Body size in relation to cubicle dimensions affects lying behavior and joint lesions in dairy cows.

Adequate cubicle dimensions are important for dairy cows to allow for species-appropriate lying behavior. Even though cow body size has increased in the last 2 decades, the cubicle dimensions of housing systems built many years ago have not been adjusted on most farms. Therefore, cows may be impaired in their lying behaviors, and thus the present study aimed to determine the influence of the ratio of body size to cubicle dimension on lying behavior and joint lesions. We investigated the lying behavior of 144 cows with withers heights of 140 to 163 cm on 8 Swiss dairy farms. Among the farms, the cubicle bed length varied from 187 to 200 cm and lunge space length varied from 47 to 202 cm. Specific behaviors of lying down and standing up movements, as well as lying positions, were observed on 3 d per farm. As outcome variables, the occurrences of these behaviors were calculated as proportions in relation to the respective total number of observations per cow. In addition, the presence of joint lesions was scored once. Data of the individual cows were analyzed in relation to the given cubicle dimensions on the farms by mixed-effects models. The bed length ratio [bed length (cm) on the farm/withers height (cm) of the observed cow] and the lunge space ratio [lunge space length (cm) on the farm/withers height (cm) of the observed cow] were used as explanatory variables. An increase in the bed length ratio was associated with decreased proportions of lying down movements with (1) repeated head pendulum movements, (2) repeated stepping with front legs, and (3) hitting against cubicle elements; decreased proportions of standing up movements with (1) shifting backward, (2) hesitant head lunge movements, and (3) hitting against cubicle elements; and an increased proportion of lying positions without physical contact with cubicle elements. An increase in the lunge space ratio was associated with a decreased proportion of standing up movements with sideways directed head lunge movements. Furthermore, an increase in the bed length ratio decreased the proportion of cows with tarsal joint lesions. To summarize, the lying behavior of large-framed cows was clearly modified given the cubicle dimensions in use on the study farms. In view of the consistency of the obtained results, we recommend adjusting the dimensions of cubicles so that they are suitable for cows whose body size meets the breeding goals of the farm.

Dirksen N ，Gygax L ，Traulsen I ，Wechsler B ，Burla JB ... -  《-》

Cubicle design and dairy cow rising and lying down behaviours in free-stalls with insufficient lunge space.

Brouwers SP ，Simmler M ，Scriba MF ，Savary P ... -  《-》

Effects of cubicle characteristics on animal welfare indicators in dairy cattle.

Gieseke D ，Lambertz C ，Gauly M 《-》

Do International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering (CIGR) dimension recommendations for loose housing of cows improve animal welfare?

Design of cubicles and self-locking barriers can affect cow skin alterations, lameness, and dirtiness. We investigated whether the International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering (CIGR, Gainesville, FL)-recommended cattle housing design and dimensions actually improve cow welfare. We recorded individual cow body dimensions and assessed skin alterations, dirtiness, and lameness on 3,841 cows from 131 loose housing dairy farms (76 farms with cubicles and 55 straw-yard systems). We recorded the dimensions of cubicles (e.g., width, length, and so on) and of the self-locking barrier (e.g., top rail height and so on) for each farm. We then compared whether these dimensions would match with the individual cow body dimensions and whether compliance was associated with the occurrence of skin alterations, lameness, and dirtiness. Most cows (69.2%) had at least one skin alteration, on the tarsus (41.2%); neck, shoulder, or back (28.2%); hindquarters (22.0%); carpus (21.2%); and flank, side, or udder (11.6%). Lameness prevalence reached 17.9%. Most cows (83.1%) were scored dirty in at least one body region, mainly on the lower hind legs including hocks (81.4%), hindquarters (41.8%), and udder (21.0%). Cubicle recommendations were mostly met for cubicle resting length (75.9% of cubicles) and neck rail distance (NRD, 60.7%) but less so for overall cubicle length (CL, 38.8%), cubicle width (CW, 30.9%), neck rail height (NRH, 22.5%), head space (HS, 15.8%), partition zone for controlling lying position (ii zone, 15.7%), head and lunging space (HLS, 10.6%), partition head zone (i zone, 9.4%), and partition zone for pelvis freedom (iii zone, 6.0%). Compliance with design recommendations was associated with fewer skin alterations on neck (recommendation met for CW, CL, HS, and NRD and i zone), hindquarters (CW, CL, NRD), tarsus (CW, i and ii zones), and carpus (CW, HS, i and ii zones); less lameness (CW, NRH, i zone); and less dirtiness on the hindquarters (CW, HLS, NRD), lower hind legs (iii zone), and udder (CW, CL, HLS, NRD). Compliance with recommended i zone and ii zone design was associated with less injury and lameness but more dirtiness, whereas the opposite was true for the iii zone. Self-locking barrier recommendations were mostly met for bottom rail height (68.2%), separation wall width (SWW, 68.3%), and top rail height (TRH, 56.9%) and less often met for separation wall height (36.3%) and height difference between feeding floor and walking alley (26.5%). Risk for skin alterations on carpus and neck only decreased when SWW and TRH met recommendations. In conclusion, compliance with CIGR recommendations for some cubicle dimensions and neck rail position was associated with lower risk for cow welfare. However, the CIGR recommendations on cubicle partitions and self-locking barriers still leave welfare at risk and so need to be refined through further research with close observation of cow lying and feeding behavior.

de Boyer des Roches A ，Lardy R ，Capdeville J ，Mounier L ，Veissier I ... -  《-》

Cubicle housing systems for cattle: Comfort of dairy cows depends on cubicle adjustment.

Veissier I ，Capdeville J ，Delval E 《-》