Get access to all handy features included in the IVIS website
- Get unlimited access to books, proceedings and journals.
- Get access to a global catalogue of meetings, on-site and online courses, webinars and educational videos.
- Bookmark your favorite articles in My Library for future reading.
- Save future meetings and courses in My Calendar and My e-Learning.
- Ask authors questions and read what others have to say.
Association between rumination patterns detected by an ear-tag based accelerometer system and rumen physiology in dairy cows
Simoni, A.; König, F.; Weimar, K...
Get access to all handy features included in the IVIS website
- Get unlimited access to books, proceedings and journals.
- Get access to a global catalogue of meetings, on-site and online courses, webinars and educational videos.
- Bookmark your favorite articles in My Library for future reading.
- Save future meetings and courses in My Calendar and My e-Learning.
- Ask authors questions and read what others have to say.
Read
Objectives: Rumination is an essential part of the physiology of dairy cows. In this context, rumination activity is considered as a useful indicator for early detection of diseases and metabolic disorders.
The accelerometer-based sensor system SMARTBOW (SB, Smartbow/Zoetis LLC, Weibern, Austria) provides health alerts based on individual thresholds of rumination patterns in dairy cows. Detailed knowledge about the association between sensor-based rumination patterns and rumen physiology would help to interpret the clinical significance of rumination alerts. To the authors knowledge, no research has been carried out into the interaction between rumination alerts and changes of rumen fluid in dairy cows. These results could lead to a better interpretation of sensor-based rumination alerts.
Material & Methods: The study was conducted between April and October 2021 on a conventional dairy farm in the north of Germany, housing approximately 1900 Holstein-Friesian cows fitted with SB ear tags. According to our study 102 cows were matched in pairs based on the appearance of a rumination alert (ALRT) vs. no rumination alert (NALRT) and the lactation status. NALRT cows had to meet health criteria including a rectal temperature of < 39.5 C° and no signs of lameness (Sprecher >2). SB algorithms provided an ‘acute rumination alert’ and a ‘long-time rumination alert’ which were presented in Smartbow software and sent to a mobile device. A rumination alert was considered as valid if it persisted for at least 12 h, and the sample of rumen fluid was collected within the first 12 h of the alert.
Rumen fluid was taken twice using an oral stomach tube (SELEKT Rumen Fluid Collector, Nimrod Veterinary Products, Moreton-in-Marsh, UK). The first extraction (Ex1) was performed at the beginning of the alarm and the second extraction (Ex2) after the end of the alarm. The cows’ status (ALRT vs NALRT) of each sample was blinded prior to examination by replacing the animals’ identification number with a sample number randomly assigned by a second person.
The following parameters were examined in each sample: (1) rumen pH and redox potential by a portable electronic pH-meter (G1501 Serie, GHM Group Greisinger, Regenstauf, Germany; pH electrode GE 114-WD; redox electrode GR 175 BNC), (2) duration of methylene blue reduction time and sedimentation/flotation time, (3) microscopic evaluation of protozoa in a counting chamber (Fuchs-Rosenthal, Paul Marienfeld GmbH & Co.KG, Lauda-Königshofen, Germany).
To investigate potential differences in rumen physiology parameters between ALRT and NALRT, the rumen fluid parameters of the groups were compared at both extraction times (Ex1 and Ex2) by the Mann–Whitney U-test. For the detection of changes in rumen physiology within each group during the extraction period, rumen fluid parameters between Ex1 and Ex2 were compared for each group by related-sam- ples Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
Results: The rumen parameters: pH, redox potential, methylene blue reduction time and sedimentation/flotation time differed significantly between ALRT cows and their NAL-RT counterparts at Ex1 (P < 0.01). In contrast the number of protozoa showed significant differences between groups at Ex1 and Ex2 (P < 0.01). No differences were apparent for the other parameters at Ex2. The rumen fluid parameters of ALRT cows reached alignment with the values of their NALRT partners during the extraction period, except for the number of protozoa. Furthermore, ALRT animals differed in all rumen fluid parameters within the extraction period (P < 0.01) while those of NALRT cows remained constant.
Conclusions: The rumen fluid parameters were within the physiological ranges for ALRT and NALRT cows at both extraction times, but a higher variation was in ALRT cows at Ex1 was found. Higher variations in rumen fluid parameters of cows with rumination alerts could indicate a higher vulnerability to rumen health disorders. Considering the regeneration of protozoa to be a continuous process, protozoa were not able to fully replicate themselves until Ex2, which justifies the difference existing between ALRT and NALRT animals at Ex2. The collection of rumen fluid shows snapshots of rumen physiology in matched cows during and after rumination alert. Further research might focus on continuous measurement options for detecting rumen fluid parameters of cows at different health levels.
Keywords: Rumen fluid, rumination time, health alert, rumen disorders, accelerometer.
Get access to all handy features included in the IVIS website
- Get unlimited access to books, proceedings and journals.
- Get access to a global catalogue of meetings, on-site and online courses, webinars and educational videos.
- Bookmark your favorite articles in My Library for future reading.
- Save future meetings and courses in My Calendar and My e-Learning.
- Ask authors questions and read what others have to say.
About
Affiliation of the authors at the time of publication
Clinical Unit for Herd Health Management in Ruminants, Universitiy Clinic for Ruminants, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria;
Zoetis International, Dublin, Republic of Ireland;
Zoetis Deutschland GmbH, Berlin, Germany.
Comments (0)
Ask the author
0 comments