879 resultados para DAIRY


Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

In the long term, productivity and especially productivity growth are necessary conditions for the survival of a farm. This paper focuses on the technology choice of a dairy farm, i.e. the choice between a conventional and an automatic milking system. Its aim is to reveal the extent to which economic rationality explains investing in new technology. The adoption of robotics is further linked to farm productivity to show how capital-intensive technology has affected the overall productivity of milk production. The empirical analysis applies a probit model and an extended Cobb-Douglas-type production function to a Finnish farm-level dataset for the years 2000–10. The results show that very few economic factors on a dairy farm or in its economic environment can be identified to affect the switch to automatic milking. Existing machinery capital and investment allowances are among the significant factors. The results also indicate that the probability of investing in robotics responds elastically to a change in investment aids: an increase of 1% in aid would generate an increase of 2% in the probability of investing. Despite the presence of non-economic incentives, the switch to robotic milking is proven to promote productivity development on dairy farms. No productivity growth is observed on farms that keep conventional milking systems, whereas farms with robotic milking have a growth rate of 8.1% per year. The mean rate for farms that switch to robotic milking is 7.0% per year. The results show great progress in productivity growth, with the average of the sector at around 2% per year during the past two decades. In conclusion, investments in new technology as well as investment aids to boost investments are needed in low-productivity areas where investments in new technology still have great potential to increase productivity, and thus profitability and competitiveness, in the long run.

Report drawn up on behalf of the Committeeon Agriculture on A. the proposals from the Commission of the European Communities to the Council (Doc. 1-893/83-COM(83) 548 final) for: I. a regulation amending Regulation (EEC) No. 804/68 on the common organization of the markets in milk and milk products. II. a regulation laying down general rules applying to the milk sector levy specified in Article 5(c) of Regulation (EEC) No. 804/68. III. a regulation laying down general rules applying to the milk sector levy specified in Article 5(d) of Regulation (EEC) No. 804/68. B. the proposals from the Commission of the European Communities to the Council (Doc. 1-996/83-COM(83) 611 final) for: I. a regulation amending Regulation (EEC No. 1723/81 as regards the possibility of granting aids for the use of butter in the manufacture of certain food-stuffs. II. a regulation amending Regulation (EEC) No. 1411/71 as regards the fat content of drinking milk. III. a regulation laying down general rules on the granting of aid for concentrated skimmed milk and concentrated milk for use as animal feed. IV. a regulation amending Regulation (EEC) No. 1269/79 with regard to the terms for the disposal of butter at a reduced price for direct consumption. C. the proposal from the Commission of the European Communities to the Council (Doc. 1-1113/83)-COM(83) 644 final) for a regulation amending Regulations (EEC) No. 1078/77 introducing a system of premiums for the non-marketing of milk and milk products and for the conversion of dairy herds.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This study was carried out to detect differences in locomotion and feeding behavior in lame (group L; n = 41; gait score ≥ 2.5) and non-lame (group C; n = 12; gait score ≤ 2) multiparous Holstein cows in a cross-sectional study design. A model for automatic lameness detection was created, using data from accelerometers attached to the hind limbs and noseband sensors attached to the head. Each cow's gait was videotaped and scored on a 5-point scale before and after a period of 3 consecutive days of behavioral data recording. The mean value of 3 independent experienced observers was taken as a definite gait score and considered to be the gold standard. For statistical analysis, data from the noseband sensor and one of two accelerometers per cow (randomly selected) of 2 out of 3 randomly selected days was used. For comparison between group L and group C, the T-test, the Aspin-Welch Test and the Wilcoxon Test were used. The sensitivity and specificity for lameness detection was determined with logistic regression and ROC-analysis. Group L compared to group C had significantly lower eating and ruminating time, fewer eating chews, ruminating chews and ruminating boluses, longer lying time and lying bout duration, lower standing time, fewer standing and walking bouts, fewer, slower and shorter strides and a lower walking speed. The model considering the number of standing bouts and walking speed was the best predictor of cows being lame with a sensitivity of 90.2% and specificity of 91.7%. Sensitivity and specificity of the lameness detection model were considered to be very high, even without the use of halter data. It was concluded that under the conditions of the study farm, accelerometer data were suitable for accurately distinguishing between lame and non-lame dairy cows, even in cases of slight lameness with a gait score of 2.5.