Body Composition of Dairy Cows According to Lactation...
Body Composition of Dairy Cows According to Lactation Stage,
Somatotropin Treatment, and Concentrate Supplementation
Y. CHILLIARD. M. Cl&> R. LEFAIVRE. and 6. FkMOND
Laboratoire ktation et Elev&e des’ Ruminants
Institut National de la Radwche Agronomique
Theix, 63122 St.-Genès-Champanelle,
France
ABSTRACT
energy when calculated from cumulative
energy balances or ixxly componats, re-
Body weight, condition score, deuteri-
spectively.
ated water dilution space, estimated body
(Key words: cow, lactation, somato-
lipids and proteins, and calculated energy
tropin, body composition)
and protein balances were determined in
24 multiparous Holstein cows at wk 1,7,
Abbreviation key: BCS = body condition
20, and 39 after parturition. Cows
score, CEB = cumulative energy balance, DW
received two levels of energy concentrate
= deuteriated water, DWS = deuteriated water
(high and low groups) from wk 3. The
space, EB = energy balance.
objective wss to estimate changes in
body composition as affected by stage of
INTRODUCTION
lactation, concentrate level, and bST ad-
ministration or placebo from wk 9 in a 2
During a lactation cycle, dairy cows are
x 2 factorial des@.
successively mobilizing and storing body
Cows fiom high and low energy
reserves. Tissue mobilization during the first 2
groups lost 25 and 35 kg of body lipids
mo of lactation is from 15 to 60 kg of lipids
and 3.3 and .5 kg of body proteins,
(6, 20) and from 0 to 15 kg of proteins (8)
respectively, during the fïrst 7 wk of
according to milk potential, diet composition,
lactation. During the end of the winter
level of feeding, and body condition at calving
pe@od (wk 8 to 20), control and bST-
(14, 18).
Increase in mobilization or decreasc in
injected cows lost 8.5 and 21.1 kg of
body lipids, respectively. During the
deposition of body fat was observed in bST-
gming period (wk 20 to 39), bST-in-
treated cows during short triais (8 wk) (5) or
when the same diet was given for ad libitum
jected cows gained more BW (34 kg),
intake to bST and control cows (7, 21, 30).
water (36 kg), and estimated proteins
The aim of the present study was to esti-
(5.8 kg) and lost more condition score
mate changes in dairy cow body composition
(-.2 units) and estimated lipids (-11.5
during one lactation cycle according to lacta-
kg) than controls.
tion stage, concentrate supply, and bST treat-
Using data from control periods, it
ment.
was calculated that 1 unit change in body
condition score corresponded to changes
MATERtALS AND METHODS
of 35 to 44 kg in BW (cor%ted for
estimated gut content variation), 21 to 29
kg in body lipids. and 200 to 300 Mcal
Anlmals and Traatments
in body energy. One kîlogram of cor-
Twenty-four multiparous Holstein cows
rected BW change corresponded to a
received com silage for ad libitum intake dur-
change of 4.3 or 5.5 to 5.9 Mcal in body
ing the dry period and the first part of lactation
(winter period). Cows calved from the end of
October to the end of December 1986. A&r
wk 24 (i: 2) of lactation, they were tumed out
Rcccivcd Janwuy 4, 1991.
AcaptaI Apxil 19, 1991.
to pasture.
‘F’ment address: Institut S606galais de Rcchcrchcs
concentrate was fed in fixed quant@ dur-
A@wles, BP 2075, Dakar, Scntgal.
ing wk 1 (4.1 kg/d) and wk 2 (5.7 kg/d)
1991 1 Dairy Sci 743103-3116
3103
.:. .’ .
3104
CI-IILLIARD ET AL.
TABLE 1. Composition and nutitive value means for diets ingested by each nutritionai group during the winter period.1
wk 1 to 8
wk 9 to 18
High
LOW
High
LOW
Iqyedient, 96 DM
Com silage*
59.1
68.6
68.9
83.9
Protein-rich concentratd
7.6
11.7
4.8
9.5
Energy-rich concentrate
30.9
17.3
23.5
4.5
Urea5
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.1
Minerai-rich concentrate
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.5
Nutritive7value. per kg DM
1.62
1.63
1.00
1.64
z McalNEL
167
177
156
160
mi g
99
103
89
94
‘Weeks of lactation and level of energy concentrate. CP = Crude fiher, PDI = protein digestible in the intestine,
calculated as by Rémond et al. (26).
*Dry matter containing 39% grain. 94.5% OM, 18.8% CP, and 9.2% 8.
~rmaldehyde-treated
soybean (80%) and mpesecd (20%) me&; DM containing 92.5% OM, 8.1% CI? and 47.3%
CP.
41ngredients in percentage: wheat, 10; maize, 10; barley, 32; dehydrated alfa& 10; dry bcet pulps, 25, soybean mtal
5; wheat hmn, 5; dicalcium phosphate, 1.5; calcium bicarbonate, 1; Salt, .5. DM containing 92.8% OM, 10.4% CP, and
13.7% 8.
5Dry matter containing 100% OM and 288% CP.
6Commercial supplement containing: Ca, 22.346, P, 8.3%; NaCl, 1056, Mg, 446, S, 2%; Zu, 4ooo ppm; Mn, 3ooO
ppm; Ca. 800 ppm; 1,60 ppm; CO, 20 ppm; se, 5 ppm; vitamins (for 100 kg of feed): vitamin A, 25,ooO,ooO lU vitamin
D3, 8,000,000 Iu; vitamin E, 10 g. DM contain& 13.2% OM.
7Calculated from OM digestibility
of com silage and taking into accouut the negative effccts of percentage of
concentrate and level of DMI (26).
postpartum. From wlc 3 onward, it was fed
During the grazing period, cows of the low
according to the expected milk yield calculated
group were fed concentrate (twice a day in the
from the observed mi& yield during the frrst 2
milking parlor) from a milk yield of 12 kg/d
wk using standard lactation curves recorded in
higher than the yield from which the high
the same herd. At the beginning of wk 3, cows
group began to receive concentrate. The milk
were allotted to two nutritional groups, receiv-
yield assumed to be satisfied by grass alone
ing a high or low level of energy concentrate.
declined during the grazing season according
During the winter period, cows in the high and
to grass availability and quality.
low groups received daily 2.5 Mcal NEL more
The composition (proportions of grain and
(approximately 1.3 kg DM of concentrate) and
cakes) of the concentrates offered to the high
4.2 Mcal NEL less (approximately 2.2 kg DM
and low groups was calculated (Table 1) SO
of concentrate), respectively, than the recom-
that the total protein supply would be the
mended energy supply (730 kcal NErJkg 4%
same, assuming that the low group should
FCM) necessary to satisfy the difference be-
compensate for half of the difference in con-
tween expected milk yield and the yield as-
centrate supply by increasing com silage DMI.
sumed to be covemd (in excess of maintenance
Milk recording and calculations of energy and
requirement) by com silage intake at wk 5 of
protein balances were as described previously
lactation: 16 kg of 4% FCM. Cows were
(26).
adapted to the high or low concentrate level
From wk 9 to 39 postpartum, half of cows
during wk 3 and 4 postpartum. The maximum
of each nutritional group were biweekly in-
theoretical supply of concentrate was reached jected subcutaneously with either 500 mg of
at wk 5 and decreased thereafter. Ah diet recombinaut methionyl bST in a slow release
ingredients (Table 1) were fed together once a
preparation (Sometribove,
Monsanto, St.
day and mixed in the manger.
Louis, MO) or placebo.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74. No. 9, 1991
BODY COh4POSlTION
3105
Measurements and Analyses
DWS measurement; they had free access to the
same mixed diet as at the end of the winter
Body condition was scored [scale from 0 to
period in order to equalize the digestive con-
5 (22)], and body water was estimated (28,31)
tents among DWS determmation periods.
at wk 1, 7.2 (SD = S), 20.5 (i: l.l), and 38.7
Changes in body energy were calculated by
(zt 3.1) of lactation. Deuteriated water (DW,
two different methods. The iïrst was based on
99.8% purity; Commissariat à 1’Energie Ato-
changes in body components (net energy) us-
mique, Gii sur Yvette, France) was injected (.5
ing values of 9.4 and 5.7 Mcal/kg of lipids and
g/kg BW) intravenously between 0800 and
proteins, respectively. The second was from
0900 h. Milk was used to determine the
energy balances (EB), calculated as in Remond
decrease in the DW concentration because it
et al. (26) aud cumulated during the corres-
gave the same results as blood (10, 20).
ponding periods as EB (Mcal NEù during
Milk was sampled f?om six consecutive
weeks of positive EB and EB/.8 during weeks
milkings (at 0700 and 1600 h), i.e., at approxi-
of negative EB (11). These calculations are
mately 8, 23, 32, 47, 56, and 71 h after DW
based on the assumptions that metabolizable
injection. Previous work showed that quili-
energy is used with the same efficiency for
brium of blood DW was reached 6 to 8 h after
body energy deposition and milk energy secre-
injection (28). Milk samples were stored at
tion and that mobilized body energy is used for
-25-C. Milk water was extracted by deep
milk secretion with an efficiency of 80% (9).
freezing and vacuum evaporation at room tem-
Changes in BW were corrected for expected
perature. Concentration of DW in milk water
changes in digestive contents related to varia-
was measured (31) in duplicate by infmred
tions in DMt [corrected BW (kg) = BW (kg) -
spectrometry at 2512 mn using a double beam
4 x DMI (kg)]. The coefficient of correction
apparatus (perkin-Elmer 180, Norwalk, CT);
was from the absolute variation in ruminal
DW space (DWS) was calculated from the
content that was measured with the same diet
DW concentration at zero tinte. This concen-
[+ 3 kgkg incroase in DMI (25)], and an
tration was obtained from semilogarithmic plot
additional increase in intestinal content was
of DW concentration against time of samphng
assumed to be 1 kg& DMI (8).
after the DW injection (28).
Data were analyxed using variance~ovari-
Body weight of the cows was registered at
ance analysis, taking into account effects of
1400 h (i.e., 5 h after a.m feeding) during 3
bST treatment, energy concentrate supply, and
consecutive d after DW infusion. Body lipids
their interaction and using the milk yield of the
and protems were calculated (28) using equa-
first 2 wk postpartum as covariate. Brobabili-
tions previously calibrated (10) on 20 Holstein
ties of 10, 5, and 1% were used,
multiparous cows (12 dry, 4 at wk 1, and 4 at
wk 8 of lactation; 8 fat, 8 lean, and 4 in
RESULTS
medium body condition). These cows were fed
a corn silage-based diet. Their body composi-
Early Lactation
tion was measured after slaughter by chemical
analysis of the whole body. Equations were
Mean BW: body water, hdy lipids, body
protein, and body condition score (BCS) at
calving were 640, 411, 100, 87 kg, and 3.0,
Lipids (kg) = 903 x BW (kg)
respectively (Figure 1). During the first 2 mo
- 1.135 x DWS (kg)
of lactation (Table 2), cows receiving the high-
Proteins (kg) = .088 x BW (kg)
est level of energy concentrate lost more BW
+ .075 x DWS (kg)
or corrected BW (16 to 18 kg; nonsignificant)
and body proteins (2.5 kg; P < .05) and less
Accuracy of the prediction (estimated by the body lipids (9.0 kg; nonsiguificant) than those
residual SD) was 7.5 kg (8.7%) for lipids and
receiving the low level, i.e., cows that ingested
2.0 kg (2.5%) for proteins (10).
1.5 kg/d less concentrate DM. Calculated EB
The fïrst three measurements of DWS were
was not different between groups, although
during the winter period. Because the fourth
calculated protein balance was lower in the
measurement was done after 14 wk at pasture,
high group r-98 g/d, expressed in protein di-
cows were stabled for 18 d just before the last
gestible in the intestine; (26)].
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
3106
CHILLIARD ET fi.
480
680 ‘i
1
Stnrt of grazing
G
--G
Start of bST
5 660 - Start of bST
v 4 6 0
E
OSJ
‘iii 6 4 0 -
s
P
d 620 -
0 4 2 0
a
,o
600 :
.
I
.
1
-
1
.
f
0
10
20
30
40
110
96 1
é$ 9 4
Yg 92
c
‘S 90
E
a
88
2 8 6
50
L34
40!
-
1
’
1
-
1
-
’
0
10
20
30
40
Weeks of lactation
Weeks of lactation
Figure 1. Change in BW, watcr, lipids. proteins, and condition score (22) in contml (n = 11 or 12) and bST-ecattd
cows (n = 11 or 12) ulroughout lactation.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
BODY COMPOSITION
3107
T,?&SLE 2. Nutitional balances and changes in body components during the first 8 wk of lactation.
Jhimatfxl effects2
HiglG
Lowl
Concentrate
Residual SD3
(n = 11)
(11 = 12)
NutritionaI balances4
Milk yield, kgld
29.6 29.8
02 NS
2.6’
DM, kgld
16.1 16.7
-. 6 NS
1.1
Concentrate intake, kg/d
6.6 5.1 1.5
**
Bnergy balance, Mcal NQjd
-4.9
A.5
-.4 NS
2:;
Protein balance, S/d
-150 -55 -98
*
8 8
Body componcnt chsng&
BW. kg
-33.9 -18.7 -15.7 NS
i 22.6
Corrected BW,6 kg
-57.5 -39.7 -18.3 NS
22.4”
Condition score
-1.09
-92
-.14 NS
.73
Water, kg
A.5 15.4 -20.0
*
17.4
Proteins, kg
-3.3
-.5 -2.9
+
2.6a
Lipids, kg
-25.5 -34.7 9.0 NS
25.2
Bnagy, Mcal
From body components’l
-258 -329 68 NS
240
From balance8
energy
-340 -320 -25 NS
173a
lLevel of concentrate, unadjusted means.
2Level of concentrate (II@I minus low) effect was significant (**P < .Ol, *P < .05) or NS (P > JO).
3Covariate effect was significaut (aP c .Ol) or NS (P > JO).
%Veek 1 to 8 of lactation (including preexperimental period).
wk 1 and 2, i.e., the
%Veek 7.2 f .5 mirms wk 1 of lactation wk 1
(including and 2, i.e., the preexpuimental
period).
%W minus (4 x Dm (see Matehls and Methods).
7Calculated from the enagy value of body wmponent changes (see Materials and Methods).
8Calculated from cumulative energy balances over the period (sce Materials and Methods).
Period of bBl Treatment
(+5.8 kg) (Figure 1). It tended to decrease
gains in body lipids (-11.5 kg) and BCS (-.2),
During the winter period (Table 3), cows
but not significantly.
from the high groups ingested 2.9 kg DM/d
Dming the whole period of bST injection
more concentrate than those from the low
(Table 4), bST significantly increased gains in
groups but lowered their com silage intake SO
BW (+24 kg), body water (+38 kg), and body
that their total DMI was not different. No
proteins (+5.0 kg), whereas it significantly
significant differences in body component var-
decreased gains in body lipids (-23 kg) and
iations were observed. Cows injected with bST
BCS (-.5).
yielded 3.2 kg/d more milk than controls with-
out increasing total DMI. Although calculated Relatlonshlps Between Different
energy and protein balances were significantly
Estimators of Body Components
decreased by bST, the tmnds to lower gains in
BW or corrected BW (-16 to -19 kg), body
Computations based on 71 observations
proteins (-1.5 kg), and BCS (-.3) and. to
(from all cows during control periods only)
showed that BCS predicted corrected BW (44
higher losses in body lipids (-13.1 kg) than in
kg/point), body lipids (29 kg/point), and body
controls (Figure 1) were not significant.
energy (297 Mcal/point) more closely than
During the grazing period (Table 4), the
body proteins (3.9 kg/point) (Table 5 and Fig-
slight difference in concentrate level (.9 kgld)
ure 2). When they had the same BCS, bST-
between high and low groups did not affect
injected cows at wk 39 tended to have higher
any measured parameters. Injection with bST
corrected BW and lower body lipids than con-
significantly iucreased gains in BW or cor-
trois (Figure 2) due to their higher body water
rected BW (+32 to 34 kg) and body proteins
O%s- 1).
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74. No. 9. 1991
3108
-ETAL.
TABLE 3. NutritionaI balances and changes in body components during the winter period of bST treatment.
Higd
Lowl
Estimatexi effects2
Residual
bST
Control
bST
Control
Concentrate
bST
SD3
(n = 6) (n = 5)
(II = 6) (n = 7)
NutritionaI balances4
Milk yield, kg/d
28.5
27.1
29.9
25.7
-.6 NS
3.2 t
4.2’
DM, kg/d
17.8
18.8
18.0
17.5
.5 N S
-.2 N S
1.6b
Concentrate intake,
kg/d
5.4 6.0
2.9
2.8
2.7 **
-.2 N S
1.2
Energy balance,
Mcal NEdd
5
1.9
-1.4
1.7
.8 N S
- 2 . 9 **
1.98
Protein balance, g/d
-96’ 26
-21
70
-58 *
-108
**
54
Body component changes5
BW, kg
11.0
27.8
.7
16.8
10.5 NS
-16.1 NS
24.9
Corrected BW,6 kg
3.8
28.0
3.8
16.9
5.5 NS
-18.7 t
24.6
Condition score
-.OS
.30
.08
.21
.O NS
-.29 NS
Aa
Water, kg
30.3
24.8
15.2
24.3
7.1 NS
-1.3 NS
18.5
Proteins, kg
3.3 4.3
1.2
3.3
1.5 NS
-1.5 NS
3.2
Lipids, kg
-25.2
-3.8
-17.0
-13.1
1.3 NS
-13.1 NS
21.8
Energy, Mcal
From body components7 -218
-11
-153
-104
21 NS
-132 NS
209
Fmm enerRy balance’ -44
1 7 9
-107
140
68 NS
-246
**
187a
‘Level of concentrate, unadjusted means.
2Level of concentrate (high minus low) and bST treatment @ST minus control) effects were significant (**P < .Ol.
*P < .05, tP c JO) or NS (P > .~OJ.
3Covariate effect was signifïcant ('P 2 .Ol, bP < .05) or NS (P > .lO).
4Week 9 to 18 of lactation.
‘Week 20.5 i 1.1 minu wk 7.2 i .5 of lactation.
‘Corrected for DMI (see Materials and Methods).
‘Sec Mater& and Methods.
Correlation coefficients between estimators,
same periods (Table 6). Prediction of CEB by
and slopes of the regressions, generally were
changes in BCS or corrected BW, however,
lower when changes between two consecutive
was more precise (residual SD = 133 to 150
measurements during control periods were
Mcal, Table 6) than that of change in body
considered instead of absolute values (Table
energy (residual SD = 204 to 249 Mcal, Table
5). During the tïrst 2 mo of lactation, the
5). When different periods and treatment
decrease in BCS was more variable than was
groups were separated, the slope of the regres-
the decrease in corrected BW (Figure 3A).
sion between change in corrected BW and
During declining lactation, there were great
change in body energy tended to be stable
changes in corrected BW without correspond-
although intercepts were changing (Figure 3B).
mg changes in BCS. As a result, the relation-
Body energy gain for a given gain of corrected
ship between BCS and corrected BW was not
linear (Figure 3A).
BW tended to be lower in bST-supplemented
Using absolute values, changes in body en-
cows and in control cows during the period
ergy (estima& from DWS) were 297 M~al/
from wk 8 to 20.
unit of BCS and 5.9 Mcal/kg of corrected BW
(Table 5). The corresponding values were cal-
DISCUSSION
culated to be 207 and 5.5 Mcal when using
changes between consecutive periods (Table
Early Lactation
5). Cumulative EB (CEB) was 187 and 4.3
Mcal/unit of BCS change and per kg of cor-
The loss of 25 to 35 kg of body lipids
rected BW change, respectively, during the
during the first 2 mo of lactation agrees with
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
BODY COhIPOSITION
3109
TABLE 4. Milk yield, concentrate intake. and changes in body components during 8mzing and whole periods of bST
treatment.
High’
LOWl
Bstimated effects2
Residual
bST
c0ntro1
bST
Control
Concentrate
bST
SD3
Orazing period4
Numba of cows
5
5
6
7
Mi& yield, kg/d
20.3
19.1
19.3
17.8
.8 NS
1.5 NS
3.3b
Concentrate intake, kg/d
1.05
1.26
.23
.27
.89 **
-.13
NS
.44b
BW, kg
47.3
10.0
46.9
17.1
-4.8 NS
33.7 **
24.6
Corrected BW,6 kg
53.9
15.2
48.7
24.3
-3.8 NS
31.9
*
27.4
Condition score
00
.50
.42
.43
-122 NS
-25 NS
.4Pb
Water, kg
26.8
-1.2
28.6
-15.3
4.5 NS
36.2 **
14.7b
Proteius, kg
6.2
.8
6.3
.3
-.l NS
5.8
**
2.F
Lipids, kg
11.5
10.5
9.2
33.2
-9.6 NS
-11.5
NS
23.5
Energy, Mcal
From body components7 1 4 4
1 0 3
1 2 3
314
-Y0 N S
-76
NS
227
Whole period5
Number of cows
5
5
6
7
Milk yield, kgld
22.8
21.2
22.6
20.0
.2 NS
2.2 NS
3.4a
BW, kg
71.3
37.7
47.6
33.8
12.5 NS
23.9 +
31.8
Corrected BW,6 kg
69.0
43.1
52.6
41.3
7.8 NS
18.8
NS
33.7
Condition score
-.lO
.80
.50
Y:?
-.20NS
-.52 +
.69
Water, kg
64.5
23.6
43.8
15.2 +
38.2 **
17.7a
Proteins, kg
11.2
5.1
7.5
3.7
2.3 NS
5.0 **
3.5c
Lipids, kg
-10.3
6.7
-7.8
20.1
-6.3 NS
-22.8 +
29.9
Energy, Mcal
From body components7 -33
92
-30
210
-46 NS
-185
NS
290
ILeve of concentrate, tmadjusted means.
2Level of concentrate (high minus low) and bST treatment @ST minus control) effects were signiflcant (**P < .Ol,
*P < .05, +P < .lO) or NS (P > .lO).
3Cowxiate effect was significant ?P < .Ol, bP < .05, ‘P < .lO) or NS (P > .lO).
4Mean (April27 to August 5) for mi& yieId and concentrate intake or difference (wk 38.7 f 3.1 minus wk 20.5 f 1.1
of lactation) for body components.
‘Mean (wk 9 to 39 of lactation) for milk yield or difference (wk 38.7 f 1.1 minus wk 7.2 f .5 of lactation) for body
components.
‘%orrected for DMI (see MateriaIs and Methods).
‘Sec Materials and Methods.
estimations by in vivo methods. Using DWS
15kg decrease during mo 2 of lactation. Using
measurement, a loss of 17 kg from wk 1 to 8
‘% measurement, Belyea et al. (3) reported a
of lactation was observed by Chilliard et al.
48-kg decrease in body plus fetal lipids from
(11) in multiparous cows of lower milk poten-
wk -1 to 2 of lactation in cows fed for ad
tial fed for ad libitum mtake than in the present
libitum intake yielding 7368 kg of milk on
study. From wk 1 to 12, decreases of 24 and
average and a further g-kg decrease from wk 2
33 kg were found by V&ite and Chilliard (32)
to 8.
in primiparous (yielding 7050 kg of milk) and
Using changes in subcutaueous adipocyte
multiparous (yielding 8370 kg of milk) cows
diameter and equations calibrated on previ-
fed for ad libitum intake, respectiveIy. Martin
ously slaughtered CO~S, Gagliostro and Chil-
and Ehle (20) observed a 34-kg decrease (in-
hard (17) observed a 28-kg decrease in body
cluding the gravid uterus) between 1 mo be-
lipids in fistulated cows fed for ad libitum
fore and 1 mo after parturition and a further
mtake that lost 58 kg of empty BW (measured
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
Journal of
(Il
= Figure 2.
47);
Dairy
0,
Relatior&.ips
0 =
120
160
600
650
Science Vol. 74. No. 9, 1991
40
80
0
wk
0
: 1
~
l
1
1
0
20
between
and
X q
39 in
body condition
1
1
8
i
control
:
i
3 x X
1
:
1 ** X X
CHTLLlA.RD
wws
score,
Body condition score
(n = 24);
2
I
2
corrected
ET AL.
:
4
n
BW, and
.
+
3
0
n
X
I
3
n
X
X
=
wk 20 body
+
lipids.
and
39 in
4
+
+
I
4
+,
X = wk 1
X
i
bST
cows ami
5
0
1
5
(n 7 in
= 23).
aU
0
0
b
cows
a
bST = (from body components). X = wk 7 minus wk 1 in
wk 39
Figure 3. Relationships between change in
cows
minus
(n
= wk 20 in
11).
-800
-6OO-
600
800
Change in
-3
-100
-100
contml
! I
cows
X
xx
xx xx
x
x x
(n = 12);
-60
-60
I
1
lx
x x
correctai
n
corrected
BODY COMPOSITION
ail
= wk 20
-20
-20
XwIQm
cows
I
1
0
BW, change in body condition score, and change in
n
mm
minus (n
n
= 23);
q m l x
00
OR0
0
wk 7
20
20
I
0
I
0
body weight (kg)
= wk 20 minus wk 7 in control
n **
iu
Journal of
bST
0
ow
a
0
0
0
cows
60
60
I
a’
I
0
m
+
(n = 12);
Dairy
l
Science
100
100
+
I
l
= wk 39 minus wk 20
I
4
Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
cows
140
140
(n = 12); 0
1
1
Bondy
0 a
in
energy
3111
3112
CHILLIARD ET AL.
TABLE 5. Linear regressions (Y = a + bX) behveen estimators of body components.’
Y
X
a
b
r
ISD
a ’
b’
r’
l3D’
BW, kg
BCS
533
39.7
.77
37
4
24.9
.71
23
cBW, kg
BCS
459
44.4
.81
36
2
35.2
.76
29
Lipids, kg
BCS
8
29.2
.79
25
-5
20.6
.59
27
Proteins, kg
BCS
78
3.9
.67
4.9
-1
2.3
37
3.2
Body energy2
BCS
519
297
.80
246
39
207
.62
249
B&Y -%Y
BW, kg -2500
5.9
.83
228
79
6.7
.71
224
Body e&rgy
cBW, kg -2090
5.9
.87
200
32
5.5
.76
204
‘a, b, r. rSD = Absolute values (n = 71) from aJl cows at wk 1 and 7 and fiom control cows at wk 20 and 39; a’, b’, I’,
rSD’ = gains (n = 47) behveen two consecutive measurements
in tbe same MWS; BCS = body condition score; cBW =
corrected BW; rSD = residual SD.
*Mcgacalories of body cnergy calculated from body components (sec Matexials sud Methods).
after rumen emptying) from d 2 to 21 of
(5) or due to short-tenu equilibration between
lactation. Direct comparisons between in vivo
DW and water in different parts of the body
estimates and data from the chemical analysis
(14) do not seem to be involved in our applica-
of slaughtered cows are not easy to make
tion of the technique (see Materials and
because invasive techniques do not allow the
Methods). Discrepancies between estimates of
body composition of the same cow at the
changes in body energy from DWS and from
different physiological stages to be taken into
CEB were higher in early lactation when en-
account (5, 8).
ergy and protein balances were negative (11)
Integrations from repeated calorimetric
or when protein balance was more negative
measurements suggested that body fat mobili-
(high group, Table 2). A higher efficiency in
zation during the first 2 mo of lactation was
the use of mobilized energy was observed in
betwcen 20 and 60 kg for different groups of lactating ewes that were mobilizing more body
cows (9, 14). Compar+ons in the same cows
proteins (19). Such an effect in dairy cows
between changes in body energy (from body
could partly explain the overestimation of
components predicted from DWS) and CEB
body energy changes when calculated from
(taking into account digestibility measure-
CEB assuming that 80% of the mobilixed en-
ments) showed lower changes when estimated ergy was used as NEL.
with the DWS technique [(l 1) and Table 21.
The main effect of tbe high level of concen-
The reasons for these discrepancies are not
trate dming early lactation was to decrease
clear. Problems arising from biases due to
protein balance significantly because tbis con-
calibration on animais differing in age or diets centrate had a lower protein content (to equal-
TABLE 6. Linear regressions (Y = c + dX) between cumulative euergy balance (CJZB) and gains in body condition score
(BCS), BW, corrected BW (cBW), or plasma NEFA during lhe winter period.’
Y
X
C
d
r
rSD*
cE!B3
BCS
-82
187
.74
150
CBB
BW, kg
-133
4.9
.71
156
CBB
NEFwA,@&
-87
4.3
.80
133
cm3
23
-.41
-.79
137
‘Data (n = 47) from 24 cows during two periods (wk 1 to 7 and 8 to 20).
*Residual SD.
3Megacalories of body energy, calculated from cumulative energy balance as described in Materials ami Methods.
4Values from Cissé et al. (12). The correlation CoeffGzient ‘was slightly improved using Iog(NEFA) (r = -.82) or
(NJZFA)ln (r = -.83) instead of NEFA.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74. No. 9, 1991
BODY COhfKWTION
3113
ize the expected protein intakes), and com
This was in contrast with results in trials in
silage voluntary intake was decreased more
which bST-injected cows received much more
than expected (26). This eau explain the signif-
concentrate than controls according to individ-
icant decreases in body water and proteins in
ual milk yield and body condition. These cows
this group (Table 2) and, hence, the higher
increased their calculated EB and gained more
nonsignificant loss of BW. The protein loss
body condition during the last months of bST
(3.3 kg) was lower than that observed previ-
treatment, so as to recover ahnost completely
ously in underfed cows (6 to 13 kg) but higher
the higher BCS loss that was previously ob-
than in well-fed cows (1 kg) during the sarne
served during the first 6 to 8 wk of bST
perd (10). The initial values (86 to 88 kg of
injection (1, 7, 23).
body pmtein, Figure 1) were well in the range
The bST had no effect on body water and
(85 to 90 kg) observed in slaughtered early
proteins during the winter period although it
lactating cows (10, 14, 21).
decreased sharply the calculated protein bal-
ance (Table 3). This probably cari be related to
the N-sparing effect of bST and to the
Declinlng Lactation
decreased urinary N excretion (29) that was
Con& CO~S. From wk 8 to 20, control
confixmed in these cows by a decreased uremia
cows mvered body proteins lost during early
(12). In contrast, during the grazing period,
lactation (Figure l), as observed previously
bST sharply increased body water (36 kg
(9). However, they continued to lose some
above controls), corrected BW (34 kg), and
body lipids (4 to 13 kg), contrary to previous
body proteins (Table 4). The increase in esti-
results (3, 11,20) aud despite being in positive
mated body proteins (6.2 kg in absolute value),
calculated EB (Table 1). During the grazing
however, was surprisingly high for mature
period, there was no further increase in body
cows (32). This could be a bias due to in-
proteins, whereas body lipids were partially
creases in extracelhtlar water compartments,
recovered (Figure 1). These results suggest that
such as gut contents or plasma volume. A
body lipid changes are not always paralleled
l-kg increase in the water of gut contents, for
by protein changes.
example, would increase BW by about 1 kg
bST-Injected CO~S. Body lipids tended to and estimated body proteins by about .088 +
be decreased further by bST injection during
.075 = .163 kg (see Materials and Methods).
the winter period (13 kg below controls) in
During the last period of DWS measurement
accordance with the decrease in EB (Table 3)
(wk 38 and 39 of lactation), DMI of the com
and the increase in blood NEFA of these
silage-based diet was 16.1 kgJd in control cows
animals (12). Decreases in EB (7.23). BCS (1,
and 17.1 kg/d in bST-treated cows (Z’ < .25).
33), and body lipids (-17 kg) (5) generally
This could lead to an increase in digestive
water content by about 4 kg (see Materials and
were observed during the fist 6 to 8 wk of
Methods), although any hypothetical residual
bST treatment, a period in which energy intake
effect of the previous pastum diet on digestive
was never increased significantly.
content cannot be excluded.
The tendency of bST to decrease body lipid
Furthermore, there cari be an effect of bST
deposition during the grazing period (Table 4)
per se, because the foregut tissue and content
cari be due to the low concentrate supply com-
increased by 2 and 10 kg, respectively, in
bined with the medium quality of available
slaughtered bST cows that previously had free
pastum that did not allow bST-injected cows to
access to feed (5). A slower fecal excretion
ingest more energy than the contml cows.
rate of Cr203 was observed after bST treat-
Other long-terrn studies also showed lower EB
ment (4). There also were weekly fluctuations
and lipid deposition in bST-treated animals,
in BW (wk 1 vs. 2) after each bST injection
either when the satne total mixed diets were
(24) that apparently were not related to corres-
fed for ad libitum intake [-16 to -69 kg of
ponding fluctuations in feed intake. However,
lipids after 36 wk of bST (30); -5 to -35 kg of
in another slaughter trial, gastrointestinal con-
lipids after 18 wk of bST (21)] or when lirnited
tent (live weight minus empty BW) increased
concentrates were offered separately frorn com by only 5 kg in bST-treated cows (21). An
silage [-42 kg of lipids after 24 wk of bST,
increase in plasma volume (16) also could
Vérité and Chilliard, quoted by ChiBiard (7)].
contribute slightly to the increase in body wa-
JO~ of Dahy Scicmx Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
3114
CHILLIARD ET AL.
ter but was not confiied in a slaughter trial stores. Using a literature survey (18), it cari be
(5). Hypothetical changes in gut contents and
calculated frorn five trials on multiparous cows
blood volume are unlikely to explain com-
that 1 unit of BCS (scale 1 to 4) corresponds
pletely the 36-kg incmase in body water in
on average to 32 kg (+I 15) of BW. A value of
bST-treated cows compared with controls.
56 kg of BW/unit of BCS (scale 1 to 5) was
Therefore, bST may favor protein (and, hence,
observed in culled dairy cows when using
water) deposition during late lactation when
absolute values and of 32 kg of BWlunit of
milk protein secretion is sufficiently low or
BCS when using changes in early lactating
when hormonal secretions in pregnant animais
cows (15). There are few data conceming
cari act in synergy with bST. Eregnancy stage
lipids. In nonpregnant, nonlactating Friesian
was 146 (& 41) and 159 (rt 39) d in bST-
CO~S, 1 unit of BCS (scale 0 to 5) corre-
treated and control CO~S, respectively. This
sponded surprisingly to 84 kg of lipids and to
suggests that the gravid uterus (and its water
110 kg of BW (35).
content) was not heavier in treated CO~S.
Changes in body energy (estimated either
Injection with bST decreased BCS only
from body components or from CEB) were
slightly (-5 under controls). In a previous
200 to 300 McaNmit change in BCS and 4.3
calibration on 49 slaughtered CO~S, we found
to 5.9 Mcal/kg change in corrected BW (Ta-
that 1 unit of BCS corresponded to 28 kg of
bles 5 and 6). These values are somewhat
body lipids and 34 kg of BW (27). In contrast,
lower than estimates from slaughter or feeding
bST treatment (Table 4) decreased body lipids trials (250 to 340 Mcal and 4.9 to 7.6 Mcal for
more (23 kg below controls) than predicted (14
BCS and corrected BW, respectively) (8, 34).
kg) from BCS change, and it increased BW
In our trial, there was not good agreement
(24 kg), although a decrease (-17 kg) was
between changes in body energy from wk 8 to
predicted. This cari be related to the increases
20, estimated from either body components or
in body water (38 kg) and body protein (5 kg)
CEB (Table 3), contrary to a previous trial in
that masked the predicted decrease in BW (38
which both estimations were largely positive
+5 - 17 = +26 kg). Furthermore, the small
from wk 9 to 18 (11). Diet digestibility was
decmase in BCS may be due to a true increase not measured in each cow in our trial. Howev-
in muscular mass under the skin compensatiug
er, CEB was closely related to plasma NEFA
for the effect of decreasing subcutaneous fat on
0 = -.79, Table 6) and to change in corrected
BCS. Decmase in BCS without significant
B W ( r = +.80), although change in body en-
change in BW also was observed by West et
ergy (from body components) was less related
al. (33) in bST-treated CO~S.
to these traits (r = -.49, n = 47 with plasma
NEFA, r = +.68, n = 47 with corrected BW).
EstImators of Body Components
An unexpected higher body energy loss (for
given change in corrected BW) was apparent
In this trial, the relationships between BCS,
for all individual cows from control and bST
BW, and body lipids estimated from DWS
groups between wk 8 and 20 (Figure 3B).
(using data from control periods only, Table 5
Although differences between consecutive
and Figure 2) were close to corresponding
periods represent cumulative variabilities due
relationships calculated by Remond et al. (27)
to DWS measurement or to changes in gastro-
from 49 slaughtered multiparous Holstein
intestinal water (that is, however, assumed to
cows:
be rather constant at this lactation stage), it is
difficult to explain these systematically lower
BW (kg) = 34.2 x BCS + 479
means (-46 to -244 Mcal, Table 3) of changes
(r = .69,
in body energy when using the DWS technique
residual SD = 47 kg);
compared with CEB. This difference cor-
Bdy lipids (kg) = 27.5 x BCS - 2.5
responds to about 2 Mcal NEdd, i.e., to .l
(r = .84,
Mcal NE&g DMI, corresponding to about 7%
residual SD = 23 kg).
of the estimated energy value of the diets
(Table 1). The same apparent contradiction
This validates both BCS and DWS tech-
also was observed by Belyea and Adams (2) in
niques as useful tools for estimating body
cows that were in positive calculated EB
kmmal of Daùy Science Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
BODY COMPOSII’ION
3115
(+2.65 Mcal/d during mo 3 and 4 of lactation)
and its effects on gastrointestinal motility. Asian-
without gain in body energy as estirnated IÏom
Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2:149.
5 Brown, D. L., S. J. Taylor, E. J. De Peters, and R. L.
whole body ‘?K counting. The cor-relation be-
Baldwin. 1989. Influence of sometribove, USAN
tween body energy and CEB in the present
(recombiit methionyl bovine somatotropin) on tbe
study (r = .55; n = 47), however, was only
baby composition of lactating cattle. J. Nutr. 119:633.
slightly lower than that (r = .69; n = 20) found
6 Chilhard, Y. 1987. Revue bibliographique: Variations
in early lactating goats using a two-pool mode1
quantitatives et mttabohsme des lipides dans les tissus
adipeux et le foie au cours du cycle gestation-htcta-
of tritiated water kinetics to estimate lipid
tien 2he partie: chez la brebis et la vache. Reprod.
changes (13). A better knowledge of changes
NUIT. Dev. 22327.
in gut water content and improvement of
7 ChOliard, Y. 1988. Reviewz long-tenu effects of re-
methods to predict them probably would irn-
combii bovine somatotropin (rbST) on dairy cow
prove in vivo studies on body composition.
puf0rman~. Ann. z.ootech. (Paris) 32159.
8 CYhilkd, Y., B. R~%ond, J. Agabriel, J. Robelin, and
R V&ite. 1987. Variations du contenu digestif et des
CONCLUSIONS
rherves corporelles au cours du cycle gest&on-lacta-
tien Bull. Te& Ctr. Rech. Zootech. Vdt. lheix, Inst
During 30 wk of E>ST administration, cows
Natl. Rech. Agron. 70~117.
gained more BW, water and proteins, and less
9Chilhd. Y., B. Remond. D. Sauvant, and M. Ver-
body lipids than controls. There generally was
morel. 1983. Particularit6s du mkabolisme energ&
tique. Bull. Tech. Ctr. Rech. Zootech. Vtt. Theix, Inst.
good agreement among traits such as BW,
Natl. Rd. Agron 53:37.
body water, BCS, CEB, and plasma NEFA
lOChilliard, Y., ami J. Robelin. 1983. Mobilization of
that were measured independently. However,
bcdy proteins by early lactating cows measmed by
the loss of body energy apparently was overes-
slaughter and b0 dilution techniques. 4th Int. Symp.
Rotein Metab. Nutr. (Clermont-Ferra@.
Em. Assoc.
timated during wk 8 to 20 of lactation when
Anim. Frod. Publ. No. 31. huit. Natl. Rech. Agron.
predicted from DWS. Re&ts suggest that
Pobl. IL195
bST-treated cows need more concentrates than
11 Chilhard, Y., J. Robelin, and B. Rémond. 1984. In
controls in order to achieve the repletion of
vivo estimation of body lipid mobilisation ami recon-
body fat before the dry period.
stitution in dairy cattle. Cari. J. Anim. Sci 64(Suppl.):
236.
12 Cisst, ht. Y. cMliard, V. Coxam, M. J. Davicco, ami
ACKNOWLEDQMENTS
B. R6mond. 1991. Slow release somatotropin in dairy
heifers and cows fed hvo levels of energy concentrate.
We thank A. Ollier, E. Girard, J. N. Ram-
2. Plasma hormones and mctabolites. J. Dairy Sci 74:
pon, and G. Sauvage for technical assistance
1382.
and P. Boule (University Clermont-Ferrand II,
13 Dunshea, F. R., A. W. Bell, and T. E. Trigg. 1990.
France) and F. Bocquier for helpful advice in
Body composition changes in goats dming early lacta-
tion estimated ushtg a two-pool mode1 of bitiated
DW analyses and computations. This work
water kiuetic-s. Br. J. Nutr. 64~121.
was supported by Monsanto (St. Louis, MO).
14 Brdman, R. A, and S. M Andrew. 1989. Methods for
M. Cissé received a fellowship from the Centre
and estimates of body tissue mobiition in the htctat-
International des Etudiants et Stagiaires
hg dairy cow. Page 19 in Roc. Monsanto Te&
S y m p . precediq C o m e l l Nutr. Cor& F e e d
(Ministère de la Coopération, France).
Manuf.(oCtober 24), Syracuse, NY. Monsanto ed.
15 Ferguson, J. D., and K. A. Otto. 1989. Matqing body
REFERENCES
condition in dairy cows. Page 75 in Proc. Cornell
Nufr. Conf. Feed Mannf., Syracuse, NY.
1 Bauman, D. E., D. L. Hard, A. Crooker, M. S. Par-
16 Fullerton, F. M., 1. R. Fleet, R. B. Heap, 1. C. Hart,
ttidge, K. Ganick, L. D. Sandles, N. Erb, S. E.
and T. B. Mepham. 1989. Cardiovascular msponses
Franson, G. F. Hartnell, and R L. Hintz. 1989. Long-
and mammary substrate uptake in Jersey cows treated
term evalmtion of a prolonged-releasc formulation of
with pituitary-derived growth hormone during late
N-metbionyl boviue somatotropm in lactating dairy
lactation J. Dairy Res. 5527.
CO~S. J. Dairy Sci. 72642.
17Gagliostro. G., and Y. CXlliad 1991. Duodenal
2 Belyea, R. L., and M. W. Adams. 1990. Bnergy and
raped oil infusion in early and midlactation cows.
nitrogen utilidion of high versus low producing dairy
2. Vobmtary intake, milk production, and composi-
cows. J. Dairy Sci. 73:1023.
tion. J. Dairy Sci. 74499.
3 Belyea, R L., G. R Frost, F. M. Mat@ J. L. Clark,
18 Gamsworthy, P. C. 1988. The effcct of energy
sud L. G. Forkner. 1978. Body composition of dairy
merves at calving on performance of dairy cows.
cattle by potassium-40 liquid scintillation detection. J.
Page 157 in Nutrition and lactation in the dairy cow.
Dairy Sci. 61:206.
P. C. Gamsworthy, ed. Proc. 46th Univ. Nottiqham
4Bertoni. G., F. Piccioli-Cappelli, R. Lombardehi, and
Paster School Agric. Sci., Buttenvorths, Kent, Bngl.
V. Cam>a. 1989. Somatotropin treatment of dairy cows
19 Gedy, K. G., and A. R. Sykes. 1986. Effects of
Journal Of Dairy Science Vol. 74, No. 9. 1991
3116
CHKMARDETAL.
herbage allowance during pregoancy and lactation on
28 RoMin, J. 1982. Meamrement of Bondy water in living
feed intake. milk production, body composition and
cattle by dilution technique. Beret. Statens Husdyr-
energy utilization of ewes at pasture. J. Agric. Sci.
brugsfors. 524 156.
(Camb.) 106z351.
29 Sechen, S. J., D. E. Bauman, H. F. Tyrrell, and P. J.
2OMartin, R. A., and F. R Ehle. 1986. Body composi-
Reynolds. 1989. Effect of somatotropin on kinetics of
tion of lactating and dry Holstein cows estbnated by
nonesterirïed fatty acids and partition of cnergy, car-
deuterium dilution. J. Dairy Sci. 6988.
bon, aod nitrogen in lactating daky CO~S. J. Dairy Sci.
21 McGuffey, R K.. T. E. Spike, and R. P. Basson. 1989.
72:59.
Prutitioning of energy in tbe lactating dairy cow
30 Soderholm, C. G., D. E. Otterby, J. G. Lii P. R
mceiving bST. J. Datry Sci. 72(Suppl. 1):535.(Abstr.)
Ehle. J. E. Wheaton, W. P. Hansen, and R. J. Annex-
22 Mulvany, P. 1977. Dsky cow condition sroring. NatJ.
stad. 1988. Effe~ts of recombinant bovine somato-
Jnst. Res. Dairying, Paper No. 4468. Shinficld, Engl.
tropin on milk production, body composition, and
23 Peel, C. J.. P. J. Eppard, and D. L. Hard. 1989.
physiological parameters. J. Dairy Sci. 71:355.
Evaluation of sometribove (methionyl bovine somato-
31 Tissier, M, J. Robelin, A. Purroy, and Y. Geay. 1978.
tropin) in toxicology and clinicaJ trials in Europe and
Extraction et dosage automatique rapide de l’eau
the United States. Page 167 in Biotecbnology in
lourde dans les liquides biologiques. Amt. Biol. Anim.
growth regulation. R. B. Heap, C. G. Rosser, and G.
Biochim. Biophys. 181223.
E. Lammbg, ed. Butterworths, London, Engl.
32 VkitC, R., and Y. Chilhard. 1990. Effect of age of
24Phipps, R. H. 1988. The use of prolonged release
dairy cows on body composition changes throughout
bovine somatotropin in milk production. Jnt. Dairy
the lactation cycle as meaaured witb deuteriated water.
Fed. Bull. No. 228, Brussels, Belgium,
Proc. 6bme J. Aliu~ Nutr. Herbiv., Abstr. 38. Jnst.
25 Rémond, B. 1988. Evolution du poids du contenu du
Natl. Rech. Agron, Paris, France.
rdticulo-rumen chez les vaches au cours des 2 premi-
33 West, J. W., K. Bondari, and J. C. Johnson 1990.
ers mois de la lactation. Reprod. Nu& Dev. 28:109.
Fiffects of bovine somatotropin on milk yield and
26Rkrnond. B., M. CisSt, A. O&r, and Y. Chilkrd.
composition, body weight, and condition score of
1991. Slow release somatotropin in dairy heifers and
Holstein and Jersey CO~S. J. Dairy Sci. 73:1062.
cows fcd two levels of energy concentrate. 1. Per-
34 Wilhams, C. B., P. A. Oltenacu, and C. J. Suiffer~.
formances and body condition. J. Dairy Sci. 741370.
1989. Refinements in detamining tbe energy value of
27R4nond, B., J. Robelin, and Y. ChiUiard. 1988. Es-
body tlssue reserves and tissue gains from growth. J.
timation de la teneur en lipides des vaches Mi&res
Dairy Sci. 72~264.
pie-noires par la mtthode de notation de Mat d’en-
35 Wright, 1. A., and A.J.F. Russel. 1984. Partition of fat,
graissement. ht. Natl. Rech. Agron, Prod. Anim. 1:
body composition and body condition score in mature
111.
cows. Anim. Prod. 38:23.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74, No. 9. 1991
Somatotropin Treatment, and Concentrate Supplementation
Y. CHILLIARD. M. Cl&> R. LEFAIVRE. and 6. FkMOND
Laboratoire ktation et Elev&e des’ Ruminants
Institut National de la Radwche Agronomique
Theix, 63122 St.-Genès-Champanelle,
France
ABSTRACT
energy when calculated from cumulative
energy balances or ixxly componats, re-
Body weight, condition score, deuteri-
spectively.
ated water dilution space, estimated body
(Key words: cow, lactation, somato-
lipids and proteins, and calculated energy
tropin, body composition)
and protein balances were determined in
24 multiparous Holstein cows at wk 1,7,
Abbreviation key: BCS = body condition
20, and 39 after parturition. Cows
score, CEB = cumulative energy balance, DW
received two levels of energy concentrate
= deuteriated water, DWS = deuteriated water
(high and low groups) from wk 3. The
space, EB = energy balance.
objective wss to estimate changes in
body composition as affected by stage of
INTRODUCTION
lactation, concentrate level, and bST ad-
ministration or placebo from wk 9 in a 2
During a lactation cycle, dairy cows are
x 2 factorial des@.
successively mobilizing and storing body
Cows fiom high and low energy
reserves. Tissue mobilization during the first 2
groups lost 25 and 35 kg of body lipids
mo of lactation is from 15 to 60 kg of lipids
and 3.3 and .5 kg of body proteins,
(6, 20) and from 0 to 15 kg of proteins (8)
respectively, during the fïrst 7 wk of
according to milk potential, diet composition,
lactation. During the end of the winter
level of feeding, and body condition at calving
pe@od (wk 8 to 20), control and bST-
(14, 18).
Increase in mobilization or decreasc in
injected cows lost 8.5 and 21.1 kg of
body lipids, respectively. During the
deposition of body fat was observed in bST-
gming period (wk 20 to 39), bST-in-
treated cows during short triais (8 wk) (5) or
when the same diet was given for ad libitum
jected cows gained more BW (34 kg),
intake to bST and control cows (7, 21, 30).
water (36 kg), and estimated proteins
The aim of the present study was to esti-
(5.8 kg) and lost more condition score
mate changes in dairy cow body composition
(-.2 units) and estimated lipids (-11.5
during one lactation cycle according to lacta-
kg) than controls.
tion stage, concentrate supply, and bST treat-
Using data from control periods, it
ment.
was calculated that 1 unit change in body
condition score corresponded to changes
MATERtALS AND METHODS
of 35 to 44 kg in BW (cor%ted for
estimated gut content variation), 21 to 29
kg in body lipids. and 200 to 300 Mcal
Anlmals and Traatments
in body energy. One kîlogram of cor-
Twenty-four multiparous Holstein cows
rected BW change corresponded to a
received com silage for ad libitum intake dur-
change of 4.3 or 5.5 to 5.9 Mcal in body
ing the dry period and the first part of lactation
(winter period). Cows calved from the end of
October to the end of December 1986. A&r
wk 24 (i: 2) of lactation, they were tumed out
Rcccivcd Janwuy 4, 1991.
AcaptaI Apxil 19, 1991.
to pasture.
‘F’ment address: Institut S606galais de Rcchcrchcs
concentrate was fed in fixed quant@ dur-
A@wles, BP 2075, Dakar, Scntgal.
ing wk 1 (4.1 kg/d) and wk 2 (5.7 kg/d)
1991 1 Dairy Sci 743103-3116
3103
.:. .’ .
3104
CI-IILLIARD ET AL.
TABLE 1. Composition and nutitive value means for diets ingested by each nutritionai group during the winter period.1
wk 1 to 8
wk 9 to 18
High
LOW
High
LOW
Iqyedient, 96 DM
Com silage*
59.1
68.6
68.9
83.9
Protein-rich concentratd
7.6
11.7
4.8
9.5
Energy-rich concentrate
30.9
17.3
23.5
4.5
Urea5
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.1
Minerai-rich concentrate
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.5
Nutritive7value. per kg DM
1.62
1.63
1.00
1.64
z McalNEL
167
177
156
160
mi g
99
103
89
94
‘Weeks of lactation and level of energy concentrate. CP = Crude fiher, PDI = protein digestible in the intestine,
calculated as by Rémond et al. (26).
*Dry matter containing 39% grain. 94.5% OM, 18.8% CP, and 9.2% 8.
~rmaldehyde-treated
soybean (80%) and mpesecd (20%) me&; DM containing 92.5% OM, 8.1% CI? and 47.3%
CP.
41ngredients in percentage: wheat, 10; maize, 10; barley, 32; dehydrated alfa& 10; dry bcet pulps, 25, soybean mtal
5; wheat hmn, 5; dicalcium phosphate, 1.5; calcium bicarbonate, 1; Salt, .5. DM containing 92.8% OM, 10.4% CP, and
13.7% 8.
5Dry matter containing 100% OM and 288% CP.
6Commercial supplement containing: Ca, 22.346, P, 8.3%; NaCl, 1056, Mg, 446, S, 2%; Zu, 4ooo ppm; Mn, 3ooO
ppm; Ca. 800 ppm; 1,60 ppm; CO, 20 ppm; se, 5 ppm; vitamins (for 100 kg of feed): vitamin A, 25,ooO,ooO lU vitamin
D3, 8,000,000 Iu; vitamin E, 10 g. DM contain& 13.2% OM.
7Calculated from OM digestibility
of com silage and taking into accouut the negative effccts of percentage of
concentrate and level of DMI (26).
postpartum. From wlc 3 onward, it was fed
During the grazing period, cows of the low
according to the expected milk yield calculated
group were fed concentrate (twice a day in the
from the observed mi& yield during the frrst 2
milking parlor) from a milk yield of 12 kg/d
wk using standard lactation curves recorded in
higher than the yield from which the high
the same herd. At the beginning of wk 3, cows
group began to receive concentrate. The milk
were allotted to two nutritional groups, receiv-
yield assumed to be satisfied by grass alone
ing a high or low level of energy concentrate.
declined during the grazing season according
During the winter period, cows in the high and
to grass availability and quality.
low groups received daily 2.5 Mcal NEL more
The composition (proportions of grain and
(approximately 1.3 kg DM of concentrate) and
cakes) of the concentrates offered to the high
4.2 Mcal NEL less (approximately 2.2 kg DM
and low groups was calculated (Table 1) SO
of concentrate), respectively, than the recom-
that the total protein supply would be the
mended energy supply (730 kcal NErJkg 4%
same, assuming that the low group should
FCM) necessary to satisfy the difference be-
compensate for half of the difference in con-
tween expected milk yield and the yield as-
centrate supply by increasing com silage DMI.
sumed to be covemd (in excess of maintenance
Milk recording and calculations of energy and
requirement) by com silage intake at wk 5 of
protein balances were as described previously
lactation: 16 kg of 4% FCM. Cows were
(26).
adapted to the high or low concentrate level
From wk 9 to 39 postpartum, half of cows
during wk 3 and 4 postpartum. The maximum
of each nutritional group were biweekly in-
theoretical supply of concentrate was reached jected subcutaneously with either 500 mg of
at wk 5 and decreased thereafter. Ah diet recombinaut methionyl bST in a slow release
ingredients (Table 1) were fed together once a
preparation (Sometribove,
Monsanto, St.
day and mixed in the manger.
Louis, MO) or placebo.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74. No. 9, 1991
BODY COh4POSlTION
3105
Measurements and Analyses
DWS measurement; they had free access to the
same mixed diet as at the end of the winter
Body condition was scored [scale from 0 to
period in order to equalize the digestive con-
5 (22)], and body water was estimated (28,31)
tents among DWS determmation periods.
at wk 1, 7.2 (SD = S), 20.5 (i: l.l), and 38.7
Changes in body energy were calculated by
(zt 3.1) of lactation. Deuteriated water (DW,
two different methods. The iïrst was based on
99.8% purity; Commissariat à 1’Energie Ato-
changes in body components (net energy) us-
mique, Gii sur Yvette, France) was injected (.5
ing values of 9.4 and 5.7 Mcal/kg of lipids and
g/kg BW) intravenously between 0800 and
proteins, respectively. The second was from
0900 h. Milk was used to determine the
energy balances (EB), calculated as in Remond
decrease in the DW concentration because it
et al. (26) aud cumulated during the corres-
gave the same results as blood (10, 20).
ponding periods as EB (Mcal NEù during
Milk was sampled f?om six consecutive
weeks of positive EB and EB/.8 during weeks
milkings (at 0700 and 1600 h), i.e., at approxi-
of negative EB (11). These calculations are
mately 8, 23, 32, 47, 56, and 71 h after DW
based on the assumptions that metabolizable
injection. Previous work showed that quili-
energy is used with the same efficiency for
brium of blood DW was reached 6 to 8 h after
body energy deposition and milk energy secre-
injection (28). Milk samples were stored at
tion and that mobilized body energy is used for
-25-C. Milk water was extracted by deep
milk secretion with an efficiency of 80% (9).
freezing and vacuum evaporation at room tem-
Changes in BW were corrected for expected
perature. Concentration of DW in milk water
changes in digestive contents related to varia-
was measured (31) in duplicate by infmred
tions in DMt [corrected BW (kg) = BW (kg) -
spectrometry at 2512 mn using a double beam
4 x DMI (kg)]. The coefficient of correction
apparatus (perkin-Elmer 180, Norwalk, CT);
was from the absolute variation in ruminal
DW space (DWS) was calculated from the
content that was measured with the same diet
DW concentration at zero tinte. This concen-
[+ 3 kgkg incroase in DMI (25)], and an
tration was obtained from semilogarithmic plot
additional increase in intestinal content was
of DW concentration against time of samphng
assumed to be 1 kg& DMI (8).
after the DW injection (28).
Data were analyxed using variance~ovari-
Body weight of the cows was registered at
ance analysis, taking into account effects of
1400 h (i.e., 5 h after a.m feeding) during 3
bST treatment, energy concentrate supply, and
consecutive d after DW infusion. Body lipids
their interaction and using the milk yield of the
and protems were calculated (28) using equa-
first 2 wk postpartum as covariate. Brobabili-
tions previously calibrated (10) on 20 Holstein
ties of 10, 5, and 1% were used,
multiparous cows (12 dry, 4 at wk 1, and 4 at
wk 8 of lactation; 8 fat, 8 lean, and 4 in
RESULTS
medium body condition). These cows were fed
a corn silage-based diet. Their body composi-
Early Lactation
tion was measured after slaughter by chemical
analysis of the whole body. Equations were
Mean BW: body water, hdy lipids, body
protein, and body condition score (BCS) at
calving were 640, 411, 100, 87 kg, and 3.0,
Lipids (kg) = 903 x BW (kg)
respectively (Figure 1). During the first 2 mo
- 1.135 x DWS (kg)
of lactation (Table 2), cows receiving the high-
Proteins (kg) = .088 x BW (kg)
est level of energy concentrate lost more BW
+ .075 x DWS (kg)
or corrected BW (16 to 18 kg; nonsignificant)
and body proteins (2.5 kg; P < .05) and less
Accuracy of the prediction (estimated by the body lipids (9.0 kg; nonsiguificant) than those
residual SD) was 7.5 kg (8.7%) for lipids and
receiving the low level, i.e., cows that ingested
2.0 kg (2.5%) for proteins (10).
1.5 kg/d less concentrate DM. Calculated EB
The fïrst three measurements of DWS were
was not different between groups, although
during the winter period. Because the fourth
calculated protein balance was lower in the
measurement was done after 14 wk at pasture,
high group r-98 g/d, expressed in protein di-
cows were stabled for 18 d just before the last
gestible in the intestine; (26)].
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
3106
CHILLIARD ET fi.
480
680 ‘i
1
Stnrt of grazing
G
--G
Start of bST
5 660 - Start of bST
v 4 6 0
E
OSJ
‘iii 6 4 0 -
s
P
d 620 -
0 4 2 0
a
,o
600 :
.
I
.
1
-
1
.
f
0
10
20
30
40
110
96 1
é$ 9 4
Yg 92
c
‘S 90
E
a
88
2 8 6
50
L34
40!
-
1
’
1
-
1
-
’
0
10
20
30
40
Weeks of lactation
Weeks of lactation
Figure 1. Change in BW, watcr, lipids. proteins, and condition score (22) in contml (n = 11 or 12) and bST-ecattd
cows (n = 11 or 12) ulroughout lactation.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
BODY COMPOSITION
3107
T,?&SLE 2. Nutitional balances and changes in body components during the first 8 wk of lactation.
Jhimatfxl effects2
HiglG
Lowl
Concentrate
Residual SD3
(n = 11)
(11 = 12)
NutritionaI balances4
Milk yield, kgld
29.6 29.8
02 NS
2.6’
DM, kgld
16.1 16.7
-. 6 NS
1.1
Concentrate intake, kg/d
6.6 5.1 1.5
**
Bnergy balance, Mcal NQjd
-4.9
A.5
-.4 NS
2:;
Protein balance, S/d
-150 -55 -98
*
8 8
Body componcnt chsng&
BW. kg
-33.9 -18.7 -15.7 NS
i 22.6
Corrected BW,6 kg
-57.5 -39.7 -18.3 NS
22.4”
Condition score
-1.09
-92
-.14 NS
.73
Water, kg
A.5 15.4 -20.0
*
17.4
Proteins, kg
-3.3
-.5 -2.9
+
2.6a
Lipids, kg
-25.5 -34.7 9.0 NS
25.2
Bnagy, Mcal
From body components’l
-258 -329 68 NS
240
From balance8
energy
-340 -320 -25 NS
173a
lLevel of concentrate, unadjusted means.
2Level of concentrate (II@I minus low) effect was significant (**P < .Ol, *P < .05) or NS (P > JO).
3Covariate effect was significaut (aP c .Ol) or NS (P > JO).
%Veek 1 to 8 of lactation (including preexperimental period).
wk 1 and 2, i.e., the
%Veek 7.2 f .5 mirms wk 1 of lactation wk 1
(including and 2, i.e., the preexpuimental
period).
%W minus (4 x Dm (see Matehls and Methods).
7Calculated from the enagy value of body wmponent changes (see Materials and Methods).
8Calculated from cumulative energy balances over the period (sce Materials and Methods).
Period of bBl Treatment
(+5.8 kg) (Figure 1). It tended to decrease
gains in body lipids (-11.5 kg) and BCS (-.2),
During the winter period (Table 3), cows
but not significantly.
from the high groups ingested 2.9 kg DM/d
Dming the whole period of bST injection
more concentrate than those from the low
(Table 4), bST significantly increased gains in
groups but lowered their com silage intake SO
BW (+24 kg), body water (+38 kg), and body
that their total DMI was not different. No
proteins (+5.0 kg), whereas it significantly
significant differences in body component var-
decreased gains in body lipids (-23 kg) and
iations were observed. Cows injected with bST
BCS (-.5).
yielded 3.2 kg/d more milk than controls with-
out increasing total DMI. Although calculated Relatlonshlps Between Different
energy and protein balances were significantly
Estimators of Body Components
decreased by bST, the tmnds to lower gains in
BW or corrected BW (-16 to -19 kg), body
Computations based on 71 observations
proteins (-1.5 kg), and BCS (-.3) and. to
(from all cows during control periods only)
showed that BCS predicted corrected BW (44
higher losses in body lipids (-13.1 kg) than in
kg/point), body lipids (29 kg/point), and body
controls (Figure 1) were not significant.
energy (297 Mcal/point) more closely than
During the grazing period (Table 4), the
body proteins (3.9 kg/point) (Table 5 and Fig-
slight difference in concentrate level (.9 kgld)
ure 2). When they had the same BCS, bST-
between high and low groups did not affect
injected cows at wk 39 tended to have higher
any measured parameters. Injection with bST
corrected BW and lower body lipids than con-
significantly iucreased gains in BW or cor-
trois (Figure 2) due to their higher body water
rected BW (+32 to 34 kg) and body proteins
O%s- 1).
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74. No. 9. 1991
3108
-ETAL.
TABLE 3. NutritionaI balances and changes in body components during the winter period of bST treatment.
Higd
Lowl
Estimatexi effects2
Residual
bST
Control
bST
Control
Concentrate
bST
SD3
(n = 6) (n = 5)
(II = 6) (n = 7)
NutritionaI balances4
Milk yield, kg/d
28.5
27.1
29.9
25.7
-.6 NS
3.2 t
4.2’
DM, kg/d
17.8
18.8
18.0
17.5
.5 N S
-.2 N S
1.6b
Concentrate intake,
kg/d
5.4 6.0
2.9
2.8
2.7 **
-.2 N S
1.2
Energy balance,
Mcal NEdd
5
1.9
-1.4
1.7
.8 N S
- 2 . 9 **
1.98
Protein balance, g/d
-96’ 26
-21
70
-58 *
-108
**
54
Body component changes5
BW, kg
11.0
27.8
.7
16.8
10.5 NS
-16.1 NS
24.9
Corrected BW,6 kg
3.8
28.0
3.8
16.9
5.5 NS
-18.7 t
24.6
Condition score
-.OS
.30
.08
.21
.O NS
-.29 NS
Aa
Water, kg
30.3
24.8
15.2
24.3
7.1 NS
-1.3 NS
18.5
Proteins, kg
3.3 4.3
1.2
3.3
1.5 NS
-1.5 NS
3.2
Lipids, kg
-25.2
-3.8
-17.0
-13.1
1.3 NS
-13.1 NS
21.8
Energy, Mcal
From body components7 -218
-11
-153
-104
21 NS
-132 NS
209
Fmm enerRy balance’ -44
1 7 9
-107
140
68 NS
-246
**
187a
‘Level of concentrate, unadjusted means.
2Level of concentrate (high minus low) and bST treatment @ST minus control) effects were significant (**P < .Ol.
*P < .05, tP c JO) or NS (P > .~OJ.
3Covariate effect was signifïcant ('P 2 .Ol, bP < .05) or NS (P > .lO).
4Week 9 to 18 of lactation.
‘Week 20.5 i 1.1 minu wk 7.2 i .5 of lactation.
‘Corrected for DMI (see Materials and Methods).
‘Sec Mater& and Methods.
Correlation coefficients between estimators,
same periods (Table 6). Prediction of CEB by
and slopes of the regressions, generally were
changes in BCS or corrected BW, however,
lower when changes between two consecutive
was more precise (residual SD = 133 to 150
measurements during control periods were
Mcal, Table 6) than that of change in body
considered instead of absolute values (Table
energy (residual SD = 204 to 249 Mcal, Table
5). During the tïrst 2 mo of lactation, the
5). When different periods and treatment
decrease in BCS was more variable than was
groups were separated, the slope of the regres-
the decrease in corrected BW (Figure 3A).
sion between change in corrected BW and
During declining lactation, there were great
change in body energy tended to be stable
changes in corrected BW without correspond-
although intercepts were changing (Figure 3B).
mg changes in BCS. As a result, the relation-
Body energy gain for a given gain of corrected
ship between BCS and corrected BW was not
linear (Figure 3A).
BW tended to be lower in bST-supplemented
Using absolute values, changes in body en-
cows and in control cows during the period
ergy (estima& from DWS) were 297 M~al/
from wk 8 to 20.
unit of BCS and 5.9 Mcal/kg of corrected BW
(Table 5). The corresponding values were cal-
DISCUSSION
culated to be 207 and 5.5 Mcal when using
changes between consecutive periods (Table
Early Lactation
5). Cumulative EB (CEB) was 187 and 4.3
Mcal/unit of BCS change and per kg of cor-
The loss of 25 to 35 kg of body lipids
rected BW change, respectively, during the
during the first 2 mo of lactation agrees with
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
BODY COhIPOSITION
3109
TABLE 4. Milk yield, concentrate intake. and changes in body components during 8mzing and whole periods of bST
treatment.
High’
LOWl
Bstimated effects2
Residual
bST
c0ntro1
bST
Control
Concentrate
bST
SD3
Orazing period4
Numba of cows
5
5
6
7
Mi& yield, kg/d
20.3
19.1
19.3
17.8
.8 NS
1.5 NS
3.3b
Concentrate intake, kg/d
1.05
1.26
.23
.27
.89 **
-.13
NS
.44b
BW, kg
47.3
10.0
46.9
17.1
-4.8 NS
33.7 **
24.6
Corrected BW,6 kg
53.9
15.2
48.7
24.3
-3.8 NS
31.9
*
27.4
Condition score
00
.50
.42
.43
-122 NS
-25 NS
.4Pb
Water, kg
26.8
-1.2
28.6
-15.3
4.5 NS
36.2 **
14.7b
Proteius, kg
6.2
.8
6.3
.3
-.l NS
5.8
**
2.F
Lipids, kg
11.5
10.5
9.2
33.2
-9.6 NS
-11.5
NS
23.5
Energy, Mcal
From body components7 1 4 4
1 0 3
1 2 3
314
-Y0 N S
-76
NS
227
Whole period5
Number of cows
5
5
6
7
Milk yield, kgld
22.8
21.2
22.6
20.0
.2 NS
2.2 NS
3.4a
BW, kg
71.3
37.7
47.6
33.8
12.5 NS
23.9 +
31.8
Corrected BW,6 kg
69.0
43.1
52.6
41.3
7.8 NS
18.8
NS
33.7
Condition score
-.lO
.80
.50
Y:?
-.20NS
-.52 +
.69
Water, kg
64.5
23.6
43.8
15.2 +
38.2 **
17.7a
Proteins, kg
11.2
5.1
7.5
3.7
2.3 NS
5.0 **
3.5c
Lipids, kg
-10.3
6.7
-7.8
20.1
-6.3 NS
-22.8 +
29.9
Energy, Mcal
From body components7 -33
92
-30
210
-46 NS
-185
NS
290
ILeve of concentrate, tmadjusted means.
2Level of concentrate (high minus low) and bST treatment @ST minus control) effects were signiflcant (**P < .Ol,
*P < .05, +P < .lO) or NS (P > .lO).
3Cowxiate effect was significant ?P < .Ol, bP < .05, ‘P < .lO) or NS (P > .lO).
4Mean (April27 to August 5) for mi& yieId and concentrate intake or difference (wk 38.7 f 3.1 minus wk 20.5 f 1.1
of lactation) for body components.
‘Mean (wk 9 to 39 of lactation) for milk yield or difference (wk 38.7 f 1.1 minus wk 7.2 f .5 of lactation) for body
components.
‘%orrected for DMI (see MateriaIs and Methods).
‘Sec Materials and Methods.
estimations by in vivo methods. Using DWS
15kg decrease during mo 2 of lactation. Using
measurement, a loss of 17 kg from wk 1 to 8
‘% measurement, Belyea et al. (3) reported a
of lactation was observed by Chilliard et al.
48-kg decrease in body plus fetal lipids from
(11) in multiparous cows of lower milk poten-
wk -1 to 2 of lactation in cows fed for ad
tial fed for ad libitum mtake than in the present
libitum intake yielding 7368 kg of milk on
study. From wk 1 to 12, decreases of 24 and
average and a further g-kg decrease from wk 2
33 kg were found by V&ite and Chilliard (32)
to 8.
in primiparous (yielding 7050 kg of milk) and
Using changes in subcutaueous adipocyte
multiparous (yielding 8370 kg of milk) cows
diameter and equations calibrated on previ-
fed for ad libitum intake, respectiveIy. Martin
ously slaughtered CO~S, Gagliostro and Chil-
and Ehle (20) observed a 34-kg decrease (in-
hard (17) observed a 28-kg decrease in body
cluding the gravid uterus) between 1 mo be-
lipids in fistulated cows fed for ad libitum
fore and 1 mo after parturition and a further
mtake that lost 58 kg of empty BW (measured
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
Journal of
(Il
= Figure 2.
47);
Dairy
0,
Relatior&.ips
0 =
120
160
600
650
Science Vol. 74. No. 9, 1991
40
80
0
wk
0
: 1
~
l
1
1
0
20
between
and
X q
39 in
body condition
1
1
8
i
control
:
i
3 x X
1
:
1 ** X X
CHTLLlA.RD
wws
score,
Body condition score
(n = 24);
2
I
2
corrected
ET AL.
:
4
n
BW, and
.
+
3
0
n
X
I
3
n
X
X
=
wk 20 body
+
lipids.
and
39 in
4
+
+
I
4
+,
X = wk 1
X
i
bST
cows ami
5
0
1
5
(n 7 in
= 23).
aU
0
0
b
cows
a
bST = (from body components). X = wk 7 minus wk 1 in
wk 39
Figure 3. Relationships between change in
cows
minus
(n
= wk 20 in
11).
-800
-6OO-
600
800
Change in
-3
-100
-100
contml
! I
cows
X
xx
xx xx
x
x x
(n = 12);
-60
-60
I
1
lx
x x
correctai
n
corrected
BODY COMPOSITION
ail
= wk 20
-20
-20
XwIQm
cows
I
1
0
BW, change in body condition score, and change in
n
mm
minus (n
n
= 23);
q m l x
00
OR0
0
wk 7
20
20
I
0
I
0
body weight (kg)
= wk 20 minus wk 7 in control
n **
iu
Journal of
bST
0
ow
a
0
0
0
cows
60
60
I
a’
I
0
m
+
(n = 12);
Dairy
l
Science
100
100
+
I
l
= wk 39 minus wk 20
I
4
Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
cows
140
140
(n = 12); 0
1
1
Bondy
0 a
in
energy
3111
3112
CHILLIARD ET AL.
TABLE 5. Linear regressions (Y = a + bX) behveen estimators of body components.’
Y
X
a
b
r
ISD
a ’
b’
r’
l3D’
BW, kg
BCS
533
39.7
.77
37
4
24.9
.71
23
cBW, kg
BCS
459
44.4
.81
36
2
35.2
.76
29
Lipids, kg
BCS
8
29.2
.79
25
-5
20.6
.59
27
Proteins, kg
BCS
78
3.9
.67
4.9
-1
2.3
37
3.2
Body energy2
BCS
519
297
.80
246
39
207
.62
249
B&Y -%Y
BW, kg -2500
5.9
.83
228
79
6.7
.71
224
Body e&rgy
cBW, kg -2090
5.9
.87
200
32
5.5
.76
204
‘a, b, r. rSD = Absolute values (n = 71) from aJl cows at wk 1 and 7 and fiom control cows at wk 20 and 39; a’, b’, I’,
rSD’ = gains (n = 47) behveen two consecutive measurements
in tbe same MWS; BCS = body condition score; cBW =
corrected BW; rSD = residual SD.
*Mcgacalories of body cnergy calculated from body components (sec Matexials sud Methods).
after rumen emptying) from d 2 to 21 of
(5) or due to short-tenu equilibration between
lactation. Direct comparisons between in vivo
DW and water in different parts of the body
estimates and data from the chemical analysis
(14) do not seem to be involved in our applica-
of slaughtered cows are not easy to make
tion of the technique (see Materials and
because invasive techniques do not allow the
Methods). Discrepancies between estimates of
body composition of the same cow at the
changes in body energy from DWS and from
different physiological stages to be taken into
CEB were higher in early lactation when en-
account (5, 8).
ergy and protein balances were negative (11)
Integrations from repeated calorimetric
or when protein balance was more negative
measurements suggested that body fat mobili-
(high group, Table 2). A higher efficiency in
zation during the first 2 mo of lactation was
the use of mobilized energy was observed in
betwcen 20 and 60 kg for different groups of lactating ewes that were mobilizing more body
cows (9, 14). Compar+ons in the same cows
proteins (19). Such an effect in dairy cows
between changes in body energy (from body
could partly explain the overestimation of
components predicted from DWS) and CEB
body energy changes when calculated from
(taking into account digestibility measure-
CEB assuming that 80% of the mobilixed en-
ments) showed lower changes when estimated ergy was used as NEL.
with the DWS technique [(l 1) and Table 21.
The main effect of tbe high level of concen-
The reasons for these discrepancies are not
trate dming early lactation was to decrease
clear. Problems arising from biases due to
protein balance significantly because tbis con-
calibration on animais differing in age or diets centrate had a lower protein content (to equal-
TABLE 6. Linear regressions (Y = c + dX) between cumulative euergy balance (CJZB) and gains in body condition score
(BCS), BW, corrected BW (cBW), or plasma NEFA during lhe winter period.’
Y
X
C
d
r
rSD*
cE!B3
BCS
-82
187
.74
150
CBB
BW, kg
-133
4.9
.71
156
CBB
NEFwA,@&
-87
4.3
.80
133
cm3
23
-.41
-.79
137
‘Data (n = 47) from 24 cows during two periods (wk 1 to 7 and 8 to 20).
*Residual SD.
3Megacalories of body energy, calculated from cumulative energy balance as described in Materials ami Methods.
4Values from Cissé et al. (12). The correlation CoeffGzient ‘was slightly improved using Iog(NEFA) (r = -.82) or
(NJZFA)ln (r = -.83) instead of NEFA.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74. No. 9, 1991
BODY COhfKWTION
3113
ize the expected protein intakes), and com
This was in contrast with results in trials in
silage voluntary intake was decreased more
which bST-injected cows received much more
than expected (26). This eau explain the signif-
concentrate than controls according to individ-
icant decreases in body water and proteins in
ual milk yield and body condition. These cows
this group (Table 2) and, hence, the higher
increased their calculated EB and gained more
nonsignificant loss of BW. The protein loss
body condition during the last months of bST
(3.3 kg) was lower than that observed previ-
treatment, so as to recover ahnost completely
ously in underfed cows (6 to 13 kg) but higher
the higher BCS loss that was previously ob-
than in well-fed cows (1 kg) during the sarne
served during the first 6 to 8 wk of bST
perd (10). The initial values (86 to 88 kg of
injection (1, 7, 23).
body pmtein, Figure 1) were well in the range
The bST had no effect on body water and
(85 to 90 kg) observed in slaughtered early
proteins during the winter period although it
lactating cows (10, 14, 21).
decreased sharply the calculated protein bal-
ance (Table 3). This probably cari be related to
the N-sparing effect of bST and to the
Declinlng Lactation
decreased urinary N excretion (29) that was
Con& CO~S. From wk 8 to 20, control
confixmed in these cows by a decreased uremia
cows mvered body proteins lost during early
(12). In contrast, during the grazing period,
lactation (Figure l), as observed previously
bST sharply increased body water (36 kg
(9). However, they continued to lose some
above controls), corrected BW (34 kg), and
body lipids (4 to 13 kg), contrary to previous
body proteins (Table 4). The increase in esti-
results (3, 11,20) aud despite being in positive
mated body proteins (6.2 kg in absolute value),
calculated EB (Table 1). During the grazing
however, was surprisingly high for mature
period, there was no further increase in body
cows (32). This could be a bias due to in-
proteins, whereas body lipids were partially
creases in extracelhtlar water compartments,
recovered (Figure 1). These results suggest that
such as gut contents or plasma volume. A
body lipid changes are not always paralleled
l-kg increase in the water of gut contents, for
by protein changes.
example, would increase BW by about 1 kg
bST-Injected CO~S. Body lipids tended to and estimated body proteins by about .088 +
be decreased further by bST injection during
.075 = .163 kg (see Materials and Methods).
the winter period (13 kg below controls) in
During the last period of DWS measurement
accordance with the decrease in EB (Table 3)
(wk 38 and 39 of lactation), DMI of the com
and the increase in blood NEFA of these
silage-based diet was 16.1 kgJd in control cows
animals (12). Decreases in EB (7.23). BCS (1,
and 17.1 kg/d in bST-treated cows (Z’ < .25).
33), and body lipids (-17 kg) (5) generally
This could lead to an increase in digestive
water content by about 4 kg (see Materials and
were observed during the fist 6 to 8 wk of
Methods), although any hypothetical residual
bST treatment, a period in which energy intake
effect of the previous pastum diet on digestive
was never increased significantly.
content cannot be excluded.
The tendency of bST to decrease body lipid
Furthermore, there cari be an effect of bST
deposition during the grazing period (Table 4)
per se, because the foregut tissue and content
cari be due to the low concentrate supply com-
increased by 2 and 10 kg, respectively, in
bined with the medium quality of available
slaughtered bST cows that previously had free
pastum that did not allow bST-injected cows to
access to feed (5). A slower fecal excretion
ingest more energy than the contml cows.
rate of Cr203 was observed after bST treat-
Other long-terrn studies also showed lower EB
ment (4). There also were weekly fluctuations
and lipid deposition in bST-treated animals,
in BW (wk 1 vs. 2) after each bST injection
either when the satne total mixed diets were
(24) that apparently were not related to corres-
fed for ad libitum intake [-16 to -69 kg of
ponding fluctuations in feed intake. However,
lipids after 36 wk of bST (30); -5 to -35 kg of
in another slaughter trial, gastrointestinal con-
lipids after 18 wk of bST (21)] or when lirnited
tent (live weight minus empty BW) increased
concentrates were offered separately frorn com by only 5 kg in bST-treated cows (21). An
silage [-42 kg of lipids after 24 wk of bST,
increase in plasma volume (16) also could
Vérité and Chilliard, quoted by ChiBiard (7)].
contribute slightly to the increase in body wa-
JO~ of Dahy Scicmx Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
3114
CHILLIARD ET AL.
ter but was not confiied in a slaughter trial stores. Using a literature survey (18), it cari be
(5). Hypothetical changes in gut contents and
calculated frorn five trials on multiparous cows
blood volume are unlikely to explain com-
that 1 unit of BCS (scale 1 to 4) corresponds
pletely the 36-kg incmase in body water in
on average to 32 kg (+I 15) of BW. A value of
bST-treated cows compared with controls.
56 kg of BW/unit of BCS (scale 1 to 5) was
Therefore, bST may favor protein (and, hence,
observed in culled dairy cows when using
water) deposition during late lactation when
absolute values and of 32 kg of BWlunit of
milk protein secretion is sufficiently low or
BCS when using changes in early lactating
when hormonal secretions in pregnant animais
cows (15). There are few data conceming
cari act in synergy with bST. Eregnancy stage
lipids. In nonpregnant, nonlactating Friesian
was 146 (& 41) and 159 (rt 39) d in bST-
CO~S, 1 unit of BCS (scale 0 to 5) corre-
treated and control CO~S, respectively. This
sponded surprisingly to 84 kg of lipids and to
suggests that the gravid uterus (and its water
110 kg of BW (35).
content) was not heavier in treated CO~S.
Changes in body energy (estimated either
Injection with bST decreased BCS only
from body components or from CEB) were
slightly (-5 under controls). In a previous
200 to 300 McaNmit change in BCS and 4.3
calibration on 49 slaughtered CO~S, we found
to 5.9 Mcal/kg change in corrected BW (Ta-
that 1 unit of BCS corresponded to 28 kg of
bles 5 and 6). These values are somewhat
body lipids and 34 kg of BW (27). In contrast,
lower than estimates from slaughter or feeding
bST treatment (Table 4) decreased body lipids trials (250 to 340 Mcal and 4.9 to 7.6 Mcal for
more (23 kg below controls) than predicted (14
BCS and corrected BW, respectively) (8, 34).
kg) from BCS change, and it increased BW
In our trial, there was not good agreement
(24 kg), although a decrease (-17 kg) was
between changes in body energy from wk 8 to
predicted. This cari be related to the increases
20, estimated from either body components or
in body water (38 kg) and body protein (5 kg)
CEB (Table 3), contrary to a previous trial in
that masked the predicted decrease in BW (38
which both estimations were largely positive
+5 - 17 = +26 kg). Furthermore, the small
from wk 9 to 18 (11). Diet digestibility was
decmase in BCS may be due to a true increase not measured in each cow in our trial. Howev-
in muscular mass under the skin compensatiug
er, CEB was closely related to plasma NEFA
for the effect of decreasing subcutaneous fat on
0 = -.79, Table 6) and to change in corrected
BCS. Decmase in BCS without significant
B W ( r = +.80), although change in body en-
change in BW also was observed by West et
ergy (from body components) was less related
al. (33) in bST-treated CO~S.
to these traits (r = -.49, n = 47 with plasma
NEFA, r = +.68, n = 47 with corrected BW).
EstImators of Body Components
An unexpected higher body energy loss (for
given change in corrected BW) was apparent
In this trial, the relationships between BCS,
for all individual cows from control and bST
BW, and body lipids estimated from DWS
groups between wk 8 and 20 (Figure 3B).
(using data from control periods only, Table 5
Although differences between consecutive
and Figure 2) were close to corresponding
periods represent cumulative variabilities due
relationships calculated by Remond et al. (27)
to DWS measurement or to changes in gastro-
from 49 slaughtered multiparous Holstein
intestinal water (that is, however, assumed to
cows:
be rather constant at this lactation stage), it is
difficult to explain these systematically lower
BW (kg) = 34.2 x BCS + 479
means (-46 to -244 Mcal, Table 3) of changes
(r = .69,
in body energy when using the DWS technique
residual SD = 47 kg);
compared with CEB. This difference cor-
Bdy lipids (kg) = 27.5 x BCS - 2.5
responds to about 2 Mcal NEdd, i.e., to .l
(r = .84,
Mcal NE&g DMI, corresponding to about 7%
residual SD = 23 kg).
of the estimated energy value of the diets
(Table 1). The same apparent contradiction
This validates both BCS and DWS tech-
also was observed by Belyea and Adams (2) in
niques as useful tools for estimating body
cows that were in positive calculated EB
kmmal of Daùy Science Vol. 74, No. 9, 1991
BODY COMPOSII’ION
3115
(+2.65 Mcal/d during mo 3 and 4 of lactation)
and its effects on gastrointestinal motility. Asian-
without gain in body energy as estirnated IÏom
Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2:149.
5 Brown, D. L., S. J. Taylor, E. J. De Peters, and R. L.
whole body ‘?K counting. The cor-relation be-
Baldwin. 1989. Influence of sometribove, USAN
tween body energy and CEB in the present
(recombiit methionyl bovine somatotropin) on tbe
study (r = .55; n = 47), however, was only
baby composition of lactating cattle. J. Nutr. 119:633.
slightly lower than that (r = .69; n = 20) found
6 Chilhard, Y. 1987. Revue bibliographique: Variations
in early lactating goats using a two-pool mode1
quantitatives et mttabohsme des lipides dans les tissus
adipeux et le foie au cours du cycle gestation-htcta-
of tritiated water kinetics to estimate lipid
tien 2he partie: chez la brebis et la vache. Reprod.
changes (13). A better knowledge of changes
NUIT. Dev. 22327.
in gut water content and improvement of
7 ChOliard, Y. 1988. Reviewz long-tenu effects of re-
methods to predict them probably would irn-
combii bovine somatotropin (rbST) on dairy cow
prove in vivo studies on body composition.
puf0rman~. Ann. z.ootech. (Paris) 32159.
8 CYhilkd, Y., B. R~%ond, J. Agabriel, J. Robelin, and
R V&ite. 1987. Variations du contenu digestif et des
CONCLUSIONS
rherves corporelles au cours du cycle gest&on-lacta-
tien Bull. Te& Ctr. Rech. Zootech. Vdt. lheix, Inst
During 30 wk of E>ST administration, cows
Natl. Rech. Agron. 70~117.
gained more BW, water and proteins, and less
9Chilhd. Y., B. Remond. D. Sauvant, and M. Ver-
body lipids than controls. There generally was
morel. 1983. Particularit6s du mkabolisme energ&
tique. Bull. Tech. Ctr. Rech. Zootech. Vtt. Theix, Inst.
good agreement among traits such as BW,
Natl. Rd. Agron 53:37.
body water, BCS, CEB, and plasma NEFA
lOChilliard, Y., ami J. Robelin. 1983. Mobilization of
that were measured independently. However,
bcdy proteins by early lactating cows measmed by
the loss of body energy apparently was overes-
slaughter and b0 dilution techniques. 4th Int. Symp.
Rotein Metab. Nutr. (Clermont-Ferra@.
Em. Assoc.
timated during wk 8 to 20 of lactation when
Anim. Frod. Publ. No. 31. huit. Natl. Rech. Agron.
predicted from DWS. Re&ts suggest that
Pobl. IL195
bST-treated cows need more concentrates than
11 Chilhard, Y., J. Robelin, and B. Rémond. 1984. In
controls in order to achieve the repletion of
vivo estimation of body lipid mobilisation ami recon-
body fat before the dry period.
stitution in dairy cattle. Cari. J. Anim. Sci 64(Suppl.):
236.
12 Cisst, ht. Y. cMliard, V. Coxam, M. J. Davicco, ami
ACKNOWLEDQMENTS
B. R6mond. 1991. Slow release somatotropin in dairy
heifers and cows fed hvo levels of energy concentrate.
We thank A. Ollier, E. Girard, J. N. Ram-
2. Plasma hormones and mctabolites. J. Dairy Sci 74:
pon, and G. Sauvage for technical assistance
1382.
and P. Boule (University Clermont-Ferrand II,
13 Dunshea, F. R., A. W. Bell, and T. E. Trigg. 1990.
France) and F. Bocquier for helpful advice in
Body composition changes in goats dming early lacta-
tion estimated ushtg a two-pool mode1 of bitiated
DW analyses and computations. This work
water kiuetic-s. Br. J. Nutr. 64~121.
was supported by Monsanto (St. Louis, MO).
14 Brdman, R. A, and S. M Andrew. 1989. Methods for
M. Cissé received a fellowship from the Centre
and estimates of body tissue mobiition in the htctat-
International des Etudiants et Stagiaires
hg dairy cow. Page 19 in Roc. Monsanto Te&
S y m p . precediq C o m e l l Nutr. Cor& F e e d
(Ministère de la Coopération, France).
Manuf.(oCtober 24), Syracuse, NY. Monsanto ed.
15 Ferguson, J. D., and K. A. Otto. 1989. Matqing body
REFERENCES
condition in dairy cows. Page 75 in Proc. Cornell
Nufr. Conf. Feed Mannf., Syracuse, NY.
1 Bauman, D. E., D. L. Hard, A. Crooker, M. S. Par-
16 Fullerton, F. M., 1. R. Fleet, R. B. Heap, 1. C. Hart,
ttidge, K. Ganick, L. D. Sandles, N. Erb, S. E.
and T. B. Mepham. 1989. Cardiovascular msponses
Franson, G. F. Hartnell, and R L. Hintz. 1989. Long-
and mammary substrate uptake in Jersey cows treated
term evalmtion of a prolonged-releasc formulation of
with pituitary-derived growth hormone during late
N-metbionyl boviue somatotropm in lactating dairy
lactation J. Dairy Res. 5527.
CO~S. J. Dairy Sci. 72642.
17Gagliostro. G., and Y. CXlliad 1991. Duodenal
2 Belyea, R. L., and M. W. Adams. 1990. Bnergy and
raped oil infusion in early and midlactation cows.
nitrogen utilidion of high versus low producing dairy
2. Vobmtary intake, milk production, and composi-
cows. J. Dairy Sci. 73:1023.
tion. J. Dairy Sci. 74499.
3 Belyea, R L., G. R Frost, F. M. Mat@ J. L. Clark,
18 Gamsworthy, P. C. 1988. The effcct of energy
sud L. G. Forkner. 1978. Body composition of dairy
merves at calving on performance of dairy cows.
cattle by potassium-40 liquid scintillation detection. J.
Page 157 in Nutrition and lactation in the dairy cow.
Dairy Sci. 61:206.
P. C. Gamsworthy, ed. Proc. 46th Univ. Nottiqham
4Bertoni. G., F. Piccioli-Cappelli, R. Lombardehi, and
Paster School Agric. Sci., Buttenvorths, Kent, Bngl.
V. Cam>a. 1989. Somatotropin treatment of dairy cows
19 Gedy, K. G., and A. R. Sykes. 1986. Effects of
Journal Of Dairy Science Vol. 74, No. 9. 1991
3116
CHKMARDETAL.
herbage allowance during pregoancy and lactation on
28 RoMin, J. 1982. Meamrement of Bondy water in living
feed intake. milk production, body composition and
cattle by dilution technique. Beret. Statens Husdyr-
energy utilization of ewes at pasture. J. Agric. Sci.
brugsfors. 524 156.
(Camb.) 106z351.
29 Sechen, S. J., D. E. Bauman, H. F. Tyrrell, and P. J.
2OMartin, R. A., and F. R Ehle. 1986. Body composi-
Reynolds. 1989. Effect of somatotropin on kinetics of
tion of lactating and dry Holstein cows estbnated by
nonesterirïed fatty acids and partition of cnergy, car-
deuterium dilution. J. Dairy Sci. 6988.
bon, aod nitrogen in lactating daky CO~S. J. Dairy Sci.
21 McGuffey, R K.. T. E. Spike, and R. P. Basson. 1989.
72:59.
Prutitioning of energy in tbe lactating dairy cow
30 Soderholm, C. G., D. E. Otterby, J. G. Lii P. R
mceiving bST. J. Datry Sci. 72(Suppl. 1):535.(Abstr.)
Ehle. J. E. Wheaton, W. P. Hansen, and R. J. Annex-
22 Mulvany, P. 1977. Dsky cow condition sroring. NatJ.
stad. 1988. Effe~ts of recombinant bovine somato-
Jnst. Res. Dairying, Paper No. 4468. Shinficld, Engl.
tropin on milk production, body composition, and
23 Peel, C. J.. P. J. Eppard, and D. L. Hard. 1989.
physiological parameters. J. Dairy Sci. 71:355.
Evaluation of sometribove (methionyl bovine somato-
31 Tissier, M, J. Robelin, A. Purroy, and Y. Geay. 1978.
tropin) in toxicology and clinicaJ trials in Europe and
Extraction et dosage automatique rapide de l’eau
the United States. Page 167 in Biotecbnology in
lourde dans les liquides biologiques. Amt. Biol. Anim.
growth regulation. R. B. Heap, C. G. Rosser, and G.
Biochim. Biophys. 181223.
E. Lammbg, ed. Butterworths, London, Engl.
32 VkitC, R., and Y. Chilhard. 1990. Effect of age of
24Phipps, R. H. 1988. The use of prolonged release
dairy cows on body composition changes throughout
bovine somatotropin in milk production. Jnt. Dairy
the lactation cycle as meaaured witb deuteriated water.
Fed. Bull. No. 228, Brussels, Belgium,
Proc. 6bme J. Aliu~ Nutr. Herbiv., Abstr. 38. Jnst.
25 Rémond, B. 1988. Evolution du poids du contenu du
Natl. Rech. Agron, Paris, France.
rdticulo-rumen chez les vaches au cours des 2 premi-
33 West, J. W., K. Bondari, and J. C. Johnson 1990.
ers mois de la lactation. Reprod. Nu& Dev. 28:109.
Fiffects of bovine somatotropin on milk yield and
26Rkrnond. B., M. CisSt, A. O&r, and Y. Chilkrd.
composition, body weight, and condition score of
1991. Slow release somatotropin in dairy heifers and
Holstein and Jersey CO~S. J. Dairy Sci. 73:1062.
cows fcd two levels of energy concentrate. 1. Per-
34 Wilhams, C. B., P. A. Oltenacu, and C. J. Suiffer~.
formances and body condition. J. Dairy Sci. 741370.
1989. Refinements in detamining tbe energy value of
27R4nond, B., J. Robelin, and Y. ChiUiard. 1988. Es-
body tlssue reserves and tissue gains from growth. J.
timation de la teneur en lipides des vaches Mi&res
Dairy Sci. 72~264.
pie-noires par la mtthode de notation de Mat d’en-
35 Wright, 1. A., and A.J.F. Russel. 1984. Partition of fat,
graissement. ht. Natl. Rech. Agron, Prod. Anim. 1:
body composition and body condition score in mature
111.
cows. Anim. Prod. 38:23.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 74, No. 9. 1991