It’s well known that high producing dairy cows can only keep up rapidly increasing milk production and have enough energy for maintenance by losing bodyweight in the post-partum period. The cow is not able to fulfil the energy requirement of steeply increasing milk production at the beginning of lactation, because it is physically not possible to eat enough feed to make up for the energy lost with milk. Because of this, the cow has to mobilise its body reserves to provide for the energy needed for milk production. Even with good feeding management, a cow can not balance energy intake with requirements before the 12th or 13th week of lactation (Fekete, 2009).
Thus it is safe to say that the cow – even with a perfect ration – will remain in a negative energy balance, so in this phase of production we have to make sure that besides providing a balanced amount of protein and energy for the rumen to function properly, we also have to provide by-pass proteins that are not degraded in the rumen and serve as a post-ruminal source of essential amino acids for milk production.
From the data in Table 1 it is obvious that the most efficient solution from the perspective of milk production would be if the total amount of raw protein entering the rumen could be transformed into a digestible microbial mass and this would fulfil the protein requirements of the cow. The essential amino acid composition of this “protein mass” resembles the essential amino acid composition of milk proteins the most, so this, entering the postruminal parts of the digestive system would be the biologically most efficient method. Meanwhile microbial proteins only account for about 50-55% of the protein requirement in high yielding dairy cows and the remaining part must be supplemented by providing dietary proteins.
Table 1: Lysine and methionine content (g/100 g protein) and Lys:Met ration in raw milk, microbial proteins and selected dietary protein sources
We started a 100-day feeding trial with one of our partners with compound feed supplemented with Rapeex as follows:
Cows were assigned to control and treatment groups in a way to make groups comparable with regard to milk production and phase of lactation. In fact this meant that two parallel trials were set up: The first trial started at 74 days in milk (DIM) with 92 cows assigned to the control group and 93 cows to the treatment group.
The second trial started at 141 DIM with 85 cows as controls and 92 cows in the treatment group. This design provided data from both cows at the peak of lactation and cows in mid-lactation.
We will provide data regarding the treatment groups as A1 and B1, with the relevant control groups as A0 and B0, respectively.
The ration fed during the trial was formulated in such a way that it did not differ in its nutritional value or by-pass protein content for the treatment and control groups, except for the Rapeex added to the ration of the treated cows. Because at the time of the trial we didn’t have objective data regarding the by-pass protein content of Rapeex, we determined the ratio of by-pass proteins at 50% based on literature data and our own experience.
When formulating the tested ration we also took into account the very practical aspect of feed cost. We made sure there was no difference in the cost of the control and the trial feeds.
The objective of the trial was to assess the applicability of Rapeex.
The results of the trial are demonstrated in Figures 1 and 2. Figure 1 shows the milk production of treated cows starting the trial at 141 DIM. Average milk production for the given period in the treatment group A1 was 34.7 kg, with 33.3 kg in the control group A0 . The treatment group A1 started the trial with an average milk production of 40.8 kg and finished the trial with 30.5 kg, while average milk production in the control group A0 was 39.5 kg at inclusion and 30.6 kg at the closing of the trial. Results show that the treatment group A1 produced on average +1.4 kg more milk.
Figure 1: Average milk production (kg) in the treatment group A1 and the control group A0 between 11.11.2022 and 16.02.2023.
Figure 2 shows the milk production of treated cows starting the trial at the peak of lactation. Average milk production for the given period in the treatment group B1 was 39.4 kg, with 38.6 kg in the control group B0. The treatment group B1 started the trial with an average milk production of 44.5 kg and finished the trial with 34.8 kg. Average milk production in the control group B0 was 44.8 kg at inclusion and 35.2 kg at the closing of the trial. Result show that the treatment group B1 produced on average +0.8 kg more milk.
Figure 2: Average milk production (kg) in the treatment group B1 and the control group B0 between 11.11.2022 and 16.02.2023.
Figure 2: Average milk production (kg) in the treatment group B1 and the control group B0 between 11.11.2022 and 16.02.2023.
Results indicate that both treatment groups A1 and B1 have realised an increase in average milk production compared to the control groups. This leads to the conclusion that an appropriate diversification of protein sources was applied and Rapeex was included in the compound feed correctly, while not increasing the cost of the feed.
Bonafarm-Bábolna Takarmány Ltd. increases its GMO product range and a new product, Rapeex will be introduced besides Soyzin. Contact our colleagues at the Cattle Division if you want to increase production without increasing costs, they will gather information regarding your herd and farm, analyse the feed you have and help you make milk production more profitable on your farm with the available feeds.
Róbert Halász
Consultant, cattle
Bonafarm-Bábolna Takarmány Ltd.
Dr. Attila Tanai
Project manager, Development
Bonafarm-Bábolna Takarmány Ltd.
Fédra Borbély
junior product manager
Bonafarm-Bábolna Takarmány Ltd.
