The productivity of dairy cattle under different housing and feeding technologies

DOI: 10.32900/2312-8402-2023-129-52-61

Admina Natalia,
Candidate of Agricultural Sciences, senior scientist,,
Admin Oleksandr,
Candidate of Agricultural Sciences, senior scientist,,
Osipenko Tetiana,
Candidate of Agricultural Sciences,,
Institute of Animal Science of NAAS

Keywords: housing technology, feeding, feed consumption, dairy cattle, output, average daily gains, reproduction capability


There have been analyzed the data of production activity of 32 experimental farms of NAAS system for the last 20 years. There have been established connections and peculiarities of influence of cattle housing and feeding technologies on energy efficiency of production in dairy cattle breeding. It is established that the amount of concentrated feeds on one cow per year was 6 metric cent more fodder units on loose housing farms than on tied one (p<0,01). Total feed costs per cow per year did not differ. Milk output per average cow per year was 1,290 kg higher in loose housing compared to tied housing with feed consumption per 1 kg of milk being 0.1 fodder unit lower (p<0.001). The strength of the effect of cow housing technology was 4.5% and 8.6% respectively. The feed consumption per cow per year and the amount of concentrated feed fed in the farms using the feed mixture feeding technology were 25% and 92% higher, respectively (p<0.001) compared to the separate feeding technology. In these farms, the milk output per average annual cow was 2070 kg higher and feed consumption per 1 kg of milk was 0.2 feed units lower (p<0.001). The strength of the impact of cow feeding technology was 10.8% and 38.4% respectively.
Total feed intake and concentrate feed consumption probably did not differ between farms with different housing technologies for young cows. However, with loose housing, average daily gains of young animals were 45g higher compared to tied housing with 1.1 t of feed consumed per unit (p<0.05). There was a small effect of holding technology on these figures of 2.8% and 2.7% respectively.
Consumption of forage per 1 head of young animals was higher by 3 cent of fodder units (p<0,001) while the amount of the consumed concentrated forage was not different when feeding with fodder mixtures. As a result, an average daily gain by 123g was higher in the farms that used the feed mixture feeding technology and the cost per unit of production was lower by 1.4 t of feed units. The strength of the influence of the factor in question was 23% and 6.2% respectively.
The established relations and features of influence of technologies of the housing and feeding of dairy cattle indicate the greater energy efficiency of loose housing technology of cows and young cattle with feeding by full-feed mixture of fodder. Experimental farms pay insufficient attention to balancing feed rations, especially for young cattle, which leads to overconsumption of feed.


  1. Brahinets, S. M., Brahinets, A. M., Holubovska, O. V., Kropyvka M. F. (Ed.) (2013). Napriamy enerhozberezhennia v molochnomu skotarstvi [Directions of energy saving in dairy farming]. Zb. nauk. prats TDAU (ekonomichni nauky). Melitopol: Vyd-vo Melitopolska typohrafiia «Liuks», 1 (21), 91-97 URL: [in Ukrainian].
  2. Busenko, O. T., (Ed.) Stoliuk. V. D., & Mohylnyi, O. Y. (2005) Tekhnolohiia vyrobnytstva produktsii tvarynnytstva [Production technology of animal husbandry products]. K.: Vyshcha osvita, 496. URL: ya_virob nitstva_produktsiyi_tvarin-1.pdf [inUkrainian].
  3. Rybachenko, O. M. (2011) Osnovni problemy rozvytku kormovyrobnytstva v Ukraini [The main problems of fodder production development in Ukraine]. Ahro inkom., 10-12. URL: /agroin.pdf [in Ukrainian].
  4. Melinm M., Svennersten-Sjaunjam K., & Wiktorsson, H. (2005). Feeding Patterns and Performance of Cows in Controlled Cow Traffic in Automatic Milking Systems. J. Dairy Sci., 88, 11, 3913-3922.
  5. Deming, J. A., Bergeron, R., Leslie, K. E., DeVries, T. J. (2013). Associations of cow-level factors, frequency of feed delivery, and standing and lying behaviour of dairy cows milked in an automatic system. Can. J. Anim. Sci., 93, 427–433.
  6. Andriichuk, V. H. (2013). Ekonomika pidpryiemstv ahropromyslovoho kompleksu [Economics of enterprises of the agro-industrial complex]. Рidruchnyk. K.: KNEU, 779. [in Ukrainian].
  7. Voloshka, V. (2006). «Terezyne» ‑ symvol perspektyvy [«Terezine» is a symbol of perspective]. Propozytsiia, 1, 46-47. [in Ukrainian].
  8. Berezivskyi, P. (1998). Ekonomichna efektyvnist skotarstva ta shliakhy yii pidvyshchennia [Economic efficiency of cattle breeding and ways to increase it]. Lviv: Ukrainski tekhnolohii, 156. URL: /6493/1/1.pdf [in Ukrainian].
  9. Kravchuk, V. I., Lutsenko, M. M., & Mechta, M. (2008). Prohresyvni tekhnolohii zahotivli, pryhotuvannia i rozdavannia kormiv [Progressive technologies of procurement, preparation and distribution of fodder]. K. : Feniks, 104. [in Ukrainian].
  10. Pelekhatyi, M. S., & Shuliar, A. L. (2011). Molochna produktyvnist koriv novostvorenykh ukrainskykh molochnykh porid [Milk productivity of cows of newly created Ukrainian dairy breeds]. Zootekhnichna nauka: istoriia, problemy, perspektyvy: mat. mizhnar. nauk.-prakt. konf. Kamianets-Podilskyi, 190–191. [in Ukrainian].
  11. Haug, A., Hostmark, A. T., & Harstad, O. M. (2007). Bovine milk in human nutrition-A review. Lipids Health Dis,. 25, 1-16. URL: https://lipidworld.
  12. Tyasi, T. L., Gxasheka, M., & Tlabela, C. P. (2015). Assessing the effect of nutrition on milk composition of dairy cows: A review. Int. J. Curr. Sci., 17, 56-63. URL:
  13. Ericksona, Peter S., Kalscheur, & Kenneth F. (2020). Nutrition and feeding of dairy cattle. Animal Agriculture., 157–180.