Can automated measures of lying time help assess lameness and leg lesions on tie-stall dairy farms?

Abstract The time that dairy cows spend lying down is an important measure of their comfort and lameness and injuries to hocks and knees are associated with alterations in lying time. We examined whether automated measures of lying time could identify cows and farms with problems of lameness or leg lesions. Data were collected from 40 lactating Holstein dairy cows from each of 100 tie-stall farms. The occurrence of lameness, hock and knee injuries was recorded and lying times were recorded automatically using accelerometers. There was large variation between individual cows, and between farms in all measures of lying time. At the cow level, there was no relationship ( P >0.10) between being lame and daily duration of lying time. A lower daily duration of lying time was found among cows with hock injuries (mean±SE: non-injured=12.79±0.06h, injured=12.21±0.06h; P P =0.04) than those without lesions. The median daily duration of lying time on a farm was negatively correlated with the prevalence of lameness ( r p =−0.27, P =0.006), of hock injuries ( r p =−0.35, P =0.003) and of knee injuries ( r p =−0.28, P =0.004). A canonical discriminant function with canonical coefficients of 0.63 for mean daily duration of lying down, and of 0.54 for mean bout frequency could correctly identify 72% of the farms that were above the median for percent of cows with hock or knee injuries or being lame (linear discriminant function: constant=−95.10, daily duration=11.39, bout frequency=4.83) and 68% of the farms below the median (linear discriminant function: constant=−106.95, daily duration=11.92, bout frequency=5.30) (Wilks Lambda test P =0.002). A criterion of a median lying time between 12h and 13h alone could identify over 60% of farms above or below the median for lameness, hock and knee lesion prevalence. Automated measures of lying time may be a useful animal-based measure to indicate farms with a high percentage of lame cows or cows with leg lesions.

[1]  M. Aldrin,et al.  Behavior of lactating Holstein-Friesian cows during spontaneous cycles of estrus. , 2011, Journal of dairy science.

[2]  J. Rushen,et al.  Effect of softer flooring in tie stalls on resting behavior and leg injuries of lactating cows. , 2007, Journal of dairy science.

[3]  L. Green,et al.  Assessment of the welfare of dairy caftle using animal-based measurements: direct observations and investigation of farm records , 2003, Veterinary Record.

[4]  T. Knowles,et al.  The development, implementation and testing of a lameness control programme based on HACCP principles and designed for heifers on dairy farms. , 2009, Veterinary journal.

[5]  J. Rushen,et al.  Prevalence of and factors associated with hock, knee, and neck injuries on dairy cows in freestall housing in Canada. , 2014, Journal of dairy science.

[6]  D. Weary,et al.  Benchmarking cow comfort on North American freestall dairies: lameness, leg injuries, lying time, facility design, and management for high-producing Holstein dairy cows. , 2012, Journal of dairy science.

[7]  D. Weary,et al.  Using gait score, walking speed, and lying behavior to detect hoof lesions in dairy cows. , 2009, Journal of dairy science.

[8]  D M Weary,et al.  Invited review: The welfare of dairy cattle--key concepts and the role of science. , 2009, Journal of dairy science.

[9]  D. Weary,et al.  The Welfare of Cattle , 2007 .

[10]  J. Rushen,et al.  Technical note: a comparison of 2 methods of assessing lameness prevalence in tiestall herds. , 2014, Journal of dairy science.

[11]  D. Weary,et al.  Hock lesions and free-stall design. , 2000, Journal of dairy science.

[12]  J. Rushen,et al.  A training programme to ensure high repeatability of injury scoring of dairy cows , 2012 .

[13]  J. Amory,et al.  The effect of lameness on lying behaviour of zero grazed Holstein dairy cattle , 2011 .

[14]  M. Endres,et al.  Herd-level risk factors for lameness in high-producing holstein cows housed in freestall barns. , 2007, Journal of dairy science.

[15]  D M Weary,et al.  Lying behavior as an indicator of lameness in dairy cows. , 2010, Journal of dairy science.

[16]  J Rushen,et al.  Assessing cow comfort: effects of two floor types and two tie stall designs on the behaviour of lactating dairy cows. , 2001, Applied animal behaviour science.

[17]  D. Kelton,et al.  Herd-level risk factors for seven different foot lesions in Ontario Holstein cattle housed in tie stalls or free stalls. , 2009, Journal of dairy science.

[18]  L. Pedersen,et al.  Quantifying behavioural priorities—effects of time constraints on behaviour of dairy cows, Bos taurus , 2005 .

[19]  D M Weary,et al.  Lying behavior: assessing within- and between-herd variation in free-stall-housed dairy cows. , 2009, Journal of dairy science.

[20]  D. Kelton,et al.  Tie-stall design and its relationship to lameness, injury, and cleanliness on 317 Ontario dairy farms. , 2005, Journal of dairy science.

[21]  L. Pedersen,et al.  The effect of reward duration on demand functions for rest in dairy heifers and lying requirements as measured by demand functions , 2005 .

[22]  A. Valros,et al.  Milk yield affects time budget of dairy cows in tie-stalls. , 2012, Journal of dairy science.

[23]  J. Krieter,et al.  Risk factors influencing lameness and claw disorders in dairy cows , 2005 .

[24]  Jeffrey Rushen,et al.  Automated monitoring of behavioural-based animal welfare indicators , 2012 .

[25]  J. Rushen,et al.  Sampling cows to assess lying time for on-farm animal welfare assessment. , 2012, Journal of dairy science.

[26]  S Dippel,et al.  Assessing lameness in cows kept in tie-stalls. , 2009, Journal of dairy science.

[27]  C. Brenninkmeyer,et al.  Risk factors for lameness in cubicle housed Austrian Simmental dairy cows. , 2009, Preventive veterinary medicine.