1.054
IF5
1.150
IF
Q3
JCR
1.7
CiteScore
0.396
SJR
Q2
SJR
40
MNiSW
148.75
ICV
ORIGINAL PAPER
 
CC-BY-NC 4.0
 
 

The influence of lamb rearing system on ewe milk and lamb growth traits in dairy sheep

M. Margetín 1, 2,  
M. Oravcová 1  ,  
 
1
NAFC-RIAP Nitra, 951 41 Lužianky, Slovak Republic
2
Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, 949 76 Nitra, Slovak Republic
J. Anim. Feed Sci. 2020;29(1):27–34
Publication date: 2020-03-31
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
The objectives were to analyse ewe milk and lamb growth traits of Slovak Dairy sheep breed. Three lamb rearing systems were formed, i.e., ARM2: ewes milked twice daily throughout a whole lactation, lambs fed with milk replacer almost from birth to weaning; TRM1: ewes milked once daily and suckled by lambs in pre-weaning period; TRM0: ewes exclusively suckled by lambs in pre-weaning period. After weaning, all ewes were milked twice daily. General linear models were used for analyses of ewe daily/cumulative milk yields, fat, protein and lactose percentages/yields, usable dry matter yields and somatic cell scores in pre-weaning, post-weaning and lactation periods, and lamb live weights at birth/selected ages and their daily gains from birth to weaning. Lamb rearing system, ewe parity/age and litter size were considered as fixed factors. Additionally, lamb sex was included in growth analyses. The significantly highest cumulative milk yield was found in ARM2 ewes (202 ± 7 l); lower yield (by 17 and 64 l) was found in TRM1 and TRM0 ewes, respectively. In pre-weaning period, fat percentage and yield were significantly lower in TRM1 ewes (2.75 ± 0.14% and 0.85 ± 0.12 kg) than in ARM2 ewes (4.40 ± 0.13% and 2.76 ± 0.12 kg) as lamb contact makes ewes to with hold certain amounts of milk and fat in alveoli while machine milking to remain for offspring. No significant differences in daily gains among TRM1, TRM0 and ARM2 lambs were found (0.260 ± 0.007, 0.277 ± 0.006 and 0.259 ± 0.008 kg, respectively). Summarizing, without negative effect on lamb growth, TRM1 system seems to be the most appropriate.
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
M. Oravcová   
NAFC-RIAP Nitra, 951 41 Lužianky, Slovak Republic
 
REFERENCES (27):
1. Antonič J., Tančin V., Uhrinčať M., Mačuhová L., Mačuhová J., Jackuliaková L., 2013. The effect of exogenous oxytocin on milkability and milk composition in ewes differed in milk flow pattern. Small Rumin. Res. 113, 254–257, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smal....
2. Barillet F., Rupp R., Mignon-Grasteau S., Astruc J.-M., Jacquin M., 2001. Genetic analysis for mastitis resistance and milk somatic cell score in French Lacaune dairy sheep. Genet. Sel. Evol. 33, 397, https://doi.org/10.1051/gse:20....
3. Dikmen S., Turkmen I.I., Ustuner H., Alpay F., Balci F., Petek M., Ogan M., 2007. Effect of weaning system on lamb growth and commercial milk production of Awassi dairy sheep. Czech J. Anim. Sci. 52, 70–76, https://doi.org/10.17221/2357-....
4. Folman Y., Volcani R., Eyal E., 1966. Mother-offspring relationships in Awassi sheep. I: The effect of different suckling regimes and time of weaning on the lactation curve and milk yield in dairy flocks. J. Agric. Sci. (Camb.) 67, 359–368, https://doi.org/10.1017/S00218....
5. Gargouri A., Caja G., Such X., Ferret A., Casals R., Peris S., 1993. Evaluation of a mixed system of milking and suckling in Manchega dairy ewes. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Machine Milking of Small Ruminants. Hungarian J. Anim. Prod. 1993, Suppl. 1, 484–499.
6. ICAR, 2014. ICAR Recording Guidelines. Available from: www.icar.org.
7. Knight T.W., Atkinson D.S., Haack N.A., Palmer C.R., Rowland K.H., 1993. Effects of suckling regime on lamb growth rates and milk yields of Dorset ewes. N. Z. J. Agric. Res. 36, 215–222, https://doi.org/10.1080/002882....
8. Krupová Z., Krupa E., Wolfová M., Michaličková M., 2014. Impact of variation in production traits, inputs costs and product prices on profitability in multi-purpose sheep. Spanish J. Agric. Res. 12, 902–912, https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2....
9. Labussière J., Combaud J.-F., Petrequin P., Tessonnière R., Gouget R., 1969. Amount, composition and significance of various milk fractions successively obtained during the mechanical milking of ewes. (in French: Importance, composition et signification des différentes fractions de lait obtenues successivement au cours de la traite mécaniques des brebis). Ann. Zootech. 18, 185–196, https://doi.org/10.1051/animre....
10. Mačuhová L., Tančin V., Uhrinčať M., Mačuhová J., 2012. The level of udder emptying and milk flow stability in Tsigai, Improved Valachian, and Lacaune ewes during machine milking. Czech J. Anim. Sci. 57, 240–247, https://doi.org/10.17221/5922-....
11. Margetín M., Čapistrák A., Valkovský P., Kališ M., 1995. Dependence between growth intensity in lambs and milk production in mothers during suckling period. J. Farm. Anim. Sci. 28, 219–225.
12. Margetín M., Čapistrák A., Špánik J., Foltys V., 1996. Somatic cells in sheep milk in relation to milk production and composition during sucking and milking. Czech J. Anim. Sci. 41, 543–550.
13. Margetín M., Debrecéni O., Čapistrák A., Špánik J., Apolen D., Gálisová M., Oravcová M., 2010. Behaviour and growth intensity of dairy sheep lambs raised in nurseries. Slovak J. Anim. Sci. 43, 88–94.
14. Margetín M., Milerski M., Apolen D., Čapistrák A., Oravcová M., Debreceni O., 2013a. Relationships between production, quality of milk and udder health status of ewes during machine milking. J. Central Eur. Agric. 14, 328–340, https://doi.org/10.5513/JCEA01....
15. Margetín M., Oravcová M., Makovický P., Apolen D., Debrecéni O., 2013b. Milkability of Improved Valachian, Tsigai and Lacaune purebred and crossbred ewes. Slovak J. Anim. Sci. 46, 100–109.
16. Margetín M., Oravcová M., Huba J., Janíček M., 2017. Formation and characterization of Slovak Dairy composite sheep breed: Description of the process: A review. Slovak J. Anim Sci. 50, 139–143.
17. Marnet P.-G., Negrão J.A., 2000. The effect of a mixed-management system on the release of oxytocin, prolactin, and cortisol in ewes during suckling and machine milking. Reprod. Nutr. Dev. 40, 271–281, https://doi.org/10.1051/rnd:20....
18. Marnet P.G., McKusick B.C., 2001. Regulation of milk ejection and milkability in small ruminants. Livest. Prod. Sci. 70, 125–133, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-....
19. McKusick B.C., Thomas D.L., Berger Y.M., 2001. Effect of weaning system on commercial milk production and lamb growth of East Friesian dairy sheep. J. Dairy Sci. 84, 1660–1668, https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0....
20. McKusick B.C., Thomas D.L., Romero J.E., Marnet P.G., 2002. Effect of weaning system on milk composition and distribution of milk fat within the udder of East Friesian dairy ewes. J. Dairy Sci. 85, 2521–2528, https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0....
21. Oravcová M., Groeneveld E., Kovač M., Peškovičová D., Margetín M., 2005. Estimation of genetic and environmental parameters of milk production traits in Slovak purebred sheep using test day model. Small Rumin. Res. 56, 113–120, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smal....
22. Oravcová M., Margetín M., Tančin V., 2015. The effect of stage of lactation on daily milk yield, and milk fat and protein content in Tsigai and Improved Valachian ewes. Mljekarstvo 65, 48–56, https://doi.org/10.15567/mljek....
23. Papachristoforou C., 1990. The effects of milking method and postmilking suckling on ewe milk production and lamb growth. Ann. Zootech. 39, 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1051/animre....
24. Peters H.F., Heaney D.P., 1974. Factors influencing the growth of lambs reared artificially or with their dams. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 54, 9–18, https://doi.org/10.4141/cjas74....
25. SAS Institute Inc., 2009. SAS/STAT® 9.2 User’s Guide, Second Edition. Cary, NC (USA).
26. Thomas D.L., Berger Y.M., McKusick B.C., 2001. Effects of breed, management system, and nutrition on milk yield and milk composition of dairy sheep. J. Anim. Sci. 79, Suppl. E, E16–E20, https://doi.org/10.2527/jas200....
27. Thomas D.L., Berger Y.M., McKusick B.C., Mikolayunas C.M., 2014. Dairy sheep production research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA – a review. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 5, 22, https://doi.org/10.1186/2049-1....
ISSN:1230-1388