Effect of positioning the tie-rail to follow the natural neck line of cows when eating and rising on the welfare of dairy cows housed in tie-stall barns

A majority of dairy farms in Canada are tie-stall barns, but few experimental studies have investigated ways to improve cow comfort through tie-stall design. Epidemiological studies have found that tie-stall design may have an effect on dairy cow welfare. Our objective was to investigate tie-rail positions and develop new recommendations that combine both height and forward positions to improve dairy cow welfare. Four treatments were tested: two new tie-rail positions that follow the natural neck line of cows (Neckline1, Neckline2), Current Recommendation, and the tie-rail position commonly found on farm. Forty-eight cows blocked by parity and stage of lactation were divided between two start dates and randomly allocated to a treatment for 10 weeks. Live scoring was performed weekly to evaluate: injury, cow and stall cleanliness, bedding quantity, and body condition. Lameness scoring was performed weekly through video observation. Milk yields were recorded at each milking and milk samples were collected weekly to evaluate milk components. Feeding/rumination time was recorded continuously using ear-mounted activity data loggers. Resting behaviours were continuously recorded using leg mounted accelerometers. Cows were recorded 1 d/wk by overhead cameras and 6 lying and rising events were evaluated per recording. The tie-rail positions tested did not have an effect on cow and stall cleanliness, bedding quantity, body condition, lameness, milk yield and components, feeding/rumination time, rising and lying ability, and resting behaviour. However, Current Recommendation (difference from wk 0: +0.9 ± 0.16) had an increase in proximal neck injuries compared to Neckline2 (+0.1 ± 0.15). Neckline2 (+0.8 ± 0.16) and Neckline1 (+0.5 ± 0.16) had an increase in medial neck injuries compared to the Current Recommendation (-0.1 ± 0.18). All treatments showed a decrease over time in average lying intention time (-5.9 s/event), lying-down time (-1.1 s/event), contact with stall (-32.5 %) and slipping (-9.4 %) during lying motion. All treatments showed a decrease over time in average backwards movement on knees (-10.8 %;) and contact with tie-rail (-14.3 %) during rising motion and overall abnormal rising (-15.7 %). Although, lying and rising ability improved over time, the prevalence of abnormal lying and rising was still high in the long-term for all treatments; for example, in the long-term, cows still came in contact with the stall dividers or tie-rail 42.3% of the time during lying motion. Results suggest that the injury location on the neck shifts based on tie-rail placement. Further research is needed to improve stall design to reduce injuries and abnormal lying and rising behaviours. For instance, studies investigating alternative options to stall design such as a different material apposed to metal bars (e.g., a flexible bar or chain) and/or increasing the tie-rail forward position even further may reduce contacts between the bar and the cows. Alternatively, housing options providing fewer obstacles in the cow's environment through the elimination of stall hardware should be investigated such as a deep-bedded pack or compost pack.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.