Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-17T14:55:22.741Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does rubber flooring improve welfare and production in growing bulls in fully slatted floor pens?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

KL Graunke ,
E Telezhenko ,
A Hessle ,
C Bergsten  and
JM Loberg
KL Graunke
Affiliation:
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Environment and Health, PO Box 234, SE-532 23 Skara, Sweden
E Telezhenko
Affiliation:
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Environment and Health, PO Box 234, SE-532 23 Skara, Sweden
A Hessle
Affiliation:
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Environment and Health, PO Box 234, SE-532 23 Skara, Sweden
C Bergsten
Affiliation:
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Environment and Health, PO Box 234, SE-532 23 Skara, Sweden Swedish Dairy Association, PO Box 234, SE-532 23 Skara, Sweden
JM Loberg*
Affiliation:
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Environment and Health, PO Box 234, SE-532 23 Skara, Sweden
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: jenny.loberg@slu.se
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study compared the effects of concrete slats (CS), synthetic rubber slats on aluminium profiles (RS) and slotted rubber mats on concrete slats (RM) in fully slatted floor pens on behaviour, claw and leg disorders, claw horn growth, cleanliness and production parameters of growing dairy bulls from 225 to 650 kg average liveweight. Each pen housed five bulls up to 400 kg average liveweight and four bulls thereafter. On CS, lying bouts were less frequent and longer than on RM and RS at 250 kg. Lying down phase 1 was longest on CS and shortest on RM. Interrupted attempts at lying down occurred twice as often on CS as on the rubber floors. Severity scores for white line haemorrhage and sole haemorrhage were higher in bulls on CS than on RM. Swelling on legs had highest scores on CS, whereas the severity score for heel horn erosion was lowest on CS. Floor type had no effect on dermatitis, leg hairlessness and skin damage. Both claw horn growth and wear were greater on CS than on RS and RM. Bulls on RS and CS were cleanest. Slaughter age tended to be higher and carcase conformation score tended to be lower on CS than on rubber, whereas feed intake, feed efficiency and other carcase traits were unaffected. The results indicate that rubber flooring improves animal welfare compared with concrete.

Keywords

animal welfarebehaviourcattleclaw healthcleanlinessperformance
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , May 2011 , pp. 173 - 183
Copyright
© 2011 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Absmanner, E, Rouha-Müller, C, Scharl, T, Leisch, F and Troxler, J 2009 Effects of different housing systems on the behaviour of beef bulls: an on-farm assessment on Austrian farms. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 118: 12–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Åman, P and Hesselman, K 1984 Analysis of starch and other main constituents of cereal grains. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 14: 135–139Google Scholar
Anonymous 2008 Rena nötkreatur - om hur nötkreatur ska hållas rena under uppfödning och inför slakt. Taurus och Svenska djurhälsovården: 3. http://www.taurus.mu. (Accessed January 13, 2010). [Title translation: Clean cattle: how cattle should be kept clean during rearing and before slaughter]Google Scholar
Axelsson, J 1941 Der Gehalt des Futters an umsetzbarer Energie. Züchtungskunde 16: 337–347. [Title translation: Energy content of feed in metabolisable energy]Google Scholar
Benz, B and Wandel, H 2004 Soft-elastic floorings for paved walking areas in cubicle housing systems for dairy cattle. Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium and Conference in Lameness in Ruminants pp 212–213, Maribor, SloveniaGoogle Scholar
Bergsten, C and Pettersson, B 1992 The cleanliness of cows tied in stalls and the health of their hooves as influenced by the use of electric trainers. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 13: 229–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergsten, C, Telezhenko, E and Ventorp, M 2009 Importance of soft and hard flooring system for claw conformation, locomotion, claw and leg health in heifers and first calvers. In: Hartung, JBA (ed) Proceedings of the 14th Congress of the International Society for Animal Hygiene pp 387–390, Vechta, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Bosilevac, JM, Nou, X, Osborn, MS, Allen, DM and Koohmaraie, M 2005 Development and evaluation of an on-line hide decontamination procedure for use in a commercial beef processing plant. Journal of Food Protection 68: 265–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, MH, Webster, SD, Hadley, PJ and Stosic, PJ 2000 Production factors that influence the hygienic condition of finished beef cattle. Veterinary Record 146: 179–183CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fallon, RJ and Lenehan, JJ 2002 Factors affecting the cleanliness of cattle housed in buildings with concrete slatted floors. Beef Production Series No. 47: Teagasc, Grange Research Centre, Republic of IrelandGoogle Scholar
European Commission 1998 Commission Directive 1998/64/EC establishing Community methods of analysis for the determination of amino-acids, crude oils and fats, and olaquindox in feeding stuffs and amending Directive 71/393/EEC. Official Journal of the European Communities 41 L 257: 14–28Google Scholar
European Commission 2005 Proposal for a Council Regulation determining the Community scale for the classification of carcases of adult bovine animals.COM(2005) 402 final 2005/0171 (CNS). Commission of the European Communities: Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
Farm Animal Welfare Council 1979 Farm Animal Welfare Council Press Release on the Five Freedoms. http://www.fawc.org.uk/pdf/fivefreedoms1979.pdf. (Accessed January 13, 2010)Google Scholar
Flower, FC, Sanderson, DJ and Weary, DM 2005 Hoof pathologies influence kinematic measures of dairy cow gait. Journal of Dairy Science 88: 3166–3173CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goering, HK and Van Soest, PJ 1970 Forage Fiber Analysis (Apparatus, Reagents, Procedures, and Some Applications). Agriculture Handbook No. 379. Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture: Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
Gygax, L, Mayer, C, Schulze Westerath, H, Friedli, K and Wechsler, B 2007a On-farm assessment of the lying behaviour of finishing bulls kept in housing systems with different floor qualities. Animal Welfare 16: 205–208Google Scholar
Gygax, L, Siegwart, R and Wechsler, B 2007b Effects of space allowance on the behaviour and cleanliness of finishing bulls kept in pens with fully slatted rubber coated flooring. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 107: 1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hultgren, J and Bergsten, C 2001 Effects of a rubber-slatted flooring system on cleanliness and foot health in tied dairy cows. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 52: 75–89CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krohn, CC and Munksgaard, L 1993 Behaviour of dairy cows kept in extensive (loose housing/pasture) or intensive (tie stall) environments II. Lying and lying-down behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 37: 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leach, KA, Logue, DN, Randall, JM and Kempson, SA 1998 Claw lesions in dairy cattle: methods for assessment of sole and white line lesions. The Veterinary Journal 155: 91–102CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lenehan, JJ 2003 Optimisation of cattle housing systems for beef farmers. Beef Production Series No 44. Teagasc: Grange Research Centre, Republic of IrelandGoogle Scholar
Lenehan, JJ and Fallon, RJ 2002 Slatted floors, improving the animal floor interface. Proceedings of the IVth CIGR International Symposium, Concrete for a Sustainable Agriculture: Agro-, Aqua and Community Applications pp 215–221, Ghent, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
Lindgren, E 1979 The nutritional value of roughages determined in vivo and by laboratory methods. Report 45. Department of Animal Nutrition and Management: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, SwedenGoogle Scholar
Livesey, CT, Marsh, C, Metcalf, JA and Laven, RA 2002 Hock injuries in cattle kept in straw yards or cubicles with rubber mats or mattresses. The Veterinary Record 150: 677–679CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lowe, DE, Steen, RWJ, Beattie, VE and Moss, BW 2001 The effects of floor type systems on the performance, cleanliness, carcass composition and meat quality of housed finishing beef cattle. Livestock Production Science 69: 33–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manske, T, Hultgren, J and Bergsten, C 2002 Prevalence and interrelationships of hoof lesions and lameness in Swedish dairy cows. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 54: 247–263CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Metzner, R 1978 Analyse tierischer Bewegungsabläufe zur Gestaltung artgemäßer Rinderkrippen. Landtechnik 9: 397–404. [Title translation: Analysis of animal motion patterns to create animal-friendly feeders]Google Scholar
Mossberg, I, Lindell, L, Johnsson, S and Tornquist, M 1993 Insulated and uninsulated housing systems for growing bulls fed grass-silage ad libitum. Acta Agriculturæ Scandinavica Section A, Animal Science 43: 107–115Google Scholar
Persson, Y, Söderquist, L and Ekman, S 2007 Joint disorder; a contributory cause to reproductive failure in beef bulls? Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 49: 31CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Platz, S, Ahrens, F, Bahrs, E, Nüske, S and Erhard, MH 2007 Association between floor type and behaviour, skin lesions, and claw dimensions in group-housed fattening bulls. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 80: 209–221CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruis-Heutinck, LFM, Smits, MCJ, Smits, AC and Heeres, JJ 2000 Effects of floor type and floor area on behaviour and carpal joint lesions in beef bulls. In: Blokhuis, HJ, Ekkel, ED and Wechsler, B (eds) Improving Health and Welfare in Animal Production - Proceeding of Sessions of the EAAP Commission on Animal Management & Health - EAAP Publication No 102 The Hague, The Netherlands pp 29–36. Wageningen Pers: Wageningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Rutherford, KM, Langford, FM, Jack, MC, Sherwood, L, Lawrence, AB and Haskell, MJ 2008 Hock injury prevalence and associated risk factors on organic and nonorganic dairy farms in the United Kingdom. Journal of Dairy Science 91: 2265–2274CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schulze Westerath, H, Gygax, L, Mayer, C and Wechsler, B 2007 Leg lesions and cleanliness of finishing bulls kept in housing systems with different lying area surfaces. Veterinary Journal 174: 77–85CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scott, GB and Kelly, M 1989 Cattle cleanliness in different housing systems. Farm Building Progress 95: 21–24Google Scholar
SJVFS 1998 Directions of classifications of carcasses from the Swedish Board of Agriculture (in Swedish). The Swedish Board of Agriculture: Jönköping, SwedenGoogle Scholar
Stanek, C 1997 Tendons and tendon sheaths. In: Greenough, PR and Weaver, AD (eds) Lameness in Cattle pp 188–194. WB Saunders Company: Philadelphia, USAGoogle Scholar
Telezhenko, E, Bergsten, C, Magnusson, M and Nilsson, C 2009 Effect of different flooring systems on claw conformation of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 92: 2625–2633CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Telezhenko, E, Bergsten, C, Magnusson, M, Ventorp, M and Nilsson, C 2008 Effect of different flooring systems on weight and pressure distribution on claws of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 91: 1874–1884CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thysen, I 1987 Foot and leg disorders in dairy cattle in different housing systems. In: Wierenga, HK and Peterse, DJ (eds) Cattle Housing Systems, Lameness and Behaviour pp 166–178. Martinus Nijhoff: Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertsson, JB and Lewis, BA 1991 Methods for dietary fibre, neutral detergent fibre and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 3583–3597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zerbe, F, Niemann, G and Scheithauer, E 2008 Mastbullenhaltung - Alternativen in der Spaltenbodenhaltung. Deutsche Tierärztliche Wochenschrift 115: 118–122. [Title translation: Fattening bulls, alternative housing on slatted floors]Google Scholar