Literature DB >> 27320675

Prediction of drinking water intake by dairy cows.

J A D R N Appuhamy1, J V Judy2, E Kebreab3, P J Kononoff2.   

Abstract

Mathematical models that predict water intake by drinking, also known as free water intake (FWI), are useful in understanding water supply needed by animals on dairy farms. The majority of extant mathematical models for predicting FWI of dairy cows have been developed with data sets representing similar experimental conditions, not evaluated with modern cows, and often require dry matter intake (DMI) data, which may not be routinely available. The objectives of the study were to (1) develop a set of new empirical models for predicting FWI of lactating and dry cows with and without DMI using literature data, and (2) evaluate the new and the extant models using an independent set of FWI measurements made on modern cows. Random effect meta-regression analyses were conducted using 72 and 188 FWI treatment means with and without dietary electrolyte and daily mean ambient temperature (TMP) records, respectively, for lactating cows, and 19 FWI treatment means for dry cows. Milk yield, DMI, body weight, days in milk, dietary macro-nutrient contents, an aggregate milliequivalent concentration of dietary sodium and potassium (NaK), and TMP were used as potential covariates to the models. A model having positive relationships of DMI, dietary dry matter (DM%), and CP (CP%) contents, NaK, and TMP explained 76% of variability in FWI treatment means of lactating cows. When challenged on an independent data set (n=261), the model more accurately predicted FWI [root mean square prediction error as a percentage of average observed value (RMSPE%)=14.4%] compared with a model developed without NaK and TMP (RMSPE%=17.3%), and all extant models (RMSPE%≥15.7%). A model without DMI included positive relationships of milk yield, DM%, NaK, TMP, and days in milk, and explained 63% of variability in the FWI treatment means and performed well (RMSPE%=17.9%), when challenged on the independent data. New models for dry cows included positive relationships of DM% and TMP along with DMI or body weight. The new models with and without DMI explained 75 and 54% of the variability in FWI treatment means of dry cows and had RMSPE% of 12.8 and 15.2%, respectively, when evaluated with the literature data. The study offers a set of empirical models that can assist in determining drinking water needs of dairy farms.
Copyright © 2016 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  dairy cow; empirical model; potassium; sodium; water intake

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27320675     DOI: 10.3168/jds.2016-10950

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dairy Sci        ISSN: 0022-0302            Impact factor:   4.034


  7 in total

1.  Time of feeding and predictability of dry matter and water intake of grasscutters fed on grass and supplements containing varying levels of dietary fiber.

Authors:  J K Nyameasem; S Affedzie-Obresi; E K Adu
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2018-03-25       Impact factor: 1.559

Review 2.  A review on water intake in dairy cattle: associated factors, management practices, and corresponding effects.

Authors:  Amit Kumar Singh; Champak Bhakat; Pooja Singh
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 1.559

3.  Environmental effects on water intake and water intake prediction in growing beef cattle.

Authors:  Cashley M Ahlberg; Kristi Allwardt; Ashley Broocks; Kelsey Bruno; Levi McPhillips; Alexandra Taylor; Clint R Krehbiel; Michelle S Calvo-Lorenzo; Chris J Richards; Sara E Place; Udaya DeSilva; Deborah L VanOverbeke; Raluca G Mateescu; Larry A Kuehn; Robert L Weaber; Jennifer M Bormann; Megan M Rolf
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-09-29       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  Chewing and Drinking Activity during Transition Period and Lactation in Dairy Cows Fed Partial Mixed Rations.

Authors:  Viktoria Brandstetter; Viktoria Neubauer; Elke Humer; Iris Kröger; Qendrim Zebeli
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 2.752

Review 5.  'Can They Take the Heat?'-The Egyptian Climate and Its Effects on Livestock.

Authors:  Amira A Goma; Clive J C Phillips
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-29       Impact factor: 3.231

6.  Resource requirements for ecosystem conservation: A combined industrial and natural ecology approach to quantifying natural capital use in nature.

Authors:  Adam R Mason; Alfred Gathorne-Hardy; Chris White; Yves Plancherel; Jem Woods; Rupert J Myers
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2022-07-31       Impact factor: 3.167

7.  Multivariate analysis identifying the main factors associated with cow productivity and welfare in tropical smallholder dairy farms in Vietnam.

Authors:  Nguyen N Bang; Nguyen V Chanh; Nguyen X Trach; Duong N Khang; Ben J Hayes; John B Gaughan; Russell E Lyons; David M McNeill
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2022-09-22       Impact factor: 1.893

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.