immagine

Attività svolta

Desidero ricevere una copia cartacea
Informativa sulla privacy
Iscrizione alla newsletter

Il benessere animale come strumento per migliorare la redditività

Bibliografia

1. Bach A, Valls N, Solans A, et coll. Associations between nondietary factors and dairy herd performance. J. Dairy Sci. 2008;91(8):3259‐3267.

2. Batchelder TL. The impact of head gates and overcrowding on production and behavior patterns of lactating dairy cows. In: Proc. Dairy Housing and Equipment Systems. Managing and Planning for Profitability. Ed. Natural Resource, Agriculture, and Engineering Service Publ. 129. Camp Hill, PA. 2000:325‐330.

3. Bolinger DJ, Albright JL, Morrow‐Tesch J et coll. The effects of restraint using self‐locking stanchions on dairy cows in relation to behavior, feed intake, physiological parameters, health, and milk yield. J. Dairy Sci. 1997;80:2411‐2417.

4. Caraviello DZ, Weigel KA, Fricke PM et coll. Survey of management practices on reproductive performance of dairy cattle on large US commercial farms. J. Dairy Sci. 2006;89: 4723‐4735.

5. Casper DP, Whitlock L, Schauff D et coll. Feed efficiency is driven by dry matter intake. J. Dairy Sci. 2004;87(Suppl.1, Abstr.933):462.

6. Collier RJ, Zimbelman RB, Rhoads RP et coll. A reevaluation of the impact of temperature humidity index (THI) and black globe humidity index (BGHI) on milk production in high producing dairy cows. In: Proc. of the Western Dairy Management Conference. Reno, NV 2011:113‐126.

7. Cook NB, Mentink RL, Bennett TB et coll. The effect of heat stress and lameness on time budgets of lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2007;90:1674‐1682.

8. Cook NB, Nordlund KV. The influence of the environment on dairy cow behavior, claw health and herd lameness dynamics. Vet. J. 2009;179:360‐369.

9. Cook NB, Nordlund KV. Behavioral needs of the transition cow and the considerations for special needs facility design. Vet. Clin. North Am. Food Anim. Pract. 2004;20:495‐520.

10. Cooper MD, Arney DR, Phillips CJC. Two‐ or four‐hour lying deprivation on the behavior of lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2007;90:1149‐1158.

11. Doyle R, Moran J. Cow talk: Understanding dairy cow behaviour to improve their welfare on Asian dairy farms. Doyle R, Moran J, eds. 2005:83.

12. Espejo LA, Endres MI. Herd‐ level risk factors for lameness in high‐producing Holstein cows housed in freestall barns. J. Dairy Sci. 2007;90:306‐314.

13. Fisher AD, Stewart M, Verkerk GA et coll. The effects of surface type on lying behaviour and stress responses of dairy cows during periodic weather‐induced removal from pasture. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2003;81:1‐11.

14. Fregonesi JA, Tucker CB, Weary DM. Overstocking reduces lying time in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2007;90:3349‐3354.

15. Grant RJ, Albright JL. Effect of animal grouping on feeding behavior and intake of dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 2001;84(Suppl.):E156‐E163.

16. Grant R. Taking advantage of natural behavior improves dairy cow performance. In: Proc. Western Dairy Management Conf., Reno, NV 2007:225‐236.

17. Grant RJ. Incorporating dairy cow behavior into management tools. In: Proc. Cornell Nutr. Conf. for Feed Manufac. East Syracuse, NY. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. 2004:65‐76.

18. Hill CT. The effects of stocking rate, parity, and lameness on the short‐term behavior of dairy cattle. M. S. Thesis. University of Vermont, Burlington. 2006.

19. Hill CT, Krawczel PD, Dann HM et coll. Effect of stocking density on the short‐term behavioural responses of dairy cows. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2009;117: 144‐149.

20. Hopster H, Hermans GN, Engel B et coll. Behavioural and physiological consequences of deprivation from nightly lying in dairy cows. In: Proc. 36th Int. Congr. Int. Soc. Appl. Ethol., Zan am Zee, The Netherlands. 2002:143.

21. Hulsen J. Signes de vaches ‐ Connaître, observer et interpréter. Uitgeverij Roodbond, Pays‐Bas. 2007:96p.

22. Ito K, von Keyserlingk MA, Leblanc SJ et coll. Lying behavior as an indicator of lameness in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2010;93(8): 3553‐3560.

23. Knijn H. Tabellen 100.000 kg koeien (305 dagen productie per lactatie en levensproductie per lactatie van 100.000 kg koeien) CRV, Arnhem 2014 (communication personnelle).

24. Krawczel PD, Weary DM, Grant RJ et coll. Effect of feed bin stocking density on the feeding and standing behavior of postpartum dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2009;92(E‐Suppl.1):141. (Abstr.).

25. Krawczel PD, Mooney CS, Dann HM et coll. Effect of alternative models for increasing stocking density on the lying behavior, hygiene, and short‐ term productivity of lactating Holstein dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 2008;91(E‐Suppl.1):401. (Abstr.).

26. Krawczel PD, Klaiber LB, Butzler RE et coll. 2010. Short‐term overcrowding affects the lying and social behavior of lactating Holstein dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 93(E‐Suppl. 1):789. (Abstr.).

27. Leonard N, O’Connell J, O’Farrell K. Effect of overcrowding on claw health in first calved Friesian heifers. Vet. J. 1996;152:459‐472.

28. Matzke WC, Grant RJ. Behavior of primi‐ and multiparous lactating dairy cattle in commingled groups. J. Dairy Sci. 2002;85(Suppl.1):372. (Abstr.).

29. McInerney JP. Economic aspects of the animal welfare issue. In: Proc. Society of Vet. Epidemiol. and Prev. Med., London. 1991:83‐91.

30. Metz JHM. The reaction of cows to a short‐term deprivation of lying. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1985;13:301‐307.

31. Munksgaard L, Jensen MB, Pederson LJ et coll. Quantifying behavioural priorities - Effects of time constraints on behaviour of dairy cows, Bos Taurus. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2005;92:3‐14.

32. Shabi Z, Murphy MR, Moallem U. Within‐day feeding behavior of lactating dairy cows measured using a real‐time control system. J. Dairy Sci. 2005;88: 1848‐1854.

33. Tucker CB, Weary DM, Fraser D. Free‐stall dimensions: Effects on preference and stall usage. J. Dairy Sci. 2004;87:1208‐1216.

34. Tylutki TP, Fox DG, Durbal VM et coll. Cornell Net carbohydrate and protein system: A model for precision feeding of dairy cattle. Anim. Feed. Sci. Technol. 2008;143:174‐194.

35. Wagner‐Storch AM, Palmer RW, Kammel DW. Factors affecting stall use for different freestall bases. J. Dairy Sci. 2003;86:2253‐2266.

36. West JW. Effects of heat‐stress on production in dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 2003;86:2131‐2144.

37. Wierenga HK, Hopster H. The significance of cubicles for the behaviour of dairy cows. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1990;26:309‐337.

38. Winkler C, Tucker CB, Weary DM. Effects of stall availability on time budgets and agonistic interactions in dairy cattle. In: Proc. 37th Inter. Congr. of the ISAE. Abano Terme, Italy. 2003:30.

 

TORNA INDIETRO
Abbonati per accedere

Dal web internazionale
25/03/2020

Neospora caninum: valutazione anche economica degli strumenti di controllo

L'infezione da Neospora caninum è considerata una delle più importanti cause infettive di aborto nei bovini da latte. Per intervenire sulla sua diffusione, in uno studio dell’Università di Hong Kong sono stati considerati e valutati quattro potenziali strumenti di controllo tra cui l’abbattimento degli animali positivi (test-and-cull), farmaci, vaccinazioni e allevamento selettivo. Il costo di ciascun mezzo di controllo, unitamente all'inevitabile perdita annuale dovuta alle dinamiche della popolazione, è stato adottato quale criterio di valutazione economica.

 
 

Formazione a distanza abbinata a SUMMA

 

 

Formazione Settore Agro-Zootecnico