Data · dataset · 2026
Understanding dairy cow behaviour to improve production and explore welfare implications in automatic milking systems
Listed in ZivaHub and Deakin Research Online and DMU Figshare — shown once because both records carry DOI 10.17034/32641356.v1
Automatic milking systems (AMS) may benefit both cows and farmers if appropriately implemented.
Description
Effective implementation is dependent on the voluntary behaviour of the cow as these systems require cows to visit the milking unit voluntarily. Low voluntary milking behaviour, therefore, is a concern within these systems.
Understanding what motivates a cow to visiting the milking robot is an area of particular research interest, and to date no experimental intervention has proved completely effective in optimising voluntary milking frequency (MF). The main aim of my research was to investigate how aspects of dairy cow behaviour influence productivity and welfare in an AMS context. In the first study, I investigated if social dominance and personality influenced MF in dairy cows learning to use an AMS.
Read the rest (6 more)
Social dominance ranking was associated with a higher MF during the learning period. Cows which combined the personality traits low ‘boldness’ and ‘sociality’ tended towards a longer latency until their first voluntary milking. The second study explored the effects of providing a portion of a cows’ concentrate ration outside of the milking robot upon MF and duration, lying time, milk yield, feed and forage intakes, and feeding time.
Offering cows a portion of their concentrate outside of the robot did not result in decreased MF. Furthermore, forage intake and milk yield were unaffected by concentrate location. Cows offered a larger proportion of their daily concentrate ration outside of the robot showed an improved ability to meet their concentrate targets.
In the third study, I assessed the effects of a ‘priority lane’ granting priority access to the milking robot for certain high-risk cow groups (poor mobility and with a low social ranking) upon MF, training time, lying time and hair cortisol concentrations. Priority lane access increased MF in high-risk cows. Training time, lying time, and hair cortisol concentrations remained unaffected by the priority lane.
Finally, cows managed in a pasture-based system were given additional training to encourage increased MF. The stage of training achieved by each cow, as well as their performance in executing the trained task were evaluated. The effects of the training process upon voluntary MF was investigated, and factors suspected to influence training and task execution were explored.
Achieved training stage and task execution were poor. Cows with low scores on the personality trait ‘exploration’ achieved lower training steps. Milking frequency was higher during training periods compared to testing periods, and cows were more likely <br>to execute the task during night-time hours.
Put together, the findings from these studies demonstrate that a range of cow-level factors influence motivation and AMS use, and should be considered when managing cows in this context.
Links
Where it is published
- DOI doi.org/10.17034/32641356.v1 ↗
DOI / persistent id · from zivahub uct ac za
Catalogue records · 1
- OAI-PMH record api.figshare.com/v2/oai?verb=GetRecord&metadataPrefix=oai_dc&identifier=oai%3Af… ↗
metadata API · from zivahub uct ac za
Topics
- From keywords
- Animal behaviour · Animal behaviour · Animal behaviour · Animal welfare · Animal welfare · Animal welfare · Earth & Environmental Science · Earth & Environmental Science · Earth & Environmental Science · Psychology & Behavioral Science · Psychology & Behavioral Science · Psychology & Behavioral Science
Provenance · 3 source records, 16 field assertions
| Source | Key | Last seen | Raw |
|---|---|---|---|
| ZivaHub | oai:figshare.com:article/32641356 | 8 d ago | JSON v1 |
| Deakin Research Online | oai:figshare.com:article/32641356 | 8 d ago | JSON v1 |
| DMU Figshare | oai:figshare.com:article/32641356 | 8 d ago | JSON v1 |
| Field | Assertion | Extractor | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| concepts[field].anzsrc:field:300306 | mapping · zivahub uct ac za | vocabulary-mapper@1.0.0 | keywords['animal welfare'] |
| concepts[field].anzsrc:field:300306 | mapping · figshare dmu ac uk | vocabulary-mapper@1.0.0 | keywords['animal welfare'] |
| concepts[field].anzsrc:field:300306 | mapping · dro deakin edu au | vocabulary-mapper@1.0.0 | keywords['animal welfare'] |
| concepts[field].anzsrc:field:310901 | mapping · zivahub uct ac za | vocabulary-mapper@1.0.0 | keywords['animal behaviour'] |
| concepts[field].anzsrc:field:310901 | mapping · dro deakin edu au | vocabulary-mapper@1.0.0 | keywords['animal behaviour'] |
| concepts[field].anzsrc:field:310901 | mapping · figshare dmu ac uk | vocabulary-mapper@1.0.0 | keywords['animal behaviour'] |
| concepts[field].local:field:earth-environmental | mapping · dro deakin edu au | connector:dro_deakin_edu_au@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:earth-environmental | mapping · zivahub uct ac za | connector:zivahub_uct_ac_za@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:earth-environmental | mapping · figshare dmu ac uk | connector:figshare_dmu_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:psychology-behavioral | mapping · dro deakin edu au | connector:dro_deakin_edu_au@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:psychology-behavioral | mapping · zivahub uct ac za | connector:zivahub_uct_ac_za@1.0.0 | |
| concepts[field].local:field:psychology-behavioral | mapping · figshare dmu ac uk | connector:figshare_dmu_ac_uk@1.0.0 | |
| description | source · zivahub uct ac za | connector:zivahub_uct_ac_za@1.0.0 | /metadata/dc/description |
| license_text | source · zivahub uct ac za | connector:zivahub_uct_ac_za@1.0.0 | |
| publication_date | source · zivahub uct ac za | connector:zivahub_uct_ac_za@1.0.0 | |
| title | source · zivahub uct ac za | connector:zivahub_uct_ac_za@1.0.0 | /metadata/dc/title |