4.7 Article

Stress responses during milking; Comparing conventional and automatic milking in primiparous dairy cows

Journal

JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE
Volume 85, Issue 12, Pages 3206-3216

Publisher

AMER DAIRY SCIENCE ASSOC
DOI: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(02)74409-3

Keywords

stress; automatic milking; behavior; hormone

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A comparative study was performed to evaluate the differences in behavioral and physiological stress responses during milking between cows that were milked by an automated milking system (AM-cows) and cows that were milked in a conventional tandem parlor (TM-cows). In a randomized design, 36 primiparous Holstein-Friesian dairy cows were observed and blood sampled (1-min intervals) individually during milking. AM-cows spent less time standing with their heads outside the feeding trough than TM-cows and had a lower heart rate. In addition, AM-cows had lower maximum plasma adrenaline and noradrenaline concentrations during milking. No differences were found in the number of steps. After tactile stimulation of the teats either by hand or by the cleaning brush, mean oxytocin concentrations did not differ. In AM-cows, however, elevated oxytocin levels were prolonged at the end of milking. Averaged over the first five blood samples, AM-cows tended to have higher plasma cortisol concentrations than TM-cows, but median fecal concentrations of the cortisol metabolite dioxoandrostane were comparable. Maximum quarter milk flow, maximum udder milk flow and residual milk as a percentage of the total milk volume was comparable. From this study it is concluded that behavioral and physiological responses, both in automatically and in conventionally milked cows', were relatively low and were typical for cows being milked. We therefore conclude that, as far as the welfare of the dairy cow during milking is concerned, automatic milking and conventional milking are equally acceptable.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available