Supplementary data - Virtual fencing technology to intensively graze lactating dairy cattle II: Effects on cow welfare and behavior

Supplementary Tables 1-4 and supplementary Figure 1

ABSTRACT
Virtual fencing technology uses a neckband-mounted device to deliver an audio cue when the animal nears a virtual boundary that is set via a global positioning system, followed by an electrical stimulus if it crosses the boundary. The flexibility offered by this technology could revolutionise grazing management on dairy farms, but its application and impacts on lactating dairy cattle have not been assessed. This experiment reports on the effects of an electric or a virtual front-fence on dairy cow behavior and welfare. Two temporally separated treatments were applied to a herd of 30 multi-parous cows. Cows were provided an estimated 14-15 kg DM/cow of fresh pasture in a new paddock every 24 h. From days 1 to 10 cows were grazed using a conventional electric front-fence (control treatment) and from days 14 to 23 they were grazed using a virtual front-fence (eShepherd®). Cows were trained to the technology from days 11 to 13. The milk production and live weight of individual cows were recorded daily. Cortisol concentrations were obtained from milk samples collected from individual cows on 3-days during each of the control and the virtual fence grazing periods, plus the first day of training. From day 6 of the experiment, six focal cows were fitted with a RumiWatch noseband sensor to monitor grazing and ruminating time, and eight focal cows were fitted with an Icetag sensors to monitor activity. Milk production, live weight and the time cows spent standing and lying did not differ between the electric and virtual fence periods. Milk cortisol concentrations, activity and the times spent ruminating and grazing were comparable between the electric and early virtual fence periods (i.e., days 1-3 with a virtual fence). However, at days 4-6 with a virtual fence grazing activity (steps taken and motion index) and time spent grazing were lower, while time spent ruminating was greater, than with an electric fence. Further, LSD tests suggest milk cortisol concentrations were higher at day 5 with a virtual fence than at day 8 with an electric fence and day 1 with a virtual fence. We conclude there is no evidence of behavioral and welfare impacts of virtual fencing on dairy cows in the days immediately following implementation of the technology in a simple intensive grazing regime, but a longer study is required to fully elucidate impacts beyond this period.

补充表格1-4及补充图1

摘要
虚拟围栏技术通过佩戴在动物颈部的设备，在动物接近由全球定位系统设定的虚拟边界时发出音频提示，若动物越过边界，则随后触发电刺激。该技术的灵活性有望彻底革新乳牛场的放牧管理，但其应用及其对泌乳乳牛的影响尚未得到评估。本实验报告了电围栏或虚拟围栏对乳牛行为与福祉的影响。对30头多胎次乳牛群实施了两种时间上分隔的治疗方案。乳牛每天在新的围场中获得大约14-15公斤的干物质。在实验的前10天，乳牛使用传统的电围栏（对照组）进行放牧；而在第14天至第23天，则使用虚拟围栏（eShepherd®）进行放牧。乳牛在实验的第11天至第13天接受了该技术的训练。记录了每头乳牛的日奶产量和活重。在控制组和虚拟围栏放牧期间，以及训练的第一天，从每头乳牛的奶样中提取了皮质醇浓度。从实验的第6天起，对六头焦点乳牛佩戴了RumiWatch鼻环传感器以监测放牧和反刍时间，对另外八头焦点乳牛佩戴了Icetag传感器以监测活动。电围栏和虚拟围栏期间的奶产量、活重以及乳牛站立和躺下的时间没有差异。电围栏和早期虚拟围栏期间的奶皮质醇浓度、活动以及反刍和放牧的时间相当（即使用虚拟围栏的前3天）。然而，在虚拟围栏放牧的第4-6天，放牧活动（步数和运动指数）和放牧时间低于电围栏，而反刍时间较长。此外，LSD测试表明，与电围栏的第8天和虚拟围栏的第1天相比，虚拟围栏的第5天奶皮质醇浓度更高。我们得出结论，在技术实施后的短期内，虚拟围栏对乳牛的行为和福祉没有造成影响，但在简单集约化放牧制度中，需要更长时间的研究以全面阐明该技术在此之后的影响。