...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of dairy science >Evaluation of Different Energy Feeding Systems With Production Data from Lactating Dairy Cows Offered Grass Silage-Based Diets
【24h】

Evaluation of Different Energy Feeding Systems With Production Data from Lactating Dairy Cows Offered Grass Silage-Based Diets

机译:利用以青贮饲料为基础的泌乳奶牛的生产数据评估不同的能量饲喂系统

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

A set of data from 838 lactating dairy cows, drawn from 12 long-term feeding studies (at least 8 wk/period), was used to evaluate the energy feeding systems for dairy cows currently adopted in Australia, France, The Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The animals were offered mixed diets of concentrates, forage [grass silages (n = 33) and corn silages (n = 5)] ad libitum. Data used in the present evaluation were either measured [dry matter (DM) intake, milk production and live weight], measured/estimated [dietary metabolizable energy (ME) concentration] or estimated [milk energy output and live weight change (LWC)]. The mean-square prediction error (MSPE) was used for the evaluation. Total ME intake, milk yields, and LWC varied from 91 to 338 MJ/d, 7.7 to 48.9, and -1.23 to 1.73 kg/d, respectively. Australian and French systems predicted total energy requirement and milk yield relatively well, while British, Dutch and American systems underpredicted total energy requirement by proportionately 0.06, 0.04, and 0.03, respectively; and overpredicted milk yield by 0.09, 0.06, and 0.04. The Agricultural and Food Research Council (AFRC) each produced a relatively larger error of the bias (predicted - actual data) over the total MSPE for ME requirement and milk yield and a relatively smaller error of random than other systems. However, an addition of proportionately 0.05 to the total predicted ME requirement of AFRC, as suggested in this system and currently used in the UK, indicated the prediction accuracy of ME requirement and milk yield is similar to Australian and French systems. Nevertheless, all the systems had a poor prediction of LWC. For each system, the total prediction error (total MSPE) was mainly derived from the line (slope; 0.49 to 0.64 of total MSPE), while less derived from the random (0.20 to 0.48 of total MSPE), indicating a large variation between the predicted and actual LWC existed among individual cows. The residual plots of the residual differences in LWC against predicted LWC revealed that the prediction error was greater with increasing LWC. It is concluded that Australian and French systems have a better prediction of total energy requirement and milk yield than other systems, and LWC is an inappropriate indicator of energy balance in lactating dairy cows.
机译:一组来自12项长期喂养研究(至少8周/周期)的838头泌乳奶牛的数据,用于评估目前在澳大利亚,法国,荷兰,美国采用的奶牛的能量饲喂系统王国和美国。随意给动物提供浓缩饲料,草料[草青贮饲料(n = 33)和玉米青贮饲料(n = 5)]的混合饮食。本评估中使用的数据是测量的[干物质(DM)摄入量,产奶量和活重],测量/估计的[饮食代谢能(ME)浓度]或估计的[乳能量输出和活重变化(LWC)] 。均方根预测误差(MSPE)用于评估。 ME的总摄入量,牛奶产量和LWC分别从91到338 MJ / d,7.7到48.9和-1.23到1.73 kg / d。澳大利亚和法国的体系预测的总能量需求和牛奶产量相对较好,而英国,荷兰和美国的体系预测的总能量需求分别低估了0.06、0.04和0.03。并将牛奶产量高估了0.09、0.06和0.04。农业和食品研究理事会(AFRC)相对于ME需求和牛奶产量的总MSPE产生的偏差误差(预测-实际数据)相对较大,而与其他系统相比,随机误差相对较小。但是,如本系统所建议并当前在英国使用的,按比例向AFRC的总预测ME需求中添加0.05,表明ME需求和产奶量的预测准确性与澳大利亚和法国系统相似。然而,所有系统对LWC的预测都很差。对于每个系统,总预测误差(总MSPE)主要来自直线(斜率;总MSPE的0.49至0.64),而较少来自随机(总MSPE的0.20至0.48),这表明个体母牛之间存在预测的和实际的轻量级WC。 LWC相对于预测的LWC的残差差异的残差图显示,随着LWC的增加,预测误差更大。结论是,与其他系统相比,澳大利亚和法国的系统对总能量需求和产奶量的预测更好,LWC是泌乳奶牛能量平衡的不适当指标。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号