JDS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Interpretive Summary
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tucker, C. B.
Right arrow Articles by Fraser, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tucker, C. B.
Right arrow Articles by Fraser, D.
J. Dairy Sci. 88:2730-2737
© American Dairy Science Association, 2005.

Influence of Neck-Rail Placement on Free-Stall Preference, Use, and Cleanliness

C. B. Tucker, D. M. Weary and D. Fraser

Animal Welfare Program, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Z4

Corresponding author: C. B. Tucker; e-mail: cassandra.tucker{at}agresearch.co.nz.

Three experiments examined how the presence of a neck rail at different heights and locations influenced dairy cattle behavior and stall cleanliness. Experiment 1 compared 4 levels of neck-rail height (102, 114, and 127 cm and no neck rail; presented at 160 or 180 cm from the curb) in a preference test. Cows (n = 10) showed no consistent preference based on neck-rail height, regardless of the horizontal position of the neck rail. When cows were restricted to each treatment in turn, however, time spent standing fully (with all 4 hooves) in the stall was least in the stall with the lowest neck rail (mean, 22 min/24 h) and was greatest in the stall with no neck rail (mean, 83 min/24 h). A second experiment examined the effect of a neck rail placed at 3 distances from the curb (140, 175, and 233 cm) when height was held constant (131 cm; n = 12). Time spent standing fully in the stall was least when the neck rail was close to the curb (140 cm; mean, 11 min/24 h) and was greatest when the neck rail was furthest from the curb (233 cm; mean, 86 min/24 h). When the neck rail was far from the curb, the cows were more likely to soil the stall by defecating while standing fully in the stall. Experiment 3 compared soiling of the stall by 14 cows with and without a neck rail at a height of 124.5 cm. When the neck rail was removed, cows were more than twice as likely to soil the stall by defecating while standing fully in the stall compared with when the neck rail was present (1.3 vs. 0.5 defecations/24 h). Thus, restrictive neck-rail placement prevents cows from standing in stall, but helps keep stalls clean. Access to more comfortable flooring surfaces outside the stall may help mitigate the negative effects of restrictive neck rails.

Key Words: cubicle • housing • welfare • behavior

Abbreviation key: ECT = electronic cow trainers




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J DAIRY SCIHome page
F. Bernardi, J. Fregonesi, C. Winckler, D. M. Veira, M. A. G. von Keyserlingk, and D. M. Weary
The stall-design paradox: Neck rails increase lameness but improve udder and stall hygiene
J Dairy Sci, July 1, 2009; 92(7): 3074 - 3080.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J DAIRY SCIHome page
J. A. Fregonesi, M. A. G. von Keyserlingk, C. B. Tucker, D. M. Veira, and D. M. Weary
Neck-rail position in the free stall affects standing behavior and udder and stall cleanliness
J Dairy Sci, May 1, 2009; 92(5): 1979 - 1985.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J DAIRY SCIHome page
N. B. Cook, M. J. Marin, R. L. Mentink, T. B. Bennett, and M. J. Schaefer
Comfort Zone-Design Free Stalls: Do They Influence the Stall Use Behavior of Lame Cows?
J Dairy Sci, December 1, 2008; 91(12): 4673 - 4678.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J DAIRY SCIHome page
M. Magnusson, A. H. Herlin, and M. Ventorp
Short Communication: Effect of Alley Floor Cleanliness on Free-Stall and Udder Hygiene
J Dairy Sci, October 1, 2008; 91(10): 3927 - 3930.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J DAIRY SCIHome page
J. A. Fregonesi, D. M. Veira, M. A. G. von Keyserlingk, and D. M. Weary
Effects of Bedding Quality on Lying Behavior of Dairy Cows
J Dairy Sci, December 1, 2007; 90(12): 5468 - 5472.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J DAIRY SCIHome page
J. A. Fregonesi, C. B. Tucker, and D. M. Weary
Overstocking Reduces Lying Time in Dairy Cows
J Dairy Sci, July 1, 2007; 90(7): 3349 - 3354.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J DAIRY SCIHome page
O. Hernandez-Mendo, M. A. G. von Keyserlingk, D. M. Veira, and D. M. Weary
Effects of Pasture on Lameness in Dairy Cows
J Dairy Sci, March 1, 2007; 90(3): 1209 - 1214.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J DAIRY SCIHome page
C. B. Tucker, G. Zdanowicz, and D. M. Weary
Brisket boards reduce freestall use.
J Dairy Sci, July 1, 2006; 89(7): 2603 - 2607.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J DAIRY SCIHome page
C. B. Tucker, D. M. Weary, A. M. de Passille, B. Campbell, and J. Rushen
Flooring in front of the feed bunk affects feeding behavior and use of freestalls by dairy cows.
J Dairy Sci, June 1, 2006; 89(6): 2065 - 2071.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the American Dairy Science Association ®.