Advertisement

International Journal of Biometeorology

, Volume 63, Issue 11, pp 1465–1474 | Cite as

Effects of shade location and protection from direct solar radiation on the behavior of Holstein cows

  • Steffan Edward Octávio Oliveira
  • Cíntia Carol de Melo CostaEmail author
  • Marcos Chiquitelli Neto
  • Filipe Antônio Dalla Costa
  • Alex Sandro Campos Maia
Special Issue: Brazilian Congress - Jaboticabal 2017
  • 153 Downloads

Abstract

Two trials (E1 and E2) were performed to assess the behavior of eight Holstein dairy cows with 367 ± 58 kg of body weight and 10.52 ± 0.08 kg of milk yield. A 4 × 4 Latin square design (four periods of lactation and four levels of solar blockage) with four paddocks was used. Each paddock contained a wood shading structure covered with a cloth that blocked 30% (T1), 50% (T2), 70% (T3), or 100% (T4) of direct solar radiation. In the first trial (E1) each shade structure was located approximately 40 m from the feeder and water troughs; in the second trial (E2), the distance was reduced to 5 m. Air temperature (TA, °C), relative humidity (RH, %), wind speed (U, ms−1), black globe temperature (TG, K), mean radiant temperature (TMR, K), radiant heat load (RHL, W m−2), and local shortwave radiation (RS, W m−2) were recorded at 15-min intervals from 08:00 to 17:00 h. Four behavioral activities were recorded: grazing, eating at the feed trough, ruminating, and idling. For each of these activities, animal posture (lying or upright) and location (under shade or exposed to sunlight) were recorded. The meteorological conditions showed similar variations from 8:00 to 17:00 h between the two trials. However, the air temperatures in E1 were lower (± 2 °C) than those in E2. In a PCA analysis, the first and the second principal components explained 56.87% and 21.85%, respectively, of the total variation in the behavioral variables. Under the E1 conditions, the animals did not seek shade, whereas in E2, the dairy cows spent 35 ± 5% of their time lying and idling in the shade. At a solar radiation blockage of 100%, cows were in the shade more than 60% of the time due to the intensity of solar radiation, which was 722.19 ± 14.59 W m−2 at 11:45. In a PCA analysis, the first and the second principal components explained 65.18 and 22.3%, respectively, and 87.48% together, of the total variation in the original variables. Consequently, it was possible to develop a shade index (IST) based on the first two components. In E1, animals spent very little time in the shade, spending only 0.15% of total time under the shade, irrespective of blockage. However, E2 cows used shade, reaching almost 80% of time under the shade, at midday, when the blockage was 100%.

Keywords

Heat stress Shade use Cow comfort Tropical condition Solar irradiance 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Partial data of the present study were previously published in the VII Brazilian Congress of the Biometeorology, Ambience, Behavior, and Animal Welfare (VII CBBiomet). We also thank Angela Regina Arduino, Marcos Davi de Carvalho and the staff of the Dairy Cattle Sector at UNESP for all the support provided during data collection. The authors extend special thanks to Pedro Pizzardo (Lambari, in memorian).

Funding information

The authors gratefully acknowledge the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) for funding this research (grant number 2011/16696-9).

References

  1. Baeta FC, Meador NF, Shanklin MD, Johnson HD (1987) Equivalent temperature index at temperatures above the thermoneutral for lactating dairy cows. American Society of Agricultural Engineers (USA)Google Scholar
  2. Berman A, Horovitz T (2012) Radiant heat loss, an unexploited path for heat stress reduction in shaded cattle. J Dairy Sci 95:3021–3031.  https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2011-4844 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown-Brandl TM, Eigenberg RA, Nienaber JA, Hahn GL (2005) Dynamic response indicators of heat stress in shaded and non-shaded feedlot cattle, part 1: analyses of indicators. Biosyst Eng 90:451–462.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2004.12.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Camerro LZ, Maia ASC, Neto MC, Costa CCM, Castro PA (2016) Thermal equilibrium responses in Guzerat cattle raised under tropical conditions. J Therm Biol 60:213–221.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtherbio.2016.07.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coimbra PAD, Machado Filho LCP, Hötzel MJ (2012) Effects of social dominance, water trough location and shade availability on drinking behaviour of cows on pasture. Appl Anim Behav Sci 139:175–182.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2012.04.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. da Silva RG (1999) Estimativa do balanço térmico por radiação em vacas Holandesas expostas ao sol e à sombra em ambiente tropical. R Bras Zootec 28:1403–1411.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35981999000600031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. da Silva RG (2000) Um modelo para a determinação do equilíbrio térmico de bovinos em ambientes tropicais. R Bras Zootec 29:1244–1252.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982000000400039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Da Silva RG, Maia ASC (2013) Principles of animal biometeorology. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Da Silva RG, Guilhermino MM, de Morais DAEF (2010) Thermal radiation absorbed by dairy cows in pasture. Int J Biometeorol 54:5–11.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-009-0244-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Da Silva RG, Maia ASC, de Macedo Costa LL (2015) Index of thermal stress for cows (ITSC) under high solar radiation in tropical environments. Int J Biometeorol 59:551–559.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-014-0868-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. de Melo Costa CC, Maia ASC, Neto JDF, Oliveira SEO, de Queiroz JPAF (2014) Latent heat loss and sweat gland histology of male goats in an equatorial semi-arid environment. Int J Biometeorol 58:179–184.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-013-0642-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Domingos HGT, Maia ASC, Souza JB et al (2013) Effect of shade and water sprinkling on physiological responses and milk yields of Holstein cows in a semi-arid region. Livest Sci 154:169–174.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2013.02.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gaughan JB, Goodwin PJ, Schoorl TA, Young BA, Imbeah M, Mader TL, Hall A (1998) Shade preferences of lactating Holstein - Friesian cows. Aust J Exp Agric 38:17.  https://doi.org/10.1071/EA97039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gaughan JB, Mader TL, Holt SM, Lisle A (2008) A new heat load index for feedlot cattle1. J Anim Sci 86:226–234.  https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0305 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gaughan JB, Bonner S, Loxton I, Mader TL, Lisle A, Lawrence R (2010) Effect of shade on body temperature and performance of feedlot steers1. J Anim Sci 88:4056–4067.  https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2010-2987 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hansen PJ (1990) Effects of coat colour on physiological responses to solar radiation in Holsteins. Vet Rec 127:333–334Google Scholar
  17. Kamal R, Dutt T, Patel M, Dey A, Bharti PK, Chandran PC (2018) Heat stress and effect of shade materials on hormonal and behavior response of dairy cattle: a review. Trop Anim Health Prod 50:701–706.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-018-1542-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Littell RC, Milliken GA, Stroup WW, Wolfinger RD, Schabenberger O (2006) SAS® for mixed models. 2ed. Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  19. Maia ASC, Gomes DaSilva R, Battiston Loureiro CM (2005) Respiratory heat loss of Holstein cows in a tropical environment. Int J Biometeorol 49:332–336.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-004-0244-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Maia ASC, da Silva RG, Nascimento ST, Nascimento CCN, Pedroza HP, Domingos HGT (2015) Thermoregulatory responses of goats in hot environments. Int J Biometeorol 59:1025–1033.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-014-0916-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Manly BFJ (1986) Multivariate statistical methods: a primer. Chapman and Hall, London – New York, 159 SGoogle Scholar
  22. Martin P, Bateson P (2007) Measuring behaviour: an introductory guide. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Oliveira SEO, Costa CC de M, de Souza JBF et al (2014) Short-wave solar radiation level willingly tolerated by lactating Holstein cows in an equatorial semi-arid environment. Trop Anim Health Prod 46:1413–1417.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-014-0657-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schütz KE, Rogers AR, Cox NR, Tucker CB (2009) Dairy cows prefer shade that offers greater protection against solar radiation in summer: shade use, behaviour, and body temperature. Appl Anim Behav Sci 116:28–34.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2008.07.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schütz KE, Rogers AR, Poulouin YA, Cox NR, Tucker CB (2010) The amount of shade influences the behavior and physiology of dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 93:125–133.  https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2416 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Silva RG (2000) Introdução à Bioclimatologia Animal. São Paulo: Nobel/FAPESPGoogle Scholar
  27. STATSOFT, INC. (2007) Statistica (data analysis software system), version 7Google Scholar
  28. Tucker CB, Rogers AR, Schütz KE (2008) Effect of solar radiation on dairy cattle behaviour, use of shade and body temperature in a pasture-based system. Appl Anim Behav Sci 109:141–154.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2007.03.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Valtorta SE, Leva PE, Gallardo MR (1997) Evaluation of different shades to improve dairy cattle well-being in Argentina. Int J Biometeorol 41:65–67.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s004840050055 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISB 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate Program of Animal ScienceSão Paulo State University (Unesp), School of Agricultural and Veterinarian SciencesJaboticabalBrazil
  2. 2.Innovation Group of Biometeorology, Behavior and Animal Welfare (INOBIO-MANERA)São Paulo State University (Unesp), School of Agricultural and Veterinarian SciencesJaboticabalBrazil
  3. 3.Innovation Group of Biometeorology, Behavior and Animal Welfare (INOBIO-MANERA)São Paulo State University (Unesp), School of Natural Sciences and EngineeringIlha SolteiraBrazil

Personalised recommendations