Milk fat secretion in lactating dairy cattle is influenced by soybean fatty

acid profile and particle sizeKristina weldNovember 3, 2015Dairy showcase

Milk Fat Depression

Biohydrogenation Theory Rumen microbes form bioactive FA from unsaturated

feed FA Absorption of bioactive FA in the small intestine Bioactive FA act on genes in the mammary gland to

downregulate milk fat synthesis and uptake of FA from the blood

Biohydrogenation Pathways

Linoleic Acid Pathway

Oleic Acid Pathway

Oleic vs. Linoleic

• Oils high in linoleic acid have been shown to be more fat depressing than oils high in oleic acid (He et al., 2012) Produce more bioactive FA (trans-10, cis-12 CLA)

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1.1

1.2

2 3 4 5 6 7

Dietary FA %DM

Milk

fat y

ield

(kg

/d)

C18:1

C18:2

Linoleic vs. Oleic

LOLL

MOLL

LOML

HOLL

LOHL

MOML

No FAT

He et al., 2012

Particle Size

• Oil availability also influences biohydrogenation (Chilliard et al., 2009)

Free oil is more fat depressing than whole oilseeds Too much at once for microbes to biohydrogenate

successfully?

Particle Size

• Much of the vegetable fat in dairy diets is linoleic acid.

• If that linoleic acid is replaced with oleic acid, then milk fat will increase.

Summary

Soybean Fatty Acid Profiles

Fatty Acid Plenish Conventional16:0 6.0 10.218:0 3.3 3.618:1 80.0 27.118:2 4.2 50.318:3 1.0 5.2

Trial 1 Design• 63 cows (28 primiparous, 35 multiparous) 111 ± 20 DIM• Housed in one pen containing 32 Insentec RIC gates • Covariate period followed by 3 a week treatment period

• Treatment diets containing whole raw Plenish beans (WP) or whole raw conventional beans (WC)

Diets

DietsDiet Component WC WPAlfalfa Haylage 12.4 12.5Corn Silage 41.8 41.5Concentrate 16.8 16.8High Moisture Corn 10.0 10.1Soybean Meal 3.2 -Whole Conventional Beans 15.9 -Whole Plenish Beans - 19.1

DietsDiet Analysis WC WPaNDF 25.5 25.9CP 17.6 17.4Ether Extract 5.0 5.1Ash 5.8 5.7NFC 46.1 45.9

ProductionTreatments

Multiparous (MP)

Primiparous (PP) P-Value

Variable WC WP WC WP SE diet parity Parity*diet

MP diet

PP diet

DMI (kg/d) 26.5 26.8 22.7 23.5 0.9 0.30 0.99 0.61 0.70 0.31Milk (kg/d) 45.1 45.0 40.5 38.4 1.2 0.32 0.44 0.33 0.95 0.19Fat % 3.84 4.07 4.13 4.08 0.10 0.45 0.44 0.08 0.12 0.72Protein % 3.05 3.06 2.97 3.03 0.05 0.41 0.75 0.53 0.87 0.33Lactose % 4.97 5.01 5.10 5.17 0.06 0.32 0.19 0.84 0.55 0.43Fat (kg/d) 1.70 1.84 1.63 1.58 0.06 0.56 0.13 0.05 0.05 0.35Protein (kg/d) 1.36 1.40 1.19 1.18 0.06 0.79 0.91 0.6 0.55 0.86Lactose (kg/d) 2.25 2.26 2.08 1.99 0.07 0.48 0.27 0.4 0.94 0.3Milk (Mcal/d) 32.3 33.9 30.4 29.0 1.2 0.91 0.77 0.12 0.20 0.34

Conclusions Trial 1

• There were no production effects in primiparous cows

• Plenish beans increased milk fat relative to conventional beans in multiparous cows

Trial 2 Design

• 20 cows (10 primiparous, 10 multiparous), 88 ± 10 DIM

• 5 diets fed in Latin squares

• 2x2 factorial of bean type (Plenish or conventional) and particle size (ground or whole, all raw) plus a low fat control

Diets

DietsDiet Component LF GC GP WC WP Alfalfa Haylage 10.4 10.4 10.4 10.4 10.4 Corn Silage 44.7 44.6 44.7 44.5 44.7 Concentrate A 44.9 - - - - Concentrate B - 29.0 - 29.0 - Concentrate C - - 26.3 - 26.3 Ground Conventional beans - 16.0 - - - Ground Plenish beans - - 18.6 - - Whole Conventional beans - - - 16.1 - Whole Plenish beans - - - - 18.6

Diets

DietsDiet Analysis LF GC GP WC WP aNDF 25.9 25.0 25.6 24.8 25.4 CP 17.0 16.3 16.8 16.8 17.0 Ether Extract 3.2 6.4 7.1 6.7 6.9 Ash 6.3 6.1 6.1 6.2 6.1 NFC 49.3 47.9 46.1 47.1 46.2 Starch 30.4 30.0 28.8 30.0 28.9

Production Diet Least Squares Means P-Values

Variable LF GC GP WC WP SE FatPlenish

*sizeWP vs.

WCGP vs.

GCGrou

ndPlen-

ishDMI (kg/d) 26.5 26.3 26.3 26.7 26.6 0.6 0.98 1.00 0.45 0.83

Milk (kg/d) 48.0 48.8 47.2 48.5 46.8 1.0 0.80 0.87 0.58 0.01Fat % 3.25 3.09 3.50 3.40 3.53 0.16 0.17 0.10 0.28 0.01Protein % 3.18 3.09 3.18 3.08 3.13 0.04 0.06 0.35 0.24 0.01

Lactose % 4.96 5.00 5.07 5.00 5.01 0.04 0.08 0.27 0.34 0.19

Fat (kg/d) 1.54 1.49 1.64 1.64 1.63 0.08 0.18 0.06 0.96 0.01Protein (kg/d) 1.51 1.50 1.49 1.49 1.40 0.03 0.11 0.55 0.23 0.19Lactose (kg/d) 2.37 2.43 2.37 2.42 2.34 0.05 0.61 0.63 0.41 0.01

Milk (Mcal/d) 32.2 31.9 33.0 33.0 32.6 0.87 0.48 0.40 0.19 0.70

Production Diet Least Squares Means P-Values

Variable LF GC GP WC WP SE FatInteraction

WP vs. WC

GP vs. GC

Ground

Plen-ish

DMI (kg/d) 26.5 26.3 26.3 26.7 26.6 0.6 0.98 1.00 0.45 0.83

Milk (kg/d) 48.0 48.8 47.2 48.5 46.8 1.0 0.80 0.87 0.58 0.01Fat % 3.25 3.09 3.50 3.40 3.53 0.16 0.17 0.10 0.28 0.01Protein % 3.18 3.09 3.18 3.08 3.13 0.04 0.06 0.35 0.24 0.01

Lactose % 4.96 5.00 5.07 5.00 5.01 0.04 0.08 0.27 0.34 0.19

Fat (kg/d) 1.54 1.49 1.64 1.64 1.63 0.08 0.18 0.06 0.96 0.01Protein (kg/d) 1.51 1.50 1.49 1.49 1.40 0.03 0.11 0.55 0.23 0.19Lactose (kg/d) 2.37 2.43 2.37 2.42 2.34 0.05 0.61 0.63 0.41 0.01

Milk (Mcal/d) 32.2 31.9 33.0 33.0 32.6 0.87 0.48 0.40 0.19 0.70

Conventional Average: 48.7

Plenish Average: 47.0

Trial 2 Conclusion

• There is a significant interaction between the particle size of soybeans and their fatty acid profile on milk fat concentration and yield.

Multiparous and primiparous

Overall

• Plenish studies confirm that substituting oleic for linoleic acid in typical dairy feeds can have a positive effect on milk fat.

• FA profile of soybeans may be more important when soybeans are ground rather than whole.

Implications• If one is feeding/growing soybeans for dairy cattle then it

would make sense to feed/grow Plenish rather than conventional beans

• As long as…

• yield/acre (cost) is similar between Plenish and conventional

• The decrease in milk production was not due to the difference in soybean FA profile.

• High oleic corn?

Acknowledgements

• Thank you to DuPont Pioneer for the donation of the soybeans!

• Thank you to all the barn staff – especially Sandy Trower and David Rieman – for making these trials run smoothly!

Questions?

ProductionTreatments

MP PP P-Value

Variable WC WP WC WP SE diet parity Interaction

MP diet PP diet

DMI (kg/d) 26.5 26.8 22.7 23.5 0.9 0.30 0.99 0.61 0.70 0.31Milk (kg/d) 45.1 45.0 40.5 38.4 1.2 0.32 0.44 0.33 0.95 0.19Fat % 3.84 4.07 4.13 4.08 0.10 0.45 0.44 0.08 0.12 0.72Protein % 3.05 3.06 2.97 3.03 0.05 0.41 0.75 0.53 0.87 0.33Lactose % 4.97 5.01 5.10 5.17 0.06 0.32 0.19 0.84 0.55 0.43Fat (kg/d) 1.70 1.84 1.63 1.58 0.06 0.56 0.13 0.05 0.05 0.35Protein (kg/d) 1.36 1.40 1.19 1.18 0.06 0.79 0.91 0.6 0.55 0.86Lactose (kg/d) 2.25 2.26 2.08 1.99 0.07 0.48 0.27 0.4 0.94 0.3Milk (Mcal/d) 32.3 33.9 30.4 29.0 1.2 0.91 0.77 0.12 0.20 0.34

Production Diet Least Squares Means P-Values

Variable LF GC GP WC WP SE FatInteraction

WP vs. WC

GP vs. GC

Ground

Plenish

DMI (kg/d) 26.5 26.3 26.3 26.7 26.6 0.6 0.98 1.00 0.45 0.83Milk (kg/d) 48.0 48.8 47.2 48.5 46.8 1.0 0.80 0.87 0.58 0.01Fat % 3.25 3.09 3.50 3.40 3.53 0.16 0.17 0.10 0.28 0.01Protein % 3.18 3.09 3.18 3.08 3.13 0.04 0.06 0.35 0.24 0.01Lactose % 4.96 5.00 5.07 5.00 5.01 0.04 0.08 0.27 0.34 0.19Fat (kg/d) 1.54 1.49 1.64 1.64 1.63 0.08 0.18 0.06 0.96 0.01Protein (kg/d) 1.51 1.50 1.49 1.49 1.40 0.03 0.11 0.55 0.23 0.19Lactose (kg/d) 2.37 2.43 2.37 2.42 2.34 0.05 0.61 0.63 0.41 0.01Milk (Mcal/d) 32.2 31.9 33.0 33.0 32.6 0.87 0.48 0.40 0.19 0.70