Transgenesis in Animal Agriculture: Addressing Animal Health and Welfare Concerns

The US Food and Drug Administration’s final Guidance for Industry on the regulation of transgenesis in animal agriculture has paved the way for the commercialization of genetically engineered (GE) farm animals. The production-related diseases associated with extant breeding technologies are reviewed, as well as the predictable welfare consequences of continued emphasis on prolificacy at the potential expense of physical fitness. Areas in which biotechnology could be used to improve the welfare of animals while maintaining profitability are explored along with regulatory schema to improve agency integration in GE animal oversight

Choice of grazed herbage or maize silage by lactating dairy cows: influence of sward height and concentrate level Preferência por pastagem ou silagem de milho por vacas leiteiras em lactação: influência da altura do pasto e do nível de concentrado

The preference of lactating dairy cows for grazed herbage or maize silage (MS), simultaneously offered ad libitum in the field, was examined at two sward heights (SH 4-6 and 8-10cm) and two concentrate levels (CL 0 and 6kg day-1) in a 2x2 factorial arrangement within a completely randomised experimental design. The experiment lasted 35 days and was carried out in spring using 24 multiparous Holstein Friesian cows. On average, the cows proportionately spent more time grazing than eating MS (0.85:0.15) and even though the higher rate of intake (RI) of dry matter (DM) of MS compared with grazed herbage (76 versus 26g DM min-1), the proportion of total DM intake as herbage was higher compared to that of MS (0.56:0.44). The higher crude protein and low fibre content of grazed herbage appeared to have a higher priority of choice than RI, as the cows chose to graze for longer (grazing time 385 min, MS feeding time 67min) despite the lower RI of herbage. The low proportion MS intake indicated that RI was a secondary factor of choice. Concentrate supplementation had a greater depressing effect on herbage intake than on MS intake. These results suggest that the animals reduce the intake of feed with lower RI when the labor associated to eat is decreased. The factors influencing the choice for herbage over maize silage remain unclear.<br>A preferência de vacas leiteiras em lactação por pasto ou silagem de milho (SM) oferecidas ad libitum simultaneamente no pasto foi avaliada quanto a duas alturas de pastagem (4-6 e 8-10cm) e dois níveis de concentrado (0 e 6kg dia-1), em um arranjo fatorial 2x2 dentro de um delineamento inteiramente ao acaso. O experimento, com duração de 35 dias, foi executado na primavera utilizando 24 vacas multíparas da raça Holandesa. As vacas passaram, em média, proporcionalmente mais tempo pastando do que comendo SM (0,85:0,15) e, mesmo considerando a maior taxa de consumo (TC) de matéria seca (MS) de SM comparada com a da pastagem (76 versus 26g MS min-1), a proporção do total do consumo de MS como pastagem foi mais alta comparada com aquela da SM (0,56:0,44). A proteína crua mais alta e o menor conteúdo de fibra da pastagem pareceram ter prioridade na escolha pelos animais do que a TC, pois as vacas preferiram pastar por mais tempo (tempo de pastejo = 385min, tempo para comer SM = 67min), não obstante ter havido menor TC na pastagem. A baixa proporção de consumo de SM indicou que a TC foi um fator secundário na preferência dos animais. A suplementação concentrada teve maior efeito depressor no consumo de pastagem que o consumo de SM. Estes resultados sugerem que a prioridade dos animais, quando o trabalho associado com o comer é reduzido, é o de diminuir o consumo de alimento com menor TC. Os fatores que influenciaram a preferência por pastagem sobre silagem de milho ainda não são totalmente claros

Higher sustainability performance of intensive grazing versus zero-grazing dairy systems

Although grazing of dairy cows is an integral part of dairy farming in many European countries, farmers today more often choose for zero-grazing systems, where cows are housed throughout the year. Some studies already compared grazing and zero-grazing systems for specific issues such as labor efficiency, environmental impact, or animal welfare. In our study, we perform a more integrated evaluation, considering relevant ecological, economic, and social aspects. This allows for a balanced and more complete comparison of the sustainability performance of the two production methods. We evaluated ten intensive grazing and ten zero-grazing specialized Flemish dairy farms on the use of nutrients and energy, productivity and profitability, labor input, and animal welfare. In addition, we put special effort in formulating useful management advice for farmers. Therefore, we combined a detailed analysis of the sustainability indicators with an intensive interaction and discussion with farmers and farm advisors. Results show that, on average, the zero-grazing farms performed significantly worse from an ecological and economic point of view. This fact is explained mainly due to a less efficient use of concentrates and byproducts. Social sustainability performance did not differ significantly between the two groups. As a result, the integrated sustainability performance was significantly lower for the zero-grazing group. This finding shows that a further shift from intensive grazing to zero-grazing can move dairy farming in Flanders further away from sustainability. An important advice to improve the ecological and economic performance of zero-grazing farms is to optimize cows' rations to include more forages and optimize forage production and use. More detailed site- and case-specific management advice for farmers of both groups was provided during a discussion meeting. We consider this an essential additional step to any sustainability evaluation, since progress can only be made when monitoring results are translated into practical measures