Energy balance in first-lactation Holstein, Jersey, and reciprocal F1 crossbred cows in a planned crossbreeding...

The Virginia Tech crossbreeding project began in the fall of 2002 by mating Holstein (H) and Jersey (J) foundation females to Holstein and Jersey bulls to create HH, HJ, JH, and JJ genetic groups, where the sire breed is listed first followed by dam breed. Collection of individual daily feed intakes began in September 2005 and continued through November 2008, resulting in observations on 43, 34, 41, and 22 HH, HJ, JH, and JJ cows, respectively. Intakes were measured for 2 wk out of every 6-wk period for first-lactation cows less than 310 d in milk. The ration was analyzed for dry matter and nutrient content, which was used to calculate net energy of lactation (NEL, Mcal/kg). Body and milk weights were collected daily with milk components measured monthly. The NEL requirements for maintenance, growth (in the form of retained energy), pregnancy, and production were calculated using National Research Council (2001) equations. Random regression models were used to predict consumed NEL and NEL required for production, maintenance, and body weight at every week in lactation. Energy required for growth was calculated for each cow at each stage of lactation using five 2-mo stages. Energy balance was estimated by subtracting the predicted energy required for production, maintenance, growth, and pregnancy from the predicted NEL consumed. A linear model with fixed effects of genetic group, year-season of calving group, and a linear and quadratic effect of age at calving was used to analyze the energy terms. The HJ and JH groups were not different in any of the analyses for energy terms. The HH cows consumed more energy than did HJ and JJ cows. There were no genetic group differences for total energy for pregnancy. The HH, HJ, and JH groups were not different from each other for energy required for production but required more energy for production than the JJ. The JH allocated a lower percentage of their energy intake to maintenance than the HH (25.7 to 27.4%) and the JJ allocated less energy to growth than the HH and HJ. Genetic group explained significant variation for percentage of energy partitioned to production with the JJ allocating more energy to production than the HH (66.3 vs. 60.9%). Genetic group differences in characterization of energy balance warrant further study.