivation increases the risk of acidosis.
  • Another consequence is an important loss of electrolytes, through sweating.
  • Several studies show an increase of the anoestrus period after calving, for dairy cows suffering from heat stress, largely due to a lack of energy intake.
  • Heat stress during the dry period of dairy cows decreases calf birth weight and compromises the passive IgG transfer from colostrum and cell-mediated immune function of the calves during the pre-weaning period (Tao, 2012).

All these impacts are even amplified with high-potential animals, which are particularly sensitive to temperature and hygrometry variations.

 

Nutrition to fight heat stress impacts

Due to the wide variety of heat stress impacts, it is very difficult to solve it with a unique and single mode of action. Among the possible options, nutrition can play an important role.

The nutritional solution Axion®Thermoplus incorporated to feed was developed to act at the different levels impaired by hot weather in order to maintain animal performance, through three several ways:

  • To prevent the feed intake drop, Axion®Thermoplus, as a specific blend of feed ingredients (with selected plant extracts and aroma), supports dry matter intake. In fact, its active components stimulate the activity of the key enzymes which contribute to feed digestibility (amylase, lipase, trypsine, and chymotrypsin).
  • The management of the mineral fraction via the use of Axion®Thermoplus (DCAD, buffers) also contributes to boost the feed intake with a better balance of electrolytes needs. Plant extracts increase salivary production which gives supplementary help for buffering the diet.
  • Plant extracts are also active in the general metabolism regulation, with a reduction of the heart rate and body temperature of the animals.

 

Field trial results

Dairy farms:

CCPA Group made several trials testing several diets and nutritional solutions, in different countries. In each country, an increase in milk production during hot period was seen for the batches of animals supplemented with Axion® Thermoplus: from 0.5 to 3 litres more, depending on different parameters. Even in farm with existing cooling system (for example in Viet Nam), a gain was seen with Axion® Thermoplus. In the following table are summarized several field trials led with two batches of animals, in different countries worldwide.

Location Number of animals Cattle breed THI Milk –Control group Milk – Axion® Thermoplus group Difference P-value
France 54 Prim Holstein 72 31.2 32.4 +1.2 p<0.05
Viet Nam 178 Prim Holstein 82 24.2 25 +0.8 p<0.05
Viet Nam 39 Prim Holstein 82 24 25.05 +1.05 p<0.05
Mexique 44 Prim Holstein 72 37 39.05 +2.05
Turquie 20 Prim Holstein 80 28.4 30.19 +1.76
Hongrie 632 Prim Holstein 79 29.46 31.73 +2.27
Brazil 175 Zebu Cross 75 30.6 31.6 +1 p<0.05
Brazil 36 Zebu Cross 79 18 19.3 +1.3 p<0.01

Table 2: Improving milk yield during heat stress, CCPA Group, 2016

It is also possible to reduce the impact of heat stress for small ruminant production. Indeed, another test with goats leads to the same kind of results.

 

Fattening units:

For fattening bulls, trials were also led in Brazil. These experiments have shown better performance levels and feed conversion rates with Axion® Thermoplus.

Location Number of animals Weight at start (kg) ADG –Control group ADG Axion® Thermoplus group FCR – Control group FCR -Axion® Thermoplus group
Brazil 1600 470 1020 1236 9.86 8.17
Brazil 700 400 1775 1845 6.11 5.96

Table 3: Increasing growth during heat stress, CCPA Group, 2012

Of course, beside nutrition, it is strongly recommended to control and adapt housing conditions and cooling systems and to select the time of feed distribution.

In order to evaluate the risk level of heat stress in farms, CCPA GROUP has also developed for the producers a heat stress application for smartphones (Iphone and Android) entitled: ThermoTool™, which can be downloaded for free on Apple Store: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/id981585161  and Google Play:  https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mobizel.thermotool. Thanks to this application, breeders can anticipate heat stress over 5 days and quickly adapt, if necessary, the management of their farm and the animal nutrition.

 

Jean PASCARD

Ruminant Product Manager

CCPA Group


  • 1

AXION THERMOCONTROL

AXION THERMOCONTROL
The weapon to fight against heat stress for
PIGS

 

Influence of HEAT STRESS on PRODUCTIVITY

Lactating sows are particularly Heat Sensitive. At more than 20-22°C, each degree reduces feed intake by 190 g/d, resulting in a reduction in milk production and piglet weight gain. In addition, body reserve mobilization will increase with a decrease in fertility, decreasing the subsequent litter size and increasing in the weaning to estrus interval ratio.

In Grower Pigs, especially during the Finisher Period, Heat Stress will reduce  Feed Intake and a reorientation of the metabolism which enhance Fatter Carcasses.

AXION THERMOCONTROL contains the plant extract Scutellaria baicalensis, reducing inflammation against heat stress

AXION THERMOCONTROL

  • Improves FEED INTAKE of pigs during HEAT STRESS
  • Improves the DIGESTIBILITY of the feed via the action of specific plant extracts on ENZYMATIC ACTIVITY
  • Lowers INFLAMMATION
  • Reduces RESPIRATORY RATE, resulting in less METABOLIC HEAT
  • Improves ELOCTROLYTE BALANCE due to HEAT STRESS

TRIALS:  Lactating sows

  • Feed intake was 10% higher
  • Body weight loss was 9% less
  • More than 250 g improvement in piglet weight at weaning.

TRIALS:  fattening period

  • Increased feed intake
  • Fewer days necessary to reach market weights (4 days).
  • At the same time, carcass weight was increased by 2 kg and the meat quality was improved (leaner carcasses).

For More Information:

Contact Herman Mynhardt at 0744129640 or herman.mynhardt@maywoodharper.co.za

 


Translate »