The Experts below are selected from a list of 3348 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ea Wechsle - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
comparison of functional aspects in two automatic Milking systems and auto tandem Milking parlors
Journal of Dairy Science, 2007Co-Authors: Lorenz Gyga, I Neuffe, Rudolf Hause, Christia Kaufma, Ea WechsleAbstract:Abstract Milk yield, Milking frequency, interMilking interval, teat-cup attachment success rate, and length of the Milking procedure are important functional aspects of automatic Milking systems (AMS). In this study, these variables were compared for 2 different models of AMS (AMS-1, with free cow traffic, and AMS-2, with selectively guided cow traffic) and auto-tandem Milking parlors (ATM) on 4 farms each. Data on Milking-stall visits and Milkings of 20 cows were recorded on 3 successive days by means of video observations. Data were evaluated with mixed-effects models. Milk yield did not differ among the 3 Milking systems. Milking frequency in the AMS was 2.47/d [95% confidence interval (CI)=(2.38, 2.56)], and was significantly higher than the 2 Milkings/d in ATM. Milking frequency was lower for cows with a higher number of days in milk (DIM) in AMS-1 [change of −0.057/10 DIM, CI=(−0.070, −0.044)], but remained constant for cows with varying DIM in AMS-2 [change of −0.003/10 DIM, CI=(−0.034, 0.027)]. As a consequence, Milking frequency was higher in early lactation [by 0.603, CI=(0.102, 1.103)] and lower in late lactation in AMS-1 than in AMS-2 [by −0.397, CI=(−0.785, −0.008)]. The interMilking interval showed the opposite pattern. Teat-cup attachment was more successful in AMS-1 than in AMS-2 (98.4 vs. 94.3% of the Milkings), with some variation among farms (range: AMS-1 96.2 to 99.5%; AMS-2 91.5 to 96.1%). The length of the entire Milking Process did not differ among the Milking systems [454s, CI=(430, 478)], although the preparation phase was longer [changes in comparison with ATM: in AMS-1 by a factor of 2.90, CI=(2.30, 3.65), and in AMS-2 by 5.15, CI=(4.09, 6.48)] and the actual Milking phase was shorter in both AMS-1 and AMS-2 than in ATM [changes in comparison with ATM: in AMS-1 by a factor of 0.76, CI=(0.62, 0.94), and in AMS-2 by 0.75, CI=(0.60, 0.93)]. The admission [changes in comparison with ATM: in AMS-1 by a factor of 2.56, CI=(1.55, 4.22), and in AMS-2 by 3.07, CI=(1.86, 5.08)] and preparation phases lasted longer in AMS-2 than in AMS-1, whereas the time required by the cows to leave the Milking stall did not differ among the systems [changes in comparison with ATM: in AMS-1 by a factor of 0.89, CI=(0.55, 1.44), and in AMS-2 by 1.02, CI=(0.63, 1.66)]. In conclusion, different technical approaches to automatic Milking led to differences in teat-cup attachment success rates, in the duration of several phases of the Milking Process, and in Milking frequency. The capacity of an AMS could be further improved by shortening the preparation phase and reducing the proportion of failed Milkings.
-
milk cortisol concentration in automatic Milking systems compared with auto tandem Milking parlors
Journal of Dairy Science, 2006Co-Authors: Lorenz Gyga, I Neuffe, Rudolf Hause, Christia Kaufma, Ea WechsleAbstract:Milk cortisol concentration was determined under routine management conditions on 4 farms with an auto-tandem Milking parlor and 8 farms with 1 of 2 automatic Milking systems (AMS). One of the AMS was a partially forced (AMSp) system, and the other was a free cow traffic (AMSf) system. Milk samples were collected for all the cows on a given farm (20 to 54 cows) for at least 1 d. Behavioral observations were made during the Milking Process for a subset of 16 to 20 cows per farm. Milk cortisol concentration was evaluated by Milking system, time of day, behavior during Milking, daily milk yield, and somatic cell count using linear mixed-effects models. Milk cortisol did not differ between systems (AMSp: 1.15 ± 0.07; AMSf: 1.02 ± 0.12; auto-tandem parlor: 1.01 ± 0.16 nmol/L). Cortisol concentrations were lower in evening than in morning Milkings (1.01 ± 0.12 vs. 1.24 ± 0.13 nmol/L). The daily periodicity of cortisol concentration was characterized by an early morning peak and a late afternoon elevation in AMSp. A bimodal pattern was not evident in AMSf. Finally, milk cortisol decreased by a factor of 0.915 in Milking parlors, by 0.998 in AMSp, and increased by a factor of 1.161 in AMSf for each unit of ln(somatic cell count/1,000). We conclude that Milking cows in Milking parlors or AMS does not result in relevant stress differences as measured by milk cortisol concentrations. The biological relevance of the difference regarding the daily periodicity of milk cortisol concentrations observed between the AMSp and AMSf needs further investigation.
Lorenz Gyga - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
comparison of functional aspects in two automatic Milking systems and auto tandem Milking parlors
Journal of Dairy Science, 2007Co-Authors: Lorenz Gyga, I Neuffe, Rudolf Hause, Christia Kaufma, Ea WechsleAbstract:Abstract Milk yield, Milking frequency, interMilking interval, teat-cup attachment success rate, and length of the Milking procedure are important functional aspects of automatic Milking systems (AMS). In this study, these variables were compared for 2 different models of AMS (AMS-1, with free cow traffic, and AMS-2, with selectively guided cow traffic) and auto-tandem Milking parlors (ATM) on 4 farms each. Data on Milking-stall visits and Milkings of 20 cows were recorded on 3 successive days by means of video observations. Data were evaluated with mixed-effects models. Milk yield did not differ among the 3 Milking systems. Milking frequency in the AMS was 2.47/d [95% confidence interval (CI)=(2.38, 2.56)], and was significantly higher than the 2 Milkings/d in ATM. Milking frequency was lower for cows with a higher number of days in milk (DIM) in AMS-1 [change of −0.057/10 DIM, CI=(−0.070, −0.044)], but remained constant for cows with varying DIM in AMS-2 [change of −0.003/10 DIM, CI=(−0.034, 0.027)]. As a consequence, Milking frequency was higher in early lactation [by 0.603, CI=(0.102, 1.103)] and lower in late lactation in AMS-1 than in AMS-2 [by −0.397, CI=(−0.785, −0.008)]. The interMilking interval showed the opposite pattern. Teat-cup attachment was more successful in AMS-1 than in AMS-2 (98.4 vs. 94.3% of the Milkings), with some variation among farms (range: AMS-1 96.2 to 99.5%; AMS-2 91.5 to 96.1%). The length of the entire Milking Process did not differ among the Milking systems [454s, CI=(430, 478)], although the preparation phase was longer [changes in comparison with ATM: in AMS-1 by a factor of 2.90, CI=(2.30, 3.65), and in AMS-2 by 5.15, CI=(4.09, 6.48)] and the actual Milking phase was shorter in both AMS-1 and AMS-2 than in ATM [changes in comparison with ATM: in AMS-1 by a factor of 0.76, CI=(0.62, 0.94), and in AMS-2 by 0.75, CI=(0.60, 0.93)]. The admission [changes in comparison with ATM: in AMS-1 by a factor of 2.56, CI=(1.55, 4.22), and in AMS-2 by 3.07, CI=(1.86, 5.08)] and preparation phases lasted longer in AMS-2 than in AMS-1, whereas the time required by the cows to leave the Milking stall did not differ among the systems [changes in comparison with ATM: in AMS-1 by a factor of 0.89, CI=(0.55, 1.44), and in AMS-2 by 1.02, CI=(0.63, 1.66)]. In conclusion, different technical approaches to automatic Milking led to differences in teat-cup attachment success rates, in the duration of several phases of the Milking Process, and in Milking frequency. The capacity of an AMS could be further improved by shortening the preparation phase and reducing the proportion of failed Milkings.
-
milk cortisol concentration in automatic Milking systems compared with auto tandem Milking parlors
Journal of Dairy Science, 2006Co-Authors: Lorenz Gyga, I Neuffe, Rudolf Hause, Christia Kaufma, Ea WechsleAbstract:Milk cortisol concentration was determined under routine management conditions on 4 farms with an auto-tandem Milking parlor and 8 farms with 1 of 2 automatic Milking systems (AMS). One of the AMS was a partially forced (AMSp) system, and the other was a free cow traffic (AMSf) system. Milk samples were collected for all the cows on a given farm (20 to 54 cows) for at least 1 d. Behavioral observations were made during the Milking Process for a subset of 16 to 20 cows per farm. Milk cortisol concentration was evaluated by Milking system, time of day, behavior during Milking, daily milk yield, and somatic cell count using linear mixed-effects models. Milk cortisol did not differ between systems (AMSp: 1.15 ± 0.07; AMSf: 1.02 ± 0.12; auto-tandem parlor: 1.01 ± 0.16 nmol/L). Cortisol concentrations were lower in evening than in morning Milkings (1.01 ± 0.12 vs. 1.24 ± 0.13 nmol/L). The daily periodicity of cortisol concentration was characterized by an early morning peak and a late afternoon elevation in AMSp. A bimodal pattern was not evident in AMSf. Finally, milk cortisol decreased by a factor of 0.915 in Milking parlors, by 0.998 in AMSp, and increased by a factor of 1.161 in AMSf for each unit of ln(somatic cell count/1,000). We conclude that Milking cows in Milking parlors or AMS does not result in relevant stress differences as measured by milk cortisol concentrations. The biological relevance of the difference regarding the daily periodicity of milk cortisol concentrations observed between the AMSp and AMSf needs further investigation.
René H. Wijffels - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
phase toxicity of dodecane on the microalga dunaliella salina
Journal of Applied Phycology, 2011Co-Authors: Dorinde M M Kleinegris, Willem A Brandenburg, Marcel Janssen, René H. WijffelsAbstract:In the so-called Milking Process of Dunaliella salina carotenoids are extracted and simultaneously produced by the culture, whilst the biomass concentration remains constant. Different theories exist about the extraction mechanisms although none have been proven yet. In this research, direct contact between dodecane and cells during the extraction Process was studied microscopically and effects of direct contact were determined during in situ extraction experiments. Our results showed that water–solvent interphase contact resulted in cell death. This cell death and consequent cell rupture resulted in the release and concomitant extraction of the carotenoids. Furthermore, it has been suggested to add a small amount of dichloromethane to the biocompatible dodecane to create an organic phase with more extraction capacity. Our results showed that the addition of dichloromethane resulted in increased cell death and consequently the extraction rate increased. The improved solubility of carotenoids in an organic phase with dichloromethane did not significantly increase the extraction rate.
-
the selectivity of Milking of dunaliella salina
Marine Biotechnology, 2010Co-Authors: Dorinde M M Kleinegris, Willem A Brandenburg, Marcel Janssen, René H. WijffelsAbstract:The Process of the simultaneous production and extraction of carotenoids, Milking, of Dunaliella salina was studied. We would like to know the selectivity of this Process. Could all the carotenoids produced be extracted? And would it be possible to vary the profile of the produced carotenoids and, consequently, influence the type of carotenoids extracted? By using three different D. salina strains and three different stress conditions, we varied the profiles of the carotenoids produced. Between Dunaliella bardawil and D. salina 19/18, no remarkable differences were seen in the extraction profiles, although D. salina 19/18 seemed to be better extractable. D. salina 19/25 was not “milkable” at all. The Milking Process could only be called selective for secondary carotenoids in case gentle mixing was used. In aerated flat-panel photobioreactors, extraction was much better, but selectiveness decreased and also chlorophyll and primary carotenoids were extracted. This was possibly related to cell damage due to shear stress.
Satu Pyorala - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
invited review udder health of dairy cows in automatic Milking
Journal of Dairy Science, 2011Co-Authors: Mari Hovinen, Satu PyoralaAbstract:Automatic Milking (AM) is increasing in modern dairy farming, and over 8,000 farms worldwide currently use this technology. Automatic Milking system is designed to replace conventional Milking managed by a milker in a Milking parlor or in tie stalls. Cows are generally milked more frequently in AM than in conventional Milking, and Milking is quarter-based instead of udder-based. Despite improvements in the Milking Process and often building of a new barn before the introduction of AM, udder health of the cows has not improved; on the contrary, problems may appear following conversion from conventional Milking to AM. This review focuses on udder health of dairy cows in AM, and we discuss several aspects of cow and Milking management in AM associated with udder health. Finally, adequate management methods in AM are suggested. According to several studies comparing udder health between automatic and conventional Milking or comparing udder health before and after the introduction of automatic Milking in the same herds, udder health has deteriorated during the first year or more after the introduction of AM. Automatic detection of subclinical and clinical mastitis and cleaning the teats before Milking are challenges of AM. Failures in mastitis detection and Milking hygiene pose a risk for udder health. These risk factors can partly be controlled by management actions taken by the farmer, but AM also needs further technical development. To maintain good udder health in AM, it is imperative that the barn is properly designed to keep the cows clean and the cow traffic flowing. Milking frequency must be maintained for every cow according to its stage of lactation and milk production. Careful observation of the cows and knowledge of how to use all data gathered from the system are also important. "Automatic" does not mean that the role of a competent herdsman is in any way diminished.
Christia Kaufma - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
comparison of functional aspects in two automatic Milking systems and auto tandem Milking parlors
Journal of Dairy Science, 2007Co-Authors: Lorenz Gyga, I Neuffe, Rudolf Hause, Christia Kaufma, Ea WechsleAbstract:Abstract Milk yield, Milking frequency, interMilking interval, teat-cup attachment success rate, and length of the Milking procedure are important functional aspects of automatic Milking systems (AMS). In this study, these variables were compared for 2 different models of AMS (AMS-1, with free cow traffic, and AMS-2, with selectively guided cow traffic) and auto-tandem Milking parlors (ATM) on 4 farms each. Data on Milking-stall visits and Milkings of 20 cows were recorded on 3 successive days by means of video observations. Data were evaluated with mixed-effects models. Milk yield did not differ among the 3 Milking systems. Milking frequency in the AMS was 2.47/d [95% confidence interval (CI)=(2.38, 2.56)], and was significantly higher than the 2 Milkings/d in ATM. Milking frequency was lower for cows with a higher number of days in milk (DIM) in AMS-1 [change of −0.057/10 DIM, CI=(−0.070, −0.044)], but remained constant for cows with varying DIM in AMS-2 [change of −0.003/10 DIM, CI=(−0.034, 0.027)]. As a consequence, Milking frequency was higher in early lactation [by 0.603, CI=(0.102, 1.103)] and lower in late lactation in AMS-1 than in AMS-2 [by −0.397, CI=(−0.785, −0.008)]. The interMilking interval showed the opposite pattern. Teat-cup attachment was more successful in AMS-1 than in AMS-2 (98.4 vs. 94.3% of the Milkings), with some variation among farms (range: AMS-1 96.2 to 99.5%; AMS-2 91.5 to 96.1%). The length of the entire Milking Process did not differ among the Milking systems [454s, CI=(430, 478)], although the preparation phase was longer [changes in comparison with ATM: in AMS-1 by a factor of 2.90, CI=(2.30, 3.65), and in AMS-2 by 5.15, CI=(4.09, 6.48)] and the actual Milking phase was shorter in both AMS-1 and AMS-2 than in ATM [changes in comparison with ATM: in AMS-1 by a factor of 0.76, CI=(0.62, 0.94), and in AMS-2 by 0.75, CI=(0.60, 0.93)]. The admission [changes in comparison with ATM: in AMS-1 by a factor of 2.56, CI=(1.55, 4.22), and in AMS-2 by 3.07, CI=(1.86, 5.08)] and preparation phases lasted longer in AMS-2 than in AMS-1, whereas the time required by the cows to leave the Milking stall did not differ among the systems [changes in comparison with ATM: in AMS-1 by a factor of 0.89, CI=(0.55, 1.44), and in AMS-2 by 1.02, CI=(0.63, 1.66)]. In conclusion, different technical approaches to automatic Milking led to differences in teat-cup attachment success rates, in the duration of several phases of the Milking Process, and in Milking frequency. The capacity of an AMS could be further improved by shortening the preparation phase and reducing the proportion of failed Milkings.
-
milk cortisol concentration in automatic Milking systems compared with auto tandem Milking parlors
Journal of Dairy Science, 2006Co-Authors: Lorenz Gyga, I Neuffe, Rudolf Hause, Christia Kaufma, Ea WechsleAbstract:Milk cortisol concentration was determined under routine management conditions on 4 farms with an auto-tandem Milking parlor and 8 farms with 1 of 2 automatic Milking systems (AMS). One of the AMS was a partially forced (AMSp) system, and the other was a free cow traffic (AMSf) system. Milk samples were collected for all the cows on a given farm (20 to 54 cows) for at least 1 d. Behavioral observations were made during the Milking Process for a subset of 16 to 20 cows per farm. Milk cortisol concentration was evaluated by Milking system, time of day, behavior during Milking, daily milk yield, and somatic cell count using linear mixed-effects models. Milk cortisol did not differ between systems (AMSp: 1.15 ± 0.07; AMSf: 1.02 ± 0.12; auto-tandem parlor: 1.01 ± 0.16 nmol/L). Cortisol concentrations were lower in evening than in morning Milkings (1.01 ± 0.12 vs. 1.24 ± 0.13 nmol/L). The daily periodicity of cortisol concentration was characterized by an early morning peak and a late afternoon elevation in AMSp. A bimodal pattern was not evident in AMSf. Finally, milk cortisol decreased by a factor of 0.915 in Milking parlors, by 0.998 in AMSp, and increased by a factor of 1.161 in AMSf for each unit of ln(somatic cell count/1,000). We conclude that Milking cows in Milking parlors or AMS does not result in relevant stress differences as measured by milk cortisol concentrations. The biological relevance of the difference regarding the daily periodicity of milk cortisol concentrations observed between the AMSp and AMSf needs further investigation.