HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Brosh, A. Articles by Aharoni, Y. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Brosh, A. Articles by Aharoni, Y.

Energy cost of cows’ grazing activity: Use of the heart rate method and the Global Positioning System for direct field estimation¹

A. Brosh^*,2, Z. Henkin^*,, E. D. Ungar, A. Dolev, A. Orlov^*, Y. Yehuda and Y. Aharoni^*

^* Beef Cattle Section, ARO, Newe Yaar Research Center, P.O. Box 1021 Ramat Yishay 30095, Israel; and Department of Natural Resources, ARO—the Volcani Center, P.O. Box 6, Bet Dagan 50250, Israel; and MIGAL—Galilee Technological Center, Qiryat Shemona, P.O. Box 90000, Rosh Pinna 12100, Israel

² Corresponding author: brosha{at}volcani.agri.gov.il

This study with grazing beef cows on the range was designed to explore the possibility of determining incremental energy expenditure (EE) in standing, traveling, and grazing relative to that in lying down, by means of continuous monitoring of EE, location, and activity by the heart-rate method, with Global Positioning System (GPS) collars, and by motion sensors in the GPS collars, respectively. Cows were observed on Mediterranean foothill rangeland covered with herbaceous vegetation through 4 seasons of the year. There were 2 stocking rate treatments, and 14 statistical models were evaluated, including one that was a stepwise model. Total daily EE (TEE) was affected by many interdependent factors apart from activity, including season, stocking rate, herbage quality, standing biomass, and reproductive state of the cow. Each model included all activity variables, plus some of the other factors. Across seasons and treatments TEE, in kJ/(kg of BW^0.75 · d), ranged from 469 in densely stocked, nonlactating cows in June to 1,092 in sparsely stocked, lactating cows in April. The cows’ daily vertical and horizontal movements ranged from 75 to 174 m and from 1.5 to 4.2 km, respectively. Within a day, time spent traveling (without grazing) ranged from 0 to 32 min, and grazing time ranged from 4.4 to 12.1 h. Cows spent less time grazing (P < 0.001) in the summer, when herbage quality was low, than in winter and spring. Relative to the baseline EE while lying down, the daily increment incurred by grazing ranged from 13 to 48 kJ/(kg of BW^0.75 · d), and that incurred by grazing, standing, and traveling combined ranged from 38 to 74 kJ/(kg of BW^0.75 · d) or 5.8 to 11.4% of TEE. In conclusion, the estimates of activity costs yielded by 11 of the models were similar to one another, whereas those yielded by the stepwise model and the remaining 2 models were 20% smaller. The cost of grazing activity was estimated to be 6.14 J/(kg of BW^0.75 · m), and that of locomotion during grazing was 6.07 J/(kg of BW^0.75 · m), which agree with values obtained for animals and humans by means of a treadmill. The experimental and statistical approach tested here yielded fairly reliable estimations of energy costs of activities in grazing cows.

Key Words: cattle • energy cost • energy expenditure • global positioning system • grazing • heart rate

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Brosh Heart rate measurements as an index of energy expenditure and energy balance in ruminants: A review J Anim Sci, May 1, 2007; 85(5): 1213 - 1227. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]