RESUMO
The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of two rumen-native microbial feed supplements (MFS) on milk production, milk composition, and feed efficiency. A total of 90 multiparous cows between 40 and 60 d in milk were enrolled in a randomized block design study. Within each block (baseline milk yield), cows were randomly assigned to: control (no microbial feed supplementation), MFS1 (0.33 g/kg total mixed ration [TMR] of an MFS containing a minimum of Clostridium beijerinckii at 2 × 106 CFU/g and Pichia kudriavzevii at 2 × 107 CFU/g), or MFS2 (0.33 g/kg TMR of a MFS containing a minimum of C. beijerinckii at 2 × 106 CFU/g, P. kudriavzevii at 2 × 107 CFU/g, Ruminococcus bovis at 2 × 107 CFU/g, and Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens at 2 × 107 CFU/g). Cows were housed in a single group and fed the study diets ad libitum for 270 d. Individual milk yield was recorded using electronic milk meters, and milk fat and protein were measured using optical in-line analyzers at each of two daily milkings. Treatment and treatment by time effects were assessed through multiple linear regression analyses. Treatment effects were observed for milk and energy-corrected milk (ECM) yields, milk fat and protein yields and concentrations, dry matter intake (DMI), and feed efficiency; those effects were conditional to time for milk yield, DMI, and feed efficiency. Overall, milk, ECM, fat, and protein yields were higher for MFS2 compared with control cows (+3.0, 3.7, 0.12, and 0.12 kg/d, respectively). Compared with MFS1, milk yield was higher and protein yield tended to be higher for MFS2 cows (+2.9 and 0.09 kg/d, respectively). In contrast, MFS1 cows produced 0.17 and 0.08 units of percentage per day more fat and protein than MFS2 cows, and 0.07 units of percentage per day more protein than control cows. Dry matter intake and feed efficiency were higher for MFS2 cows compared with MFS1 cows (+1.3 kg/d and 0.06, respectively), and feed efficiency was higher for MFS2 cows compared with control cows (+0.04). Where observed, treatment by time effects suggest that the effects of MFS2 were more evident as time progressed after supplementation was initiated. No effects of microbial supplementation were observed on body weight, body condition score, somatic cell count, or clinical mastitis case incidence. In conclusion, the supplementation of MFS2 effectively improved economically important outcomes such as milk yield, solids, and feed efficiency.
This study evaluates the effects of two rumen-native microbial feed supplements (MFS) on milk yield, composition, and feed efficiency in lactating dairy cows. Ninety multiparous Holstein cows between 40 and 60 d in milk were assigned to control (no microbial feed supplementation), MFS1 (Clostridium beijerinckii and Pichia kudriavzevii), or MFS2 (C. beijerinckii, P. kudriavzevii, Ruminococcus bovis, and Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens) total mixed ration supplementation. Overall, MFS2 cows had higher milk and milk component yields than control and MFS1, while MFS1 cows had higher milk component concentrations than control and MFS2. Feed efficiency was higher for MFS2 compared with control and MFS1 cows. Microbial feed supplementation improved economically important outcomes such as milk yield, solids, and feed efficiency.
