58
Preparturient Milking of Dairy Animals
Premilking of heifers. (i) In the case of heifers the general conclusions are very similar to those
discussed above, for all the breeds studied. (ii) The choice of the animals for the control and ex-
perimental groups was made so as to ensure that the animals of the same age and weight were evenly
distributed in the two groups. In spite of this, the average yields for the control animals were in-
variably higher than those for the experimental ones. (iii) In the experiment with Sindhi heifers,
the annual milk yield for the control (over the whole period studied) was 2,526 lb., as against 2,360 lb.
for the experimental animals. (iv) When the figures for only the first experimental year are compared,
it will be found that the yields for the control and experimental groups are 2,399 lb. and 2,225 lb.
respectively, indicating a slight set back instead of an improvement for the experimental animals.
(v) Most of the Gir heifers were studied for three years consecutively. Here also the average annual
yield of 2,304 lb. for the experimental animals was found significantly lower when compared to the
figure of 2,943 lb. for the control group. (vi) The average annual milk yields in the case of cross-bred
heifers for the control and the experimental groups over the whole period of investigation were 5,710
and 4,677 lb. respectively, thus corroborating the results obtained with Sindhi and Gir heifers.
The results of the experiment bring out very significantly the following points (i) Preparturient
treatment in an intensive form and premilking of cows and heifers do not in any way tend to improve
the milk yield of the animals so treated. On the other hand it has an adverse effect especially in
the case of heifers. The animals studied here might be regarded as moderate yielders and the re-
sults may perhaps be slightly different in the case of heavy yielders. (ii) In the present studies
the animals selected were in good health, having no udder trouble, but it is quite possible that the
premilking treatment may prove of benefit where the animals are predisposed to such trouble as
reported by Sayer [1934]. (iii) A very significant point brought out as a result of the present studies
was the weak health of the calves born to cows which had been premilked. This is illustrated by
Table III. (iv) In the case of heifers it was observed that during the whole period of study the death
rate of calves in the control group was 5 per cent lower than that of those in the experimental group.
(v) About 73 per cent of the calves that died in the experimental group did so during their first month
of life; death was mostly due to digestive trouble. This demonstrates the importance of feeding
colostrum to new born calves. (vi) Another important feature noticed in the case of all the experi-
mental animals (cows and heifers) was retention of the placenta. Probably premilking causes
weakness of muscular contraction of the uterus at parturition with the result that the placenta is not
expelled. (vii) It was found that premilking and frequent massaging of the udder involved a
considerable increase in the cost of maintaining the herd. (viii) Sometimes animals used to frequent
milking, when removed from the calving shed and put with the herd and milked only twice a day,
tended to hold their milk. This can be attributed to the extra handling which the animals were
accustomed to during the preparturient treatment.
SUMMARY
The practice of milking Sindhi, Gir and cross-bred cows and heifers prior to calving was in no
way advantageous. This treatment did not increase the milk yield to an extent which justified
the extra cost involved. The calves of cows subjected to the treatment invariably failed to thrive
as well as the controls and the mortality amongst them was very high.
REFERENCES
Dover and Siva Subramanian (1939). Agric. & Live-Stock in India, 9, 566
Espe, D. L. (1938). Secretion of Milk, 179
Henry Houston and Kon (1940). J. Dairy Res. 11, 1
Sayer, W. (1934). Agric. & Live-Stock in India 4, 106, 524
Webber, C. W. and Turner, C. W. (1920). Bull. M. 0. Agric. Expt. Sta. 272