Early-life contact with non-maternal adult cows and a pasture-based rearing environment influence behavioural responses of dairy heifers to novelty.

The complexity experienced in early life can affect trait development of individuals, including sociability and fearfulness. The modern dairy calf's rearing environment often lacks environmental and social complexity. This study examined the effects of early-life, non-maternal adult contact and access to a physically complex environment on the responses of dairy heifers to several stressors, including restraint, social isolation, and novelty at 18 months of age. From the age of 2-13 weeks, 60 dairy heifers (Bos taurus) were reared according to one of three treatments applied to 20 calves each: (1) Hand-reared at pasture in groups of ten, with three unrelated dry cows (+S); (2) Hand-reared at pasture in groups of ten (-S); or (3) Hand-reared in sheds in groups of 10-12 as a commercial control (CC). At 13 weeks, all treatment groups were mixed and managed at pasture as a single herd. At 18 months, the responses of 50 heifers to restraint in a crush, social isolation and a novel object were observed (+S = 16, -S = 17, CC = 17). Treatment did not influence responses to restraint or social isolation, but influenced some indicators of fearfulness during exposure to a novel object. Six +S heifers interacted with the novel object compared to 0 -S and one CC, and CC heifers spent around 50% more time in vigilance than +S or -S heifers. Dairy heifers provided with early-life social enrichment in the form of non-maternal adult contact may have reduced fear of novelty. The implications for lifelong ability to adapt to novel situations, such as entry into the milking herd, should be assessed.

The effectiveness of a virtual fencing technology to allocate pasture and herd cows to the milking shed.

Virtual fencing technology provides an opportunity to rethink the management of intensive grazing systems in general, yet most studies have used products developed and applied to more extensive livestock systems. This research aimed to assess the application of a virtual fencing technology developed for the intensive pastoral dairy industry. The Halter system uses 2 primary cues, sound and vibration, and one aversive secondary cue, a low energy electrical pulse, to confine cows to a pasture allocation and remotely herd cows. Two groups of 40 mid-lactation multiparous dairy cows were studied (Bos taurus, predominantly Friesian and Friesian × Jersey, parity 1-8). Cows were milked twice per day and provided 9 kg pasture DM/day in a 24-h allocation, supplemented with 7 kg silage and 6 kg grain DM/day. Training to the Halter system occurred over 10 d after which cows were managed with the technology for a further 28 d. The type and time of cues delivered was recorded by each collar and communicated via a base-station to cloud data storage. Cows took less than a day to start responding to the sound cues delivered while held on a pasture allocation and were moving to the milking parlor without human intervention by d 4 of training. On training d 1, at least 60% of sound cues resulted in an electrical pulse. Across training d 2-10, 6.4% of sound cues resulted in a pulse. After the 10-d training period, 2.6% of sound cues resulted in a pulse. During the management period, 90% of cows spent ≤1.7 min/d beyond the virtual fence, received ≤ 0.71 pulse/d in the paddock and received ≤ 1 pulse/d during virtual herding to the parlor. By the final week of the management period, 50% of cows received zero pulses/week in the paddock and 35% received zero pulses/week during virtual herding. The number of pulses delivered per day and the pulse:sound cue ratio was lower in this study than that previously reported using other virtual fencing technologies. We conclude that the Halter technology is successful at containing lactating dairy cows in an intensive grazing system as well as at remotely herding animals to the milking parlor.

A Pilot Study on the Feasibility of an Extended Suckling System for Pasture-Based Dairies.

This study investigated cow-calf productivity in a 10-week, pasture-based, extended suckling system featuring part-time cow-calf contact and once-a-day milking. A total of 30 dairy cows and their calves were assigned to two treatments: (1) cow and calf managed in an extended suckling system; or (2) cow and calf separated at birth and managed as usual. Cow-calf pairs grazed together during the day and spent the night separated by fence-line contact. The dams were reunited with the calves after once-a-day milking every morning. The commercial treatment pairs were separated after birth, and cows were milked twice a day and managed within the farm herd. Commercial calves were reared and managed as per commercial Australian practices. Cow-calf dams yielded 9 L/cow/day less saleable milk (p < 0.001), and their milk had lower fat (p = 0.04) but a higher protein percentage (p < 0.001) than commercial cows during pre-weaning. However, milk yield and composition were comparable post-weaning. Dam-suckled calves gained weight faster and were therefore weaned 2 weeks earlier than commercial calves, which were offered 8 L/day milk. This study has demonstrated a novel system of extended cow-calf suckling that could be practical to implement in pasture-based dairies. The long-term effects and scalability of the extended suckling system described here require further validation.

Contact with Mature Cows and Access to Pasture during Early Life Shape Dairy Heifer Behaviour at Integration into the Milking Herd.

This study aimed to determine the effects of early-life physical and social enrichment on the ability of dairy heifers to integrate into a herd of mature cows. Fifty heifer calves were reared from the ages of 2-13 weeks in one of three treatments: (1) Hand-reared and group-housed in sheds (CC); (2) Hand-reared and group-housed at pasture (-S); or (3) Hand-reared and group-housed at pasture, with 3 non-familial dry cows per group (+S). At 23 months of age, these heifers were introduced in groups to small herds of cows (Cows) at pasture. Social interactions were recorded continuously for two 1-h periods. Feeding, ruminating and resting behaviours of all animals and walking, standing and lying behaviours of 36 heifers only (+S = 14, -S = 13, CC = 9) were recorded for 48 h after mixing. Heifers that were managed as calves according to the CC treatment delivered less agonistic behaviour to other heifers after mixing than those reared in the +S or -S treatments (p = 0.002 and p = 0.041, respectively). On Day 2, +S heifers and cows spent the lowest proportion of time feeding (p = 0.961), with -S heifers spending significantly more time feeding than cows (p = 0.046), while CC heifers spent more time feeding than both +S heifers and cows (p = 0.027 and p < 0.002, respectively). Increasing the complexity of the early-life environment, particularly socially, may aid heifers in integrating into groups of multiparous cows later in life and shape their lifelong social experiences with same-age conspecifics.

An effective environmental enrichment framework for the continual improvement of production animal welfare.

Substrates and objects are provided to farm animals on the assumption that they improve animal welfare by enriching the environment, but these often fail to consider the extent to which an environmental enrichment (EE) improves animal welfare, if at all. Furthermore, there are numerous definitions of EE, each with a unique expectation. If expectations of animal welfare improvement are set too high, industry uptake may be thwarted, but if thresholds are set too low it will not result in meaningful improvements to animal welfare. We propose an EE framework based on revised definitions of EE that reflect improvements to various components of animal welfare: (i) pseudo-enrichment; (ii) EE for meeting basic needs; (iii) EE for pleasure; and (iv) EE for positive welfare balance. This framework requires short- and long-term assessments to determine the impact of the EE, although many are lacking in the production animal literature. Redefining EE with a focus on specific animal welfare outcomes will assist producers in identifying the optimal EE for their enterprise. Subsequently, we encourage dialogue between farmers, researchers and industry stakeholders when designing environmental enrichment programmes. This framework is a science-based tool that can be used to inform the development of clear EE assessment protocols and requirements for animal welfare legislation, assurance programmes and industry. This evidence-based framework ensures that the focus is on the outcome of EE programmes rather than the intent. Importantly, this framework has the flexibility to adapt even as baseline environments evolve, ensuring the continual improvement to production animal welfare.

Erratum: An effective environmental enrichment framework for the continual improvement of production animal welfare - ERRATUM.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1017/awf.2023.5.].

Virtual fencing technology to intensively graze lactating dairy cattle. I: Technology efficacy and pasture utilization.

Virtual fencing is promoted as the next advancement for rotational grazing systems. This experiment compared the capacity of conventional temporary electric versus virtual fencing to contain a herd of 30 lactating dairy cows within the boundaries of their daily pasture allocation (inclusion zone). Cows were moved each day to a new rectangular paddock that was divided crosswise into an inclusion and exclusion zone by a single linear electric (first 10 d) or virtual (second 10 d) front-fence. A 3-d virtual fence training period separated the 2 treatments. Virtual fences were imposed using a pre-commercial prototype of the eShepherd virtual fencing system (Agersens Pty Ltd.). Neckband-mounted devices replaced the visual cue of an electric fence with benign audio cues, which if ignored were accompanied by an aversive electrical stimulus. Cows learned to respond to the audio cues to avoid receiving electrical stimuli, with the daily ratio of electrical to audio signals for individual cows averaging (± standard deviation) 0.18 ± 0.27 over the 10 d of virtual fence deployment. Unlike the electric fence, the virtual fence did not fully eliminate cow entry into the exclusion zone, but individual cows were generally contained within the inclusion zone ≥99% of the time. Pasture depletion within the inclusion zone reduced the efficacy of the virtual fence in preventing cows from entering the exclusion zone, but the magnitude of this effect was insignificant in practical terms (i.e., increased time spent in the exclusion zone by ≤28 s/h per cow). This highlights the potential for virtual fences to control grazing dairy cow movement even when pasture availability is limited (i.e., 1 kg of dry matter/cow above a target residual of 1,500 kg of dry matter/ha), but requires confirmation under longer and more complex virtual fencing applications. Within each treatment period, uniform daily pasture utilization (% of pasture consumed above a target residual of 1,500 kg of dry matter/ha) within inclusion zones indicates that cows did not avoid grazing near electric or virtual front-fences. Overall, this study demonstrated a successful simple application of this virtual fencing system to contain a herd of grazing lactating dairy cows within the boundaries of their daily pasture allocation.

Virtual fencing technology to intensively graze lactating dairy cattle. II: Effects on cow welfare and behavior.

Virtual fencing technology uses a neckband-mounted device to deliver an audio cue when an animal nears a virtual boundary that is set via a global positioning system, followed by an electrical stimulus if it crosses the boundary. The flexibility offered by this technology could revolutionize grazing management on dairy farms, but its application and effects on lactating dairy cattle have not been assessed. This experiment reports on the effects of an electric or a virtual front-fence on dairy cow behavior and welfare. Two temporally separated treatments were applied to a herd of 30 multiparous cows. Cows were provided an estimated 14 to 15 kg of dry matter/cow of fresh pasture in a new paddock every 24 h. From d 1 to 10 cows were grazed using a conventional electric front-fence (control treatment) and from d 14 to 23 they were grazed using a virtual front-fence (eShepherd, Agersens Pty Ltd.). Cows were trained to the technology from d 11 to 13. The milk production and live weight of individual cows were recorded daily. Cortisol concentrations were obtained from milk samples collected from individual cows on 3 d during each of the control and the virtual fence grazing periods, plus the first day of training. From d 6 of the experiment, 6 focal cows were fitted with a RumiWatch (Itin + Hoch GmbH) noseband sensor to monitor grazing and ruminating time, and 8 focal cows were fitted with an IceTag (IceRobotics Ltd.) sensors to monitor activity. Milk production, live weight, and the time cows spent standing and lying did not differ between the electric and virtual fence periods. Milk cortisol concentrations, activity, and the times spent ruminating and grazing were comparable between the electric and early virtual fence periods (i.e., d 1-3 with a virtual fence). However, at d 4 to 6 with a virtual fence, activity (steps taken and motion index) and time spent grazing were lower, and time spent ruminating was greater, compared with an electric fence. Further, least significant difference tests suggest milk cortisol concentrations were higher at d 5 with a virtual fence than at d 8 with an electric fence and d 1 with a virtual fence. We conclude there is no evidence of behavioral and welfare effects of virtual fencing on dairy cows in the days immediately following implementation of the technology in a simple intensive grazing regimen, but a longer study is required to fully elucidate effects beyond this period.

Pre-Exposure to an Electrical Stimulus Primes Associative Pairing of Audio and Electrical Stimuli for Dairy Heifers in a Virtual Fencing Feed Attractant Trial.

This experiment examined whether pre-exposure to an electrical stimulus from electric fencing attenuates associative pairing of audio and electrical stimuli in dairy heifers. Two treatments were applied to 30 weaned heifers naive to electric fencing. Heifers in the 'electric-fence' treatment were exposed to an electrified perimeter fence and two periods of strip-grazing using electrified poly-wire. Control heifers remained naïve to electric fencing. The pairing of audio and electrical stimuli was assessed in a feed attractant trial using manually controlled training collars. Heifers received an audio stimulus (2 s; 84 dB) when they breached a virtual fence after which a short electrical stimulus (0.5 s; 120 mW) was administered if they continued to move forward. If the animal stopped moving forward no further stimuli were applied. By the third training session, electric-fence heifers received a lower proportion of electrical stimuli than control heifers (p = 0.03). The more exploratory interactions a heifer had with the electric fence, the lower the proportion of electrical stimuli she received during training (rs = -0.77, p = 0.002). We conclude that experience with electrical fencing enhanced the salience of the electrical stimulus delivered by manual collars used for virtual fence training.

The welfare and productivity of sows and piglets in group lactation from 7, 10, or 14 d postpartum.

Transferring sows and their litters to group lactation (GL) after an initial period of farrowing crate (FC) housing could enhance the viability of GL for commercial production. Group lactation from 7 d postpartum would reduce the time sows spend in confinement, but the effects of early mixing on animal welfare and productivity require examination. Two experiments were conducted on sows and piglets kept in GL from 7, 10, or 14 d postpartum, compared with FC. Experiment 1 utilized 180 sows and 1,887 piglets over five time replicates (n = 60 sow and litter units per treatment) comparing GL from 7 or 14 d postpartum to FC. In experiment 2, 108 sows and 1,179 piglets were studied over three time replicates (n = 36 sow and litter units per treatment) comparing GL from 10 or 14 d postpartum to FC. All sows farrowed in FC. Group lactation sows were transferred to pens (one pen of five sows at 8.4 m2/sow and one pen of seven sows at 8.1 m2/sow, per GL treatment and replicate) with their litters at 7 (GL7), 10 (GL10), or 14 (GL14) d postpartum. Farrowing crate sows and their litters remained in their FC. Data were collected on sow feed intake and reproduction, piglet mortality (from day 6 postpartum), and sow and piglet weight changes, plasma cortisol concentrations, and injuries. Piglet mortality was greater in the GL7 (17 ± 1.8%) and GL10 treatments (12 ± 0.9%) compared with GL14 (8.3 ± 1.8% P ≤ 0.001 and 8.1 ± 0.9% P ≤ 0.001 in experiments 1 and 2), and greater in GL overall compared with FC (2.7 ± 1.5% and 1.8 ± 0.9% in FC in experiments 1 and 2; P ≤ 0.001). Piglets from GL7 were also lighter at weaning than GL14 piglets (P < 0.001), whereas GL10 and GL14 did not differ (P > 0.05). Overall, piglets in GL were lighter at weaning than piglets in FC (P ≤ 0.01). Sows from GL7 were heavier at weaning (P = 0.001), and GL10 sows tended to be heavier at weaning (P = 0.08), than GL14 and FC sows. Post-mixing, sow cortisol (P ≤ 0.01) and sow and piglet injuries (P ≤ 0.02) were greater in GL than FC. Treatment had no effect on sow feed intake or reproductive performance (P > 0.05). Under the conditions of this research, the known benefits of two-stage GL housing were achieved at a cost particularly to piglets in terms of increased piglet mortality and injuries after mixing, and reduced piglet growth. The risk of piglet mortality decreased with older age at mixing.

The Behaviour and Productivity of Mid-Lactation Dairy Cows Provided Daily Pasture Allowance over 2 or 7 Intensively Grazed Strips.

Research into the effects of intense grazing regimes on cattle behaviour and productivity will support the ethical intensification of pastoral dairy production. Two treatments were applied to two herds of 30 mid-lactation cows over 28 days. Cows were offered an estimated 12 kg DM/cow (above 5 cm from ground level) of irrigated pasture per day. The control herd received their daily pasture allocation in two equal grazings while the experimental herd received theirs over seven smaller grazings. Backgrazing beyond the current allocation (morning or afternoon) was prevented. Individual records were taken daily for milk production and behaviour (MooMonitor⁺). Milk composition, energy corrected milk (ECM), and live weight were recorded weekly. Feeding mid-lactation dairy cows over seven smaller grazing allocations reduced the time cows spent ruminating (p < 0.001), milk yield (p < 0.001), and ECM (p < 0.05). However, milk composition, live weight, time feeding, and pasture consumption were not affected by feeding frequency (p > 0.05). Cattle may have adapted their ingestive behaviour in response to the more intensive strip-grazing regime utilised in this study, with negative consequences for digestive processes and consequently milk production. Intense grazing regimes need to support the ingestive, digestive, and social behaviours of cattle.

Floor Feeding Sows Their Daily Allocation over Multiple Drops per Day Does Not Result in More Equitable Feeding Opportunities in Later Drops.

This research studied whether floor feeding group-housed sows their daily allocation over multiple feed drops per day provides more equitable feeding opportunities in later drops. Over four time replicates, 275 sows were mixed into groups of 10 for both their first and second gestations (200 sows/gestation, 126 sows observed in both gestations). The feeding behavior of individual sows was recorded for 10 min following each of four feed drops per day (0730, 0900, 1100, 1500 h) on days 2, 9 and 51 post-mixing. The location of feeding sows (i.e., feeding in areas associated with high, reduced or little/no food availability) was also recorded. Sow aggressive behavior on day 2 was used to classify sows as dominant (D), subdominant (SD), or submissive (SM). Dominant sows spent the most time feeding in areas of high-food availability (gestation 1, p < 0.001; gestation 2, p = 0.023); SD sows fed more frequently than D sows from areas of reduced food availability (gestation 1, p = 0.001; gestation 2, p = 0.025); and SM sows performed more feeding behavior in areas of little/no food availability (gestation 1, p < 0.001; gestation 2, p < 0.001). These relationships did not change over feed drops or days in either gestation (p > 0.05). Further research on the management and design of floor feeding systems is required, with a particular emphasis on increasing accessibility to sows that avoid the feeding area.

Forming groups of aggressive sows based on a predictive test of aggression does not affect overall sow aggression or welfare.

This experiment examined the effects of group composition on sow aggressive behaviour and welfare. Over 6 time replicates, 360 sows (parity 1-6) were mixed into groups (10 sows per pen, 1.8 m2/sow) composed of animals that were predicted to be aggressive (n = 18 pens) or groups composed of animals that were randomly selected (n = 18 pens). Predicted aggressive sows were selected based on a model-pig test that has been shown to be related to the aggressive behaviour of parity 2 sows when subsequently mixed in groups. Measurements were taken on aggression delivered post-mixing, and aggression delivered around feeding, fresh skin injuries and plasma cortisol concentrations at days 2 and 24 post-mixing. Live weight gain, litter size (born alive, total born, stillborn piglets), and farrowing rate were also recorded. Manipulating the group composition based on predicted sow aggressiveness had no effect (P > 0.05) on sow aggression delivered at mixing or around feeding, fresh injuries, cortisol, weight gain from day 2 to day 24, farrowing rate, or litter size. The lack of treatment effects in the present experiment could be attributed to (1) a failure of the model-pig test to predict aggression in older sows in groups, or (2) the dependence of the expression of the aggressive phenotype on factors such as social experience and characteristics (e.g., physical size and aggressive phenotype) of pen mates. This research draws attention to the intrinsic difficulties associated with predicting behaviour across contexts, particularly when the behaviour is highly dependent on interactions with conspecifics, and highlights the social complexities involved in the presentation of a behavioural phenotype.