Dairy Systems
The Dairy Systems Publications section offers an in-depth look at the complexities and innovations driving the future of dairy farming. This collection highlights cutting-edge research, case studies, and reports on topics ranging from animal health and welfare to facility management and the adoption of advanced technologies.
​
Explore sustainable farming practices, efficient resource utilization, and innovative approaches that enhance productivity and economic viability in dairy operations. Whether you’re a farmer, researcher, or industry professional, these publications provide valuable insights and practical solutions to help optimize dairy systems.
​
Join us in transforming the dairy industry with research-backed strategies and innovations aimed at creating more sustainable, efficient, and resilient farming practices. Dive into the latest advancements that support a thriving future for dairy farming.
Dairy Systems Publications
Du, Xiaoxue ; Tejeda, Hernan ; Yang, Zhengliang ; Lu, Liang
Automatic milking systems (AMSs) have become increasingly common in the US in the past few years. Recent surveys from Idaho, one of the largest dairy-producing states, as well as from other states and countries, suggest that: 1. among farms adopting robotic milking systems, few are reporting less labor usage after adopting this labor-saving technology; 2. small farms rather than large farms are adopting (or more interested in adopting) robotic milking systems. In this article, we propose a series of new modeling strategies, which introduces the role of general-equilibrium effects to explain these new stylized facts. We show that: first, farms adopting labor-saving technology may, in fact, use more labor to compensate for the loss in the value of labor; second, when smaller farms experience more labor efficiency gains or value their leisure time (or off-farm income) more, they are more likely than larger farms to adopt the new technology. We contribute to the technology-adoption literature in two important ways. First, to our knowledge, this is the first article that introduces general-equilibrium effects to the technology-adoption literature. Second, this is also the first article that provides a theoretical perspective to explain the stylized facts in the adoption of robotic milking systems.
Glaze, J.B. ; Chahine, M.
In 2004 a mail-in survey was conducted to establish a baseline level of awareness and knowledge related to dairy beef quality assurance (BQA) issues in Idaho. A 30-question survey was mailed to every (n=736) registered Idaho dairy. Two-hundred seventy-three (37%) dairies participated and were categorized as small (n <201 cows; 53.5%), medium-sized (n=201 to 1,000 cows; 27.1%) or large (n >1,000 cows; 19.4%). The majority of respondents were dairy owners (83%). Eighty-nine percent of respondents indicated they followed BQA recommendations for animal care. The neck region in cows was used by 68% of respondents for i.m. injections and by 80% for s.c. injections. In calves, the values were 61 and 78%, respectively. Seventy-four percent of respondents indicated they had been trained for injections. Training methods cited included veterinarians (19.8%), dairy owners (16.8%), experience (9.9%), and BQA events or schools (4.5%). The importance of BQA in the dairy industry was rated 2.6 on a 5-point scale (0 = low; 4 = high). Participants rated the effect of dairy animals on the beef industry at 2.5. Plastic ear tags were the preferred method of animal identification, with 100% of large dairies, 97.3% of medium-sized dairies, and 84% of small dairies citing their use. Less than 10% used electronic identification for their animals. Almost half (48%) of large and medium-sized (49%) dairies and 32% of small dairies supported a national animal identification program. A mandatory identification program was supported by 41, 69, and 59% for small, medium-sized, and large dairies, respectively. The percentage of dairies keeping records was similar between small (93%), medium-sized (99%), and large (100%) dairies. Most small dairies (58%) used some form of paper records, whereas most medium-sized (85%) and large (100%) dairies used computers for record keeping. The preferred method to market cull cows by Idaho dairies was the auction market (64%), followed by order buyers (17%), direct to the packer (17%), private treaty sales (16%), and forward contracts (1%). To market calves, dairies used private treaty sales (52%), auction markets (42%), order buyers (14%), and forward contracts (1%). The results of this study will be used by University of Idaho Extension faculty in the design, development, and delivery of dairy BQA program information and materials.
Chahine, Mireille ; de Haro Marti, Mario E. ; Matuk, Celina ; Aris, Anna ; Campbell, Joy ; Polo, Javier ; Bach, Alex
Feeding SDP during transition improves milk production and milk fat content.•No negative effect on reproductive performance when SDP is included in transition feed.•The inclusion of SDP in transition feed has no detrimental effect on health performance. Spray-dried plasma (SDP) proteins are recognized as safe, high-quality feed ingredients for livestock due to their immune modulatory components, including immunoglobulins, bioactive peptides and growth factors. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of feeding a SDP product during the first 200 d of lactation on milk production and reproduction performance in dairy cows. Nine hundred ninety-eight Holstein cows, 260 d pregnant, were enrolled in a completely randomized design. Before calving, cows were fed a late gestation ration containing blood meal (BM; 13.3 g/kg of DM; Control; n = 503) or SDP (16.0 g/kg of DM; 250 g SDP/d; n = 495) replacing BM on N basis. After calving, Control cows were randomly distributed in two pens and fed a lactation ration containing 15.6 g/kg BM (DM basis). Cows on SDP were randomly distributed in 2 pens and fed a lactation ration that contained 18.3 g/kg SDP (DM basis. 400 g/d of SDP), which replaced BM. Cows were milked three times per day and milk production and composition were monitored monthly at one milking. First service consisted of a timed AI protocol applied to all cows that were > 44–50 DIM. Following AI, cows were examined daily for return to estrus or for confirmation of pregnancy by rectal palpation at 35–41 and 70–76 d after AI. At 72–78 DIM, cows not pregnant were enrolled into an intrauterine progesterone program. Cows fed SDP had greater milk yield (P < 0.01; 16.8 vs 16.4 kg/milking) and milk fat (P < 0.05; 35.5 vs 34.7 g/kg), but there were no differences in milk protein or in milk SCC between Control and SDP cows. Milk yield improvement in SDP cows was evident during the second month of lactation and onwards. No differences in pregnancy rate, overall conception rate, days at which pregnancy occurred or body condition score were observed between treatments. In conclusion, supplementation with SDP in dairy cows slightly increased milk yield and milk fat content without affecting reproductive parameters.