Get documents about "Responses of Lactating Holstein Cows to Chilled Drinking Water
Document Sample
Responses of Lactating Holstein Cows to Chilled Drinking
Water in High Ambient Temperatures
D. L. WILKS, C. E. COPPOCK, J. K. LANHAM, K. N. BROOKS, C. C. BAKER, and W. L. BRYSON
Department of Animal Science
R. G. ELMORE
Department of Large Animal Medicine and Surgery
R. A. STERMER
USDA-ARS
Texas A&M University
College Station 77843
ABSTRACT Chilled drinking water lowered respira-
tion rates and body temperatures and in-
In Experiment 1, 12 lactating Holstein creased feed intake and milk yield.
cows were provided drinking water of (Key words: chilled drinking water,
either 10.6 or 27.0'C for 24 hid in a stress hormones, lactating cows)
changeover design to examine the effects
of water temperature on feed intake, wa-
ter intake, respiration rate, rectal tempera- INTROW C T l O N
ture, plasma thyroid hormone concentra- Upon initial exposure to high environmental
tion, and milk yield. The 1st wk of each temperatures, the lactating dairy cow may over-
3-wktreatment period was for adjustment compensate by drastically reducing feed intake
and the next 2 wk were comparison in an attempt to lower internal metabolic heat
periods. Least squares means for DM in- production. At 40°C dietary intake may be
take as a percentage of body weight were reduced by as much as 40% (13). Not only does
3.68 and 3.57 for 10.6 and 27.0'C treat- reduced feed intake slow thyroid activity, but
ment groups. Water intakes in liters per heat stress also causes a decline in thyroid
kilogram of dry feed consumed as a per- activity (17). As high environmental tempera-
centage of body weight were 21.3 and tures depress secretion of thyroid hormones
20.3. Respiration rates were 70.5 and both directly by the stress itself and indirectly
81.0 breaths per minute; rectal tempera- by the reduction in feed intake, milk production
tures were 39.7 and 39.9'C, Triiodothyro- is ultimately depressed. Under some conditions,
nine averaged .88 and .75 ng/ml; thyrox- milk yield may decline 33% at 35'C and over
ine, 42.4 and 39.2 ng/ml; cortisol, 3.03 50% at 40°C (13).
and 2.06 ng/ml; and progesterone in milk, Ingraham (9) noted a consistent positive ad-
4.58 and 3.15 ng/ml for the 10.6 and vantage of 1.09 kg of milk per head per day for
27.0'C treatment groups. Milk yield aver- cows provided chilled drinking water during
aged 25.9 and 24.7 kg/d and FCM aver- the summer in Mexico. In studies with beef
aged 25.6 and 23.6 kg/d, respectively. cattle, Lofgreen et al. (11) reported that beef
In Experiment 2, 24 cows given a cattle in a hot environment consumed more
choice of chilled or warm water showed a feed, gained more weight, and improved energy
clear preference (about 98%) for the use when they were given water cooled to
warm water. If cows are given chilled 18.3'C than when they received water at
water of 1O'C continuously, no warm 32.2'C. Cattle given cooled water also drank
drinking water should be available. less than those provided warm water. In a
3-yr study with feedlot steers, Hanis et al. (8)
provided two groups of steers either 29 or 18'C
Received June 29,1989. drinking water and found no significant differ-
Accepted November 1, 1989. ences in daily gains. In two studies with chilled
1990 J Dairy Sci 73:1091-1099 1091
1092 WlLKS ET AL.
water offered for 10 midd water consumption pens inside a barn. Each pen was open on the
declined as water temperature decreased (IO, side to allow access to a dirt lot, which con-
1 ) Milam et al. (12) observed that chilled
2. tained a portable shade. One adjustment week
1')
water ( O C resulted in a greater cooling effect for cows to become accustomed to the feeding
and increased DM feed intake and milk yield system and to the water tanks preceded a
when compared with results in cows offered 7-d standardization period in which both groups
warm water (28'C). were provided 30'C drinking water. No data
In two experiments, Baker et al. (2) first were collected during the adjustment week. The
offered 10°C drinking water to a group of six first 7 d of each treatment period (21 d) were
cows for 8 h/d with 30'C water provided for used as a time for adjustment to the drinking
the rest of the day. The treatment group had water temperatures; the next 14 d were the
higher feed intakes (3.67 vs. 3.36 as a percent- comparison periods. Daily ambient high and
age of body weight), but milk yields, rectal low temperatures were recorded daily, and rela-
temperatures, and respiration rates were not tive humidities were obtained from data ob-
affected significantly, although numerical dif- tained with a sling psychrometer. Electronic
ferences indicated some resolution of heat Calm feeding gates (American Calm. Inc.
stress. In the second experiment ( ) chilled
2, Northwood, NH) were used to measure feed
water (9.X)was offered for 48 h continuous- consumption for individual cows. Cows were
ly. Cows in the treatment group drank more of offered free choice once daily a complete ration
the chilled water than those in the control composed of 45% concentrate, 15% whole cot-
group, which drank ambient water (30°C).The tonseed, 10% coastal bermudagrass hay, and
treatment group had lower respiration rates and 30% corn silage on a dry basis. The ration was
body temperatures, which reflected the' greater sampled three times per week, dried to a con-
heat-absorbing capacity of the water consumed. air
stant weight at 55"C, equilibrated to atmo-
This study is a continuation of the experiments spheric moisture, and composited by week. The
by Baker et al. (2). Observations in our pre- drinking water was supplied by the Texas
vious work (10, 2 indicated that cows did not
1) A&M University water system and was sam-
like chilled water and may drink less because pled during each comparison period. The sam-
of their anticipation of the later availability of ples were analyzed by the Texas Agricultural
the preferred warm water. The objectives of Extension Service, Soil Testing Laboratory
Experiment 1 were to determine the effects of (16). The water was chilled to 10°C with a
providing continuously chilled drinking water 20,000 BTU, 208 to 230-V, three-phase refrig-
to lactating Holstein cows in summer. In Ex- eration unit with a storage capacity of 500 L.
periment 2, we measured the preference of This water was circulated between the cooler, a
lactating Holstein cows for cold vs. warm wa- 1200-L storage tank,and the insulated drinking
ter. water tank for the treatment group at a rate
sufficient to maintain the 10°C temperature.
MATERIALS AND METHODS The water temperature was monitored by strate-
gically located and calibrated mercury and dial
thermometers. Both groups were offered water
Experiment 1
in 227.3-L insulated water tanks, and the tem-
Eight multiparous and four primiparous perature of the water in both tanks was re-
open lactating Holstein cows were used in a corded twice daily. The cows in the treatment
changeover design of treatments of 10 or 30°C group were exposed to 1 ° drinking water 24
0C
drinking water. All cows were ranked by FCM h/d for 3 wk, but the cows in the control group
within parity and were assigned randomly to received water at ambient temperatures of ap-
treatments and to periods. The average days in proximately 3 ° except for twice daily trips to
0C
milk for all cows at the beginning of the experi- the milking parlor. The water temperatures
ment w s 108.8 d, and the average FCM from
a were reversed in the tanks at the end of treat-
the previous test day was 27.7 kg. Except when ment period 1 Water intakes were monitored
.
going to the milking parlor, both groups of for both groups with meters read at 0800 and
cows had continuous access to feed and water 2000 h. Rectal temperatures and respiration
free choice, in enclosed 6.1- x 6.1-m adjacent rates of individual cows were taken 3 d/wk at
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 73, No. 4, 1990
RESPONSES TO CHLLED DRINKING WATER 1093
0800, 1500, and 2000 h. Deep rectal tempera- each day to diminish cue and position effects.
tures and respiration rates were used as indica- Consumption was obtained by difference. On
tors of heat stress. During observation times, Tuesday and Thursday of each week, respira-
cows were chained by a nylon neck collar to a tion rates (an average of two 60-s counts) and
pipe fence within each pen. Respiration rates deep rectal temperatures were taken at 1100 h
(number of breaths per minute) were observed to indicate the degree of heat stress. Following
while cows were chained to the pipe fence this trial, another 12 lactating Holstein cows
before rectal temperatures were taken. The av- were subjected to the same 2-wk protocol.
erage of two successive 1-min counts taken by
two people was used as the respiration rate for RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
each observation time. Rectal temperatures
were taken using a digital thermometer and
Experiment 1
deep rectal probes 38 cm in length. Cows were
weighed every Friday during the experiment, The weekly average maximum and mini-
and body weights were used to calculate feed mum ambient temperatures and weekly average
intake as a percentage of body weight. Jugular maximum and minimum humidities are
vein blood samples were obtained every Friday graphed in Figure 1. In wk 4 and 6, the weekly
at 0800, 1500, and 2000 h, and plasma was average temperatures were lower than the rest
analyzed for thyroxine (T4). triiodothyronine of the weeks, which may have influenced the
(T3), and cortisol with immuno 1251 kits (Pan- observations for those weeks. However, wk 1
tex, Santa Monica, CA). Both groups of cows and 4 were adjustment weeks and data col-
were milked twice daily at 2400 and 1300 h, lected were not used in the statistical analysis.
designated morning and evening milkings, re- The mean temperatures of the chilled and
spectively. Daily milk samples were taken at ambient drinking water were 10.6 and 27.0"C,
the morning milking to be analyzed for proges- respectively. The temperature of the ambient
terone by Ovusure Cowside Rapid Tube Kit water was 3°C less than anticipated, but this
(Elanco Products Company, Indianapolis. L ) N. temperature was not controlled. Chemical com-
Milk weights were obtained 3 d/wk at the position of the water (Table 1 ) was typical of
morning and evening milkings. At these times, water from the Texas A&M University water
samples of milk were taken for analysis of total system. Daily drinking water intakes were aver-
solids by drying at 100°C for 4 h, and for milk aged for each week and are shown in Table 2.
fat, milk protein, and SCC by the Texas DHIA Cows tended to drink more of the chilled drink-
laboratory. Data were analyzed using the Gen- ing water (10.6"C) than the control water
eral Linear Models procedure of SAS (3). (27.0-C). Although the difference was not sig-
nificant. it differs from earlier work in which
Experiment 2
Twelve lactating Holstein cows yielding
more than 27 kg of milk/d were used on Mon-
95
day through Friday of 2 consecutive wk. The
85
1st wk was an adjustment period and the 2nd
wk a comparison period. The cows were 8 7 5 ~
brought into the barn at 1020 h and tied in Z + 6 5
stalls without feed or water. At 1130 h, two 9 5 5 1
rectangular containers of water were offered to $ 4 5
each cow for a IO-min interval. The containers 2 35
were identical and contained similar amounts of I? 25 2
water-one with 10°C water, the other with wa- I5
ter of about 30'C. The two containers were 5
placed side by side in place of the feed manger. r/zz r/z9 815 0112 8/19 0126 912 9/9
Ad) Sld. I 2 3 4 5 6
The amounts offered exceeded the amount
drunk in cases. The positions Of the two Figure 1. Weekly averages of daily ambient tempera-
containers (right side VS. left side) were rotated tures and of relative humidities.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 73, No. 4, 1990
1094 WlLKS ET AL.
TABLE I. Chemical composition of drinking water.1*2 periments with cattle (2. 11) in which a greater
Composition (WAG)
amount of heat was absorbed by chilled water
even though less was consumed.
Cations
Calcium 3.6 Cattle with chilled drinking water ate more
Magnesium 1.o (P<.O6) feed than controls (Table 3), which is
Potassium 3.0 consistent with other studies (2, 11, 12). Period
sodium 208.3 effects were also significant ( P 4 0 3 ) ; cows
Total cations 215.9
consumed more feed as a percentage of body
Anions weight in the second half of the 6-wk experi-
Carbonate 59.8
Bi-carbonak 462.1 ment. This may have been due to lower average
Sulfate 16.6 ambient temperatures in the second treatment
Chloride 60.7 period than in the first treatment period (Figure
Total anions 599.2 1). In a study with beef cattle in a hot environ-
T t l solids
oa 815.1 ment (average maximum ambient temperature
DH 8.9
40.8'C), hfgreen et al. (11) found that cattle
'Water w s f o the Texas A&M University water
rm provided 18.3'C water 24 h/d ate more feed per
system. day and had a more efficient ratio of feed per
ZAverage of k e e samples. unit of gun than cattle given 32.2"C water.
Similarly, Baker et al. (2) and Milam et al. (12)
observed an increase in feed intake when
chilled water (1O'C) was provided to lactating
cows consumed less chilled water than ambient dairy cows for a portion of the day.
water (2, 5. 6, 10, 12, 15). The amount of heat Respiration rates flable 4) were 70.5 breaths
absorbed per cow per day from the chilled and per minute for the treatment cows compared
ambient water was 2153.31 and 898.27 kcal. with 81.0 for the control cows (P<.OOOl). The
This value was calculated by taking the differ- differences between respiration rates at the
ence between body temperature and drinking three observation times are also in Table 4.
water temperature and multiplying it by the Chilled drinking water had its greatest effect in
average liters of water consumed by each lowering respiration rates at 1500 h with a
group. Chilled drinking water absorbs more difference of 11.8 breaths per minute between
kilocalories of heat than ambient water, but the two treatments (P<.OoOl). The difference
there is an additional cooling effect for the between the chilled water treatment at 2000 h
treatment cows in this experiment, because they and the controls at 2000 h was 1 1.1 breaths per
consumed more of the chilled water than the minute (Pc.OOO1). Chilled drinking water had
ambient water. This agrees with previous ex- the least effect at 0800 h with differences be-
TABLE 2. Effect of chilled drinking water on group water intake.
Dnnking water t m e a u e
eprtr
10.6.C 27.o.C
( W g DM intake (Ukg DM intake
Weeks (Ucow per d) per 1 0 0 kg BW) (Ucow per d) per 100 kg BW)
'
1 73.35 22.78 58.68 19.20
2 79.23 22.30 62.63 18.25
3 77.93 21.99 64.36 18.95
41 72.17 19.75 79.76 21.72
5 8 1.48 20.95 89.24 24.20
6 75.17 20.06 74.89 19.85
Least sauazes means 78.45 21.32 72.78 20.11
'Weeks of adaptation; not used in the statistical analysis.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 73, No. 4, 1990
RESPONSES TO CHILLED DRINKING WATER 1095
TABLE 3. Effect of chilled drinkmg water on feed intake.
Drinking water temperature
10.6'C 27.0'C
(DM intake/ (DM intake/ (DM intake/ (DM intake/
We
ek 100 kg BW) w75) 1M) kg BW) wt.75)
1 3.22 ,155 2.87 .I36
2 3.55 ,172 3.43 ,163
3 3.54 ,172 3.40 ,161
4 3.65 .I75 3.67 ,178
5 3.89 .I87 3.69 ,180
6 3.75 .I80 3.77 .184
Least squares means 3.68 .I78 3.57 ,172
SE .04 .002 .04 .002
aP.M.
tween the two treatments at this time of 8.7 whereas control cows averaged 39.9-C
breaths per minute (P<.02). Within each treat- (P<.OOOl). Chilled drinking water had its great-
ment, differences in respiration rates between est effect in lowering rectal temperatures at
the observation times were also significant ex- 2000 h with a difference of .4"C between the
cept between 0800 and 2000 h (P<.OOOl). Res- two treatments (P<.OoOl). The difference be-
piration rates for both groups tended to be tween the chilled water treatment at 1500 h and
lower in wk 4 and 6 compared to wk 1,2, and the control treatment at 1500 h was .3'C
3. This trend may be due to a decline in the (P<.0001).Chilled drinking water had its least
average weekly temperatures in wk 4 and 6 effect at 0800 h with differences between the
(Figure 1). two treatments .1"C (fk.02).Within each treat-
Rectal temperatures (Table 5) for the treat- ment, differences between the three times were
ment cows across all times was 39.7'C, significant (Pc.OOO1). Similar to respiration
TABLE 4. Effect of chilled drinking water on respiration rates (breawmin)
Drinking water temperature and observauon time
10.6-c 27.0'C
We
ek 0800 h 1500 h 2000 h 0800 h 1500 h 2000 h
1' 79.4 91.0 74.0 83.2 100.5 87.8
2 68.3 89.0 72.3 82.5 97.7 86.3
3 74.0 90.3 72.3 84.1 100.9 84.0
41 62.6 64.7 53.7 58.3 74.7 60.7
5 60.0 67.0 61.6 63.5 83.0 70.1
6 52.9 73.8 65.1 59.8 85.5 75.1
eky
W e l least
squares means 64.6d 7 8.
gbgC 68.3d 73.3c 90.4a 79.4b
SE 1.8 2.3 1.5 1.8 2.3 1.5
Least square means
All timese 70.5 81.0
SE .79 .SO
~ ~~ ~ _ _
a*b,c7dMeansih different superscripts differ (P<.05)
wt
eP<.OOO 1.
' e k of adaptation, not u e in siaustical analysis.
Wes sd
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 73, No. 4, 1990
1096 WILKS ET AL.
TABLE 5. Effect of chilled drinking water on rectal lernperature('C).
-
Drinkine water ternmature and observation time
10.6'c 27.0'C
Weck 0800 h 1500 h 2000 h 0800 h 1500 h W h
11 39.5 40.4 40.1 39.8 40.7 40.6
2 39.1 40.3 39.9 39.5 40.7 40.6
3 39.5 40.6 40.2 39.8 40.8 40.5
4' 38.9 39.1 38.8 38.5 39.1 38.7
5 39.0 39.8 39.4 39.0 39.9 39.5
6 39.0 39.8 39.5 38.9 40.1 39.9
Weekly least
squares means 39.3e 40.0b 39.7c 39.4d 40.3a 40.1a.b
SE .7
0 I
.n .os .M .M .05
Least squares means
NItimesf 39.7 39.9
asb,c*deMeans
with different superscripts differ (P<.05)
fP<.rnI.
'Weeks of adaptation; not u e in statistical analysis.
sd
rates, rectal temperatures for both groups de- ml) (Table 6). There were also no significant
clined in wk 4. Lanham et al. (10) and Milam effects of treatment on time between the two
et al. (12) reported differences in rectal temper- groups. However, the 1500 h concentration of
atures taken 10 min after providing chilled both groups tended to be lower than the con-
water in a moderate environment, but the re- centrations of T4 during the cooler times of the
duction in body temperature was transient. Ba- day. Within the treatment group, the 1500 h T4
ker et al. (2) also noted a trend for cows concentration was 14.4 ndml lower than the
consuming chilled water to have lower body 2000 h concentration (fc.001).There were no
temperatures. Because chilled water is effective other treatment by time effects within each
in cooling t e body, cows are not required to
h group. These results agree with h t t and Wet-
increase respiration rates as high in order to temann (14), in which the concentrations of T4
keep body temperatures lower. This indicates and T 3 tended to decrease in steers exposed to
that cows consuming chilled water in a hot 32'C compared with concentrations in s'mrs at
environment may have lower maintenance re- 4°C. The main secretory product of the thyroid
quirements than those consuming ambient wa- gland is T4, followed by T3. Both increase the
ter. energy metabolism of most tissues in the body.
Cows given chilled drinking water had This may explain the lower plasma concentra-
higher plasma T3 concentrations (Table 6) tions of these hormones during the hotter times
across all times than controls ( 3 8 ng/ml) of the day and the higher plasma concentrations
(fc.008).The difference between treatment and in cows provided chilled vs. ambient drinking
control cows at 1500 h, the hottest time of the water in hot environments. Similar to feed in-
day, was .16 ng/ml (k.05).There were no take, the thyroid gland may be attempting to
other significant effects of treatment on time lower body heat production, thereby enabling
between the two groups, but the 1500 h plasma the animals to compensate for the greater envi-
concentration of T3 tended to be lower for both ronmental heat load. However, thyroid hor-
groups compared to the cooler times of the day. mone secretion is also related to factors other
Chilled drinking water did not significantly af- than environmental temperature. Thyroid hor-
fect T4 across times, but it tended to be higher mone secretion is reduced when feed intake is
in the treatment cows (42.4 ng/ml vs. 39.2 ng/ lower (17). Thyroid hormone secretion in-
Journal of Diy Science Vol. 73, No. 4, 1990
ar
RESPONSES TO CHILLED DRINKING WATER 1097
TABLE 6. Effect of chilled drinking water on plasma concentrations of uiiodothyronine (T3). thyroxine (Tk),
cortisol, and
milk progesterone (P4).
Drinking water temperature and observation time
10.6-c 27.0.C
OSOOh 1500 h UXX)h 0800 h 1500 h 2000 h
Wml)
Hormone
T3 .87' .84' .93' .81'vb .68b .77',b
T4 42.4a.b*C 35.2c 49.6a 36.4b.C 37.2b*c 43.9aSb
Cortisol 1.84"-b 3.56' 3.7P 2.52'~~ 2.32'~~ 1.34b
p4' ... ... ... ... ... ...
Means, all times and periods
T3 .88' .75b
SE .03 .03
T4 42.4 39.2
SE 1.6 1.6
Cortisol 3.03 2.06
SE .44 .44
p4 4.58 3.15
SE .56 S6
a7b-cMeansi same row w t different superscripts differ (Pe.05).
n ih
'Milk P4 was measured twice daily and averaged on a weekly basis.
creases from the first (1.96 ng/ml) to the third plasma cortisol may also suggest that the body
(2.99 ng/ml) trimester of lactation, and Hol- is attempting to lessen metabolic heat produc-
steins have lower T 4 secretion rate than Guern- tion by reducing the thermogenic actions of this
seys. hormone.
Cortisol was not significantly affected by As shown in Table 6, cattle provided chilled
chilled drinking water across all times, but the drinking water had higher milk progesterone
treatment cows tended to have higher plasma concentrations than controls (4.58 vs. 3.15 ng/
cortisol concentrations than controls (3.03 vs. ml) (R.08). cows were open during the
All
2.06 ng/ml) (Table 6). However, the entire experiment. Three cows expressed signs
2000-h concentration of cortisol in the treat- of standing estrus during the 8-wk experiment
ment group was 2.45 ng/ml higher than the and were bred, but none conceived. At the time
2000-h concentration in the control group of their breeding, two of the cows were in the
(k.03). The elevated cortisol in wk 5 may be control group and one was in the treatment
the result of the lower temperatures in wk 4. group. The absence of signs of estrus and the
Other studies that measured plasma cortisol tendency toward lower milk progesterone in the
concentrations in hot weather probably refer to control group may indicate that cows were in
long-term vs. short-term effects (1, 4). Christi- metestrum or proestrum most of the time. How-
son and Johnson (4) exposed cows to moderate ever, the majority of the treatment cows appar-
heat stress (35°C) for 20 min and observed a ently never came into estrus. This indicates that
rise in plasma cortisol concentrations. Howev- there may be other factors that affect reproduc-
er, aftcr cows were exposed to 7 to 10 wk of tive efficiency of cows in the summer. Similar
chronic mild heat stress ( 5 C , plasma cortisol
3') to this study, Folman et al. (7) showed an
was depressed (4). Abilay et al. (1) also noted a increase in summer plasma progesterone con-
depression in plasma cortisol in cows exposed centrations in cattle that were cooled by forced
to a 33.5'C environment. These authors (1) also ventilation and related reduced fertility in the
suggested that depressed cortisol in heat-ex- summer to lower progesterone concentrations.
posed cows may reflect the inactivity of a n Cows receiving chilled drinking water pro-
enzyme in the adrenal cortex which synthesizes duced more milk (25.9 vs. 24.7 kg/d) (P<.02),
cortisol from progesterone. The depression in as shown in Table 7. Milk fat percentage also
Jou~~al Dairy Science Vol. 73, No. 4. 1990
of
1098 WKKS ET AL.
TABLE 7. Effect of chilled drinking water on milk yield ing water that we did not measure. An alterna-
and components. tive for dauy farmers with cold well water is to
Drinking water use insulated water tanks to keep the water
temwrature cool.
Component 10.6.C 27.0’C
Milk yielda 25.9
(kgld)
24.7
- Experiment 2
After the adjustment weeks, all 24 cows
SE .35 .34
3.5% F C M ~ 25.5 23.6 clearly preferred ambient water. The first 12
SE .35 .34 cows drank an average of 97.2% ambient water
(%) with a range of 87.4 to 100%. Seven cows
Fat 3.43 3.31 drank only warm water. The second set of 12
SE .06 .06 COWS averaged 99.3% ambient water with a
Protein 3.07 3.07 range of 94.5 to 100%. Ten cows drank only
SE .2
0 .02 the warm water. Corresponding respiration
ShT 8.17 8.29
SE .08 .08
rates and deep rectal temperatures for the corre-
Total solids 11.59 11.60 sponding groups during the comparison weeks
SE .09 .09 were 80.5 and 39.6”C and 97.5 breaths per
(X io3) - minute and 40.5’C. Clearly, these cows had
elevated respiration rates and body tempera-
SCC 84.7 133.1
SE 42.6 42.6 tures, which reflected the July conditions.
aP<.02.
Chilled water averaged 1O’C; line water aver-
aged 29.6”C during the wk 1 of comparison and
bP<.0003.
31.0’C during the wk 2. Preference for warm
water does not prove that cows would “wait”
for the preferred water, but this appeared to
occur in our earlier studies (12), in which cows
tended to be higher in the treatment cows; given chilled water before milking were seen to
therefore, FCM was also different (25.5 vs. go immediately to the warm water trough after
23.6 kg) (P<.0003).Milam et al. (12) also leaving the milking parlor. These findings sug-
observed increased milk yields in cows pro- gest that if chilled water were offered continu-
vided with chilled drinking water. ously, cows might drink from the wash rack
Treatment cows consumed 3.08% more feed sprinklers, or any other warm water source that
than the control cows, and the concentration was available to them.
(by calculation) of NE) in the diet was 1.69
Mcalkg DM. This resulted in an additional .65 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
kg of feed consumed/d by the treatment cows,
which is equivalent to an additional 1.10 Mcal/ We express appreciation to the Texas Dairy
d. The treatment cows also produced 1.2 kg Herd Improvement Association for the milk
more milk/d, which required an additional 1.72 analyses. We thank Barbara Perkins for help in
Mcal NEl/d. These results indicate that the the preparation of the manuscript.
cows fed chilled water produced more milk
even though they did not consume enough ad- REFERENCES
ditional feed to support the additional milk. The 1 Abilay. T. A., H. D. Johnson. and M. Madan. 1975.
additional energy may have come from a lo- Influence of environmental heat on peripheral plasma
wered maintenance requirement as indicated by progesterone and cortisol during the bovine estrous
the reduced respiration rates and lower body cycle. J. Dany Sci. 58:1836.
2 Baker, C. C., C. E. Coppock, J. K.Lanham, D. H,. Nave,
temperatures. and J. M. LaBore. 1988. Chilled dnnking water effects
If chilled drinking water is to be used effec- on lactating Holstein cows in summer. J. Dairy Sci. 71:
tively by d m y farmers, the additional milk 2699.
must be great enough to pay for the cost of 3 Barr. A. J., J. H. Goodnighi,J. P. Sall, and 1. T. Helwig.
1985. A user’s guide to the statistical analysis system.
cooling the water. There also may be an added SAS h t . , C q ,NC.
reproductive benefit to providing chilled drink- 4Christison. G . I., and H. D. Johnson. 1972. Cortisol
Journal of Diy Science Vol. 73. No. 4. 1990
ar
RESPONSES TO CHILLED DRINKING WATER 1099
m o v e r in heat-stressed cows. J. Anim. Sci. 35:1005. Bond. 1975. Effect of drinking water temperature on
5 Cunningham, M. D.. F. A. Martz. and C. P. Merilan. becf cattle performance. 1. A n i . Sci. 40:223.
1964. Effect o drinking water temperature upon rumi-
f 12 Milam, K.Z., C. E. Coppock, J. W. West, J. K. Lanham,
nant digestion, intraruminal temperature, and water D. H. Nave, and J. M. Labore. 1986. Effects of drinking
consumption of nonlactatingdairycows. J. Dairy Sci. 47: water temperature on production responses in lactating
382. Holstein cows in summer. J. Diy Sci. 69:1013.
ar
6DeGen, A. A.. and B. A. Young. 1984. Effects of 13 National Research Council.1981. Effect of environment
ingestion of warm, cold and frozen water on heat balance on nutrient requirements of domestic animals. Natl.
in cattle. Can. 1. Anim. Sci. 64:73. Acad. Press, Washington. DC.
.
7 Folman, Y .M. Rosenberg,I. Ascarelli, M. Kaim, and Z. 14 F’ratt, B. R.. and R. P. Weuemann. 1986. The effect of
Hen. 1983. The effect of dietary and climatic factors on environmentaltemperatureon concentrationsof thyrox-
fertility, and on plasma progesterone and ocsuadiol-l7b ine and triiodothyronineafter thyrotropin releasing hor-
levels in dairy cows. J. Steroid Biochem. 19:863. mone in steers. J. Anim. Sci. 62:1346.
8 Harris, R., H.Yam, and J. Barnett. 1%7. Refrigerated 15 Stener, R. A., C. F. Brasington, C. E. Coppock, J. K.
water for fattening steers. J. Anim. Sci. 26:2Q7. Lanham.and K. Z. Milam. 1986. Effect of drinkingwater
9Ingraham. R. H. 1968. Milk production and rectal temperatureon heat stress of dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 69:
temperatureresponses of Holstein cattle to cooled drink- 546.
ing water in subtropicalclimate. M.S.Thesis, Iowa State 16 Texas Agricultural Extension Service. Soil Testing Lab-
Univ., Ames. oratory. 1987. Water analysis. Texas A&M Univ. Syst..
1OLanham. J. K.. C. E. Coppock, K. Z. Milam. J. M. College Station.
.
M o r e , and D H.Nave. 1986. Effectsof drinking water 17 Yousef, M. K., H. H. Kibler, and H. D. Johnson. 1967.
temperature on physiological responses of lactating Thyroid activity and heat production in cattle following
Holstein cows in summer. J. Dairy Sci. 69:1004. sudden ambient temperature changes. J. Anim. Sci. 26:
11 Lofgreen, G. P,R. L.Givens, S.R. Morrison, and T. E.
. 142.
Journal of Diy Science Vol. 73. No. 4. 1990
ar
