To produce milk that is healthier for human consumption, the present study evaluated the effect of including canola oil in the diet of dairy cows on milk production and composition as well as the nutritional quality of this milk fat. Eighteen Holstein cows with an average daily milk yield of 22 (± 4) kg/d in the middle stage of lactation were used. The cows were distributed in 6 contemporary 3x3 Latin squares consisting of 3 periods and 3 treatments: control diet (without oil), 3% inclusion of canola oil in the diet and 6% inclusion of canola oil in the diet (dry matter basis). The inclusion of 6% canola oil in the diet of lactating cows linearly reduced the milk yield by 2.51 kg/d, short-chain fatty acids (FA) by 41.42%, medium chain FA by 27.32%, saturated FA by 20.24%, saturated/unsaturated FA ratio by 39.20%, omega-6/omega-3 ratio by 39.45%, and atherogenicity index by 48.36% compared with the control treatment. Moreover, with the 6% inclusion of canola oil in the diet of cows, there was an increase in the concentration of long chain FA by 45.91%, unsaturated FA by 34.08%, monounsaturated FA by 40.37%, polyunsaturated FA by 17.88%, milk concentration of omega-3 by 115%, rumenic acid (CLA) by 16.50%, oleic acid by 44.87% and h/H milk index by 94.44% compared with the control treatment. Thus, the inclusion of canola oil in the diet of lactating dairy cows makes the milk fatty acid profile nutritionally healthier for the human diet; however, the lactating performance of dairy cows is reduce.

Fluid milk and its derivatives are important dietary ingredients that contribute to daily nutrient intake of the modern Homo sapiens. To produce milk that is healthier for human consumption, the present study evaluated the effect of adding soybean oil and linseed oil in the diet of lactating cows. The fatty acid profile of milk, milk composition, and the blood parameters of cows were evaluated. Eighteen Holstein cows were distributed in a replicated Latin square design and distributed according to the following treatments: 1) Control (CC): traditional dairy cow diet, without addition of oil; 2) Soybean oil (SO): 2.5% addition of soybean oil to the traditional diet, as a source of omega-6; 3) Linseed oil (LO): 2.5% addition of linseed oil in the diet as a source of omega-3. Milk production was not affected, but oil supplementation decreased feed intake by 1.93 kg/cow/day. The milk fat percentage was significantly lower when cows were supplemented with vegetable oil (3.37, 2.75 and 2.89% for CC, SO and LO, respectively). However, both soybean and linseed oils decreased the concentration of saturated fatty acids (66.89, 56.52 and 56.60 g/100g for CC, SO and LO respectively), increased the amount of unsaturated fatty acids in milk (33.05, 43.39, and 43.35 g/100g for CC, SO and LO respectively) and decreased the ratio between saturated/unsaturated fatty acids (2.12, 1.34, and 1.36 for CC, SO and LO respectively). Furthermore, SO and LO increased significantly the concentration of monounsaturated fatty acids (29.58, 39.55 and 39.47 g/100g for CC, SO and LO respectively), though it did not significantly alter the level of polyunsaturated fatty acids in milk fat (3.57, 3.93 and 3.98 g/100g for CC, SO and LO respectively). Supplementation with LO enhanced the concentration of omega-3 fatty acids on milk (0.32, 0.36, and 1.02 for CC, SO and LO respectively). Blood variables aspartate aminotransferase, gamma glutamyl transferase, urea, albumin, creatinine and total proteins were not altered. On the other hand, total cholesterol, HDL and LDL were greater in the group supplemented with vegetable oils. Supplementation with vegetable oils reduced the dry matter intake of cows, the fat content of milk, and improved saturated/unsaturated fatty acid ratio of milk fat. Compared to the SO treatment, animals fed LO produced milk with greater content of omega-3, and a more desirable omega-6/omega-3 ratio on a human nutrition perspective. Thus, the inclusion of SO and LO in the diet of lactating dairy cows makes the milk fatty acid profile nutritionally healthier for the human consumption.

Context The efficiency of the cow–calf sector could be enhanced by matching cow biological type to the production environment; however, methods to estimate the biological efficiency of grazing beef cows are not available. Aims This study utilised a mathematical nutrition model for ranking beef cows for estimated biological efficiency, determining energetic efficiency and evaluate relationships with other production traits. Methods Cow live weight, calf birth and weaning weight, calf birth and weaning date, and forage nutritive value of hay and pasture were collected for 69 Brangus crossbred beef cows over a complete production cycle. The Cattle Value Discovery System for Beef Cow (CVDSbc) model was used to compute metabolisable energy required (MER) for the cow, and energy efficiency index (EEI) was computed as the ratio of MER to calf weaning weight. Pearson correlation coefficients were computed among performance traits. During late lactation and gestation, low (n=8) and high (n=8) EEI cows were individually fed ad libitum for 44 and 32 days, respectively, then fed 0.5× the estimated metabolisable energy required for maintenance for 7 days (gestation experiment only). Apparent nutrient digestibility, heat production, and milk yield were measured. Key results EEI was strongly negatively correlated (P<0.05) with model predicted peak milk (−0.62) and calf weaning weight (−0.65), but moderately correlated (P<0.05) with cow live weight (0.46). Dry matter intake was not different (P>0.75) between low and high EEI cows even though low EEI cows weighed less (P<0.05) during late lactation and gestation experiments. Low EEI cows tended to have greater efficiency of metabolisable energy use for maintenance and gain (P<0.10), and EEI was negatively correlated (P<0.05) with the efficiency of metabolisable energy use for maintenance (−0.56) and gain (−0.57). Conclusion The CVDSbc model identified cows that weaned heavier calves due to greater dry matter intake of cows relative to live weight allowing more energy apportioned towards lactation, and more efficient use of metabolisable energy for maintenance and gain. Implications Energy efficiency index might provide a logical assessment of biological efficiency of beef cows in grazing production systems.

No abstract