What matters more in robots? In some respects, almost everything. Some robot farmers complain that they cannot maintain the consistent production that they had in the parlor. Everything that happens to a cow has a physiological effect and a behavioral effect. Acute mastitis is an example. Physiologically, she may have a swollen quarter, fever, and abnormal milk. Behaviorally, she will spend a lot more time in her stall. The behavior part is significant in robotic milking because we expect the cow to manage her own trips to the robot and trips to the feed bunk. The behavior aspects of transition management, feed changes, and reproductive efficiency increase their impact in robotic milking.
Transition Management
Parlor research shows that 30% of cows have a least one disease incident within 21 days of calving. That research also shows that one incident results in 800 lbs of lost milk for that lactation – 1,550 pounds if there is more than one incident. That research was with controlled milking frequency, and a high probability that each cow will follow her herd mates to the feed bunk when she returns from the parlor, and when fresh feed is delivered. The impact will be greater if the cow chooses to be milked 2X instead of 3X, and go to the bunk 3 times a day instead of 6. Transition problems are cyclical – influenced by feed changes, stocking density, weather, and more. The potential for them to cause large swings in production is greater in robots than in parlors.
Feed Changes
Nutrition consultants are extremely diligent about testing feed and anticipating changes. Cows don’t always respond as expected. Many producers noted that milk production went down a few pounds and fat test went up a few points when they switched to 2024 corn silage. There was a bigger impact if they were forced to switch before corn silage was completely fermented. On robot farms, especially in free flow barns, we frequently noticed that milkings dropped by a couple of points. Adjustments by the nutrition consultants brought visits back to normal. The balance between the feed in the bunk and the feed in the robot not only affected the available nutrients, but it also affected trips to the robot. Again, there is potential for a small change to be exaggerated in the robots.
Reproductive Efficiency
Increasing the herd average pregnancy rate from 22% to 28% can return $76 per cow. That includes the value of higher milk production that results from cows spending more time in the higher producing part of the lactation curve. It also includes the value of more calves and less reproductive culling. It does not account for the fact that late lactation cows are less motivated to come to the robot than early lactation cows. Nor does in account for the fact that those late lactation cows slow whole the barn down because they get in the way and they require more fetching. As the number of late lactation cows fluctuates seasonally, it will impact the flow and production from the whole barn.
Transition management, feed changes, and reproductive efficiency are three examples of things that can cause cyclical variation in production to be exaggerated in robot barns. What’s happening in your barn? Shoot me an email, or comment on this article. Let’s talk about it.
Comments