The Effect of Type of Roof on Heat Tolerance Coefficient and Milk Production in Friesian Holstein Crossbred Cows
Sucik Maylinda and F. Riskila
1) Faculty of Animal Husbandry, Universitas Brawijaya, Jl. Veterans Malang 65145 East Java Indonesia
Submitted: 21 July 2023, Accepted: 21 August 2023
ABSTRACT: The type of the roof is one of the factors affecting dairy production, especially in the tropics. Many physiological mechanisms are affected by air temperature and humidity which is affected by the type of roofs. The objectives of the research were to determine the effect of type of roofs that are asbestos-roofed and tile-roofed on Heat Tolerance Coefficient (HTC) and milk production in Holstein Friesian Crossbred (FHC) cows. The research was conducted in 18th August to 20th Septembre 2022 in the traditional farms in Pandesari village, Pujon District, Malang Regency. Material used was 25 FHC cows from 4 farmers that have tile-roofed stall and 22 cows from 4 farmers who had asbestos-roofed stall. Research method was a field study with purposive sampling. Data were analyzed using an unpaired t-test using Minitab software 17 version. Results showed that the type of roof had a significant effect (P<0.05) on body temperature and milk production of FHC cows, but had no significant effect (P>0.05) on respiratory rates and HTC of FHC cattle. The air temperature of the tile-roofed cage was 21.88 ± 3.18 oC with humidity of 84.94 ± 13.18%, while the air temperature of the asbestos-roofed cage was 22.21 ± 3.40 °C with humidity of 73.94 ± 9.46 %. The body temperature of the FHC cow in the asbestos-roofed cage was 38.62 ± 0.46 oC while in the tile- roofed cage it was 38.33 ± 0.30°C. The respiratory rates of cows in asbestos-roofed cages was 38.01 ± 5.23 times/minute while in tile-roofed cages it was 36.14 ± 6.00 times/minute. HTC of cows in the asbestos-roofed cage was 2.66 ± 0.24 while in the tile-roofed cage it was 2.57 ± 0.26. Daily milk production of FHC cows in asbestos-roofed pens was 9.06 ± 4.23 liters/day/head while in tile-roofed pens it was 12.47 ± 3.84 liters/day/head.
Keywords: Body temperature; Micro climate; Respiration rates; HTC
*Corresponding Author: [email protected]
INTRODUCTION
Dairy cattle are a type of ruminant livestock which is often used for milk production. One type of dairy cattle is the Holstein Friesian crossbreed (Riski, et al., 2016). FHC cattle are the result of cross- breeding Holstein Friesian cattle and local cattle breeds (Siska and Anggrayni, 2020).
There are quite a lot of FHC cattle kept in Indonesia. This type of FHC cattle are able to adapt to the tropical climate in Indonesia.
One of the sub-districts in Batu City, East Java, namely Pujon District, the majority of the people who live in the area raise dairy cattle, especially the FHC type of dairy cow.
The activity of raising dairy cows has been passed down from generation to generation by the local community.
Indonesia is a tropical country with a fairly high ambient temperature of 28-34°C.
The high temperature in Indonesia is one of the factors reducing the productivity of dairy cows. Cattle kept in an environment with high temperatures can experience stress (Adhianto, et al., 2015). High environmental temperatures or above the comfort zone will result in heat stress to stress in dairy cows (Suwarno and Mushawwir, 2019). Heat stress causes an increase in the body temperature of dairy cows. Body temperature increases significantly so feed intake, body metabolism, and milk production will decrease to help reduce body heat imbalance (Gantner, et al., 2011). High temperature and humidity will make livestock dissipate heat in the body to maintain normal body temperature conditions.
The environment is an important element that needs to be considered in determining the productivity performance of dairy cows (Kartiko, et al., 2019). The most dominant environmental factor is microclimatic conditions. Microclimate is the microclimatic conditions inside the cage (Syaefullah, et al., 2021). The microclimates measured in this study was air temperature, air humidity, and Temperature Humidity Index (THI). Microclimatic elements that affect directly are air temperature, air
humidity, solar radiation and wind speed while elements that affect indirectly are evaporation and rainfall (Purwanto and Yani. 2006). Microclimatic elements including temperature and humidity are the main aspects that are measured to determine the physiological response of livestock directly (Kartiko, et al., 2019). A microclimate that is not suitable for livestock life will trigger changes in physiological responses that occur in the livestock body (Kartiko, et al., 2019).
Physiological responses of livestock that can be seen as indicators to determine the level of environmental changes, namely body temperature, respiratory rate, and livestock heart rate. Suherman, et al. (2013) stated that unsuitable microenvironmental factors could become an obstacle in raising livestock, so efforts to control the microenvironment were necessary so that livestock productivity could be increased.
The microclimatic conditions in the pen can be attempted so as not to exceed the limits of comfortable conditions for dairy cattle and aims to reduce the level of heat received by dairy cattle. Efforts made to adjust the microclimatic conditions in the cage can be in the form of providing fans, providing drinking water, shading, determining the height of the cage, and choosing the type of roof material for the cage. The roof of the stable serves as a protector of dairy cattle from exposure to sunlight, rain, and cold air at night. The choice of the type of roof material for the shed affects the temperature conditions inside the shed so that in raising dairy cows it is better to choose the type of roof for the shed that is able to absorb and reflect heat so as to reduce heat transfer inside the shed (Kartiko, et al., 2019).
This research was conducted with the aim of knowing the physiological response and comfort level of FHC dairy cattle to the microclimatic elements inside the pen which were influenced by different types of cages, namely asbestos-roofed cages and tile- roofed sheds. The choice of treatment for asbestos-roofed cages and tile-roofed cages
in this study was because the majority of farmers in the People's Animal Husbandry in the Pujon area used on asbestos and tile roofs as roofs for their cages. The results of this study are expected to assist farmers in a better management strategy for raising dairy cattle through selecting the appropriate type of roof material for the stable so as to increase the comfort of life and optimize the productivity of dairy cattle.
MATERIAL AND METHOD Research materials
This research used 25 FHC cows from 4 farmers who had a tile roofed pens and 22 FHC cows from 4 farmers who had asbestos-roofed pens. The age of the cows varies from 3 to 5 years
Research methods
The method used in this research using the case study method and purposive sampling method. The criteria of the who were determined as respondents were smallholder farmers, who used asbestos
roofs and tiles, and milked by hand (hand milking). Data were collected in the field directly on the farm, for variables such as
rectal temperature, respiration rates of the cows, milk production. Collection data
start at 18th August to 20th Septembre 2022.
The external environment observed were relative humidity and air temperature inside the pens using thermohygrometer, respiration rates were measured using by feeling the cow's breath by placing the back of the hand in front of the cow's nostrils and the measurement is carried out for 1 minute using a hand tally counter, and the body temperature of the cows was measured using a clinical thermometer which was inserted into the cow's rectum for 1 minute.
Data Analysis
Data analysis used an unpaired t-test (Independent T Test) using Minitab Software version 17. With unpaired t-test, the average of each variable from tiled roofs and asbestos are compared with the formula:
t = X̅A−X̅B
𝑆𝑝√(𝑆2A𝑛𝐴)+(𝑆2B𝑛𝐵)
With df = nA+nB-2 Whereas:
X̅A = mean of each variable in asbestos roof X̅B = mean of aech variable in tile roof nA = number of cows in asbestos roof nB = number of cows in tile roof S2A = variance in asbestos roof S2B = variance in tile roof
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
General State at the Research Location Pujon District is one of the 33 districts in Malang Regency with a total area of around 34.18 km2 or around 4.39% of the total area of Malang Regency. The topography of Pandesari Village is in the form of hills or mountains with a height of about 1,190 m above sea level. The boundaries of the Pujon District to the north are Mojokerto Regency, to the east are Batu City, to the south are Dau District and Blitar Regency, and to the west are Ngantang District. Pandesari Village is divided into 3 sub-village namely Krajan, Sebaluh, and
Jurangrejo. In 2013 there was a division of the subvillages namely Jurangrejo and Sebaluh, Jurangrejo was divided into 2 subvillages namely Jurangrejo and Gesingan, while Sebaluh was divided into 2 subvillages namely Sebaluh and Maron Sebaluh.
Air Temperature and Humidity
Based on temperature and humidity data collection during the study, data was obtained showing that the average minimum air temperature of tile cages occurred in the morning (06.00 WIB) which was 18.06 ± 1.06°C with minimum humidity occurring during the day (12.00 WIB) which is 63.75
± 13.91% and the maximum air temperature occurs during the day (12.00 WIB) which is 24.75 ± 1.81°C with maximum humidity occurring in the morning (06.00 WIB) which is 84.94 ± 8.68% while the average air temperature in the tile cage was 21.88 ± 3.18°C with an average humidity of 84.94 ± 13.18.
The minimum air temperature in the asbestos cage occurs in the morning (06.00 WIB) which is 18.31 ± 1.25°C with
minimum humidity occurring during the day (12.00 WIB) which is 67.13 ± 8.73% and the maximum air temperature occurred during the day (12.00 WIB) which was 25.50 ± 2.19°C with maximum air humidity occurring in the morning (06.00) which was 81.13 ± 7.21% while the average air temperature in the asbestos enclosure was 22. 21±3.40°C with an average humidity of 73.94±9.46%. Temperature and humidity data can be seen in Table 1.
Table 1. Average of Air Temperature and Humidity of Asbestos Roof Cages and Tile Roof
Cages
Variables Time Tile roofed Asbestos roofed
Temperature (°C) Morning (06.00 WIB) 18,06±1,06 18,31±1,25
Noon (12.00 WIB) 24,75±1,81 25,50±2,19
Afternoon (16.00 (WIB) 22,81±1,42 22,81±1,28
Averages 21,88±3,18 22,21±3,40
N 25 22
Rel. Hum. *) (%) morning (06.00 WIB) 84,94±8,68 81,13±7,21
Noon (12.00 WIB) 63,75±13,91 67,13±8,73
Afternoon (16.00 (WIB) 75,56±5,91
73,56±6,88
Averages 84.94 ±13.18 73.94±9.46
N 25 22
*) Relative Humidity
Temperature conditions in the morning (06.00 WIB), afternoon (12.00 WIB) and evening (16.00 WIB) in asbestos-roofed pens and tile-roofed pens were relatively suitable for FHC cattle.
Jeanudin, et al. (2018) stated that the comfort zone of dairy cows ranges from 5°C-25°C if temperatures above 25°C will disrupt the physiological systems of the body and the performance of dairy cows.
Ambient temperatures reaching 29.7°C will cause mild hyperthermia and ambient temperatures reaching above 31.4°C will cause hyperthermia.
Based on this statement, the results of the average ambient temperatures in the morning, afternoon and evening in the tile sheds and asbestos sheds were 21.88 ± 3.18 and 22.21 ± 3.40 indicating that these conditions were indicated to be comfortable for dairy cows maximum production. Air temperature in the morning on the tile roof and asbestos showed ideal temperature in
the morning, especially for dairy cattle that were 18,06±1,06°C and 18.31 ± 1.25°C, as stated by Heraini, et al. (2019) that dairy cattle originating from temperate climates require an optimum temperature of around 18°C to achieve maximum production.
Livestock that is in comfortable conditions will find it easier to digest the feed they consume because less digested feed is wasted and will become energy for survival. Livestock that is in a high temperature environment will experience stress and have difficulty regulating body heat, so that livestock will drink more but their appetite will decrease and the amount of feed consumed will be low.
Humidity in the morning (06.00 WIB), afternoon (12.00 WIB) and evening (16.00 WIB) in asbestos-roofed pens and tile-roofed pens is not suitable for FHC cattle because they are above the normal range. It can be seen in Table 1 that the average humidity values in each asbestos-
roofed cage and tile-roofed cage are 73.94
± 9.46 and 84.94 ± 13.18. This value is above the normal range, in accordance with the statement of Suherman and Purwanto (2020) that the ideal temperature and humidity for FHC dairy production performance will be achieved at an air temperature of 18.3°C and humidity between 50-60%. The relatively high air humidity at the research location is due to the fact that the Pujon District has a humid climate. This is in accordance with the results of research by Muhsilin et al. (2015) that in Pujon District, temperatures range from 19-20°C with humidity around 61%.
The average 18.31 ± 1.25°C, as stated by Heraini, et al. (2019) that dairy cattle originating from temperate climates require an optimum temperature of around 18°C to achieve maximum production. Cattle that are in comfortable conditions will find it easier to digest the feed they consume because less digested feed is wasted and will become energy for survival. Cattle that are in a high temperature environment will experience stress and have difficulty
regulating body heat, so that cattle will drink more but their appetite will decrease and the amount of feed consumed will be low.
Humidity in the morning (06.00 WIB), afternoon (12.00 WIB) and evening (16.00 WIB) in asbestos-roofed pens and tile-roofed pens is not suitable for FHC cattle because they are above the normal range. It can be seen in Table 1 that the average humidity values in each asbestos- roofed cage and tile-roofed cage are 73.94
± 9.46 and 84.94 ± 13.18. This value is above the normal range, in accordance with the statement of Suherman and Purwanto (2020) that the ideal temperature and humidity for FHC dairy production performance will be achieved at an air temperature of 18.3°C and humidity between 50-60%. The relatively high air humidity at the research location is due to the fact that the Pujon District has a humid climate. This is in accordance with the results of research by Muhsilin et al. (2015) that in Pujon District, temperatures range from 19-20°C with humidity around 61%.
Table 2. Mean of THI (Thermal Humidity Index) in Each Type of Roof
Variables Tile roof Asbestos Roof
THI
Morning (06.00 WIB) 61,74±1,61 61,50±1,83
Noon (12.00 WIB) 67,79±2,20 69,46±1,89
Afternoon (16.00 (WIB) 67,40±1,48 67,05±1,74
Averages 65,64±3,30 66,00±3,81
N 25 22
The average THI value data in Table 2 shows that the average THI value in asbestos-roofed cages and tile-roofed cages has a THI value <72, namely 66.00 ± 3.81 and 65.64 ± 3.30, so it can be said that it is still within the normal range so FHC cows that are kept are in the comfort zone or are in the comfort zone. Sujowardojo and Ihsan (2010) state that a dairy cow will feel comfortable or be in the comfort zone if the THI value is below 72.
The THI value is between 72-79 then the cattle experience mild stress, if the THI value is between 80-89 the livestock experiences moderate stress, and if THI values between 90-97 cattle experiencing
severe stress. Based on the average THI values in the morning (06.00 WIB), afternoon (12.00 WIB), and evening (16.00 WIB) in asbestos cages and tile cages, there is no potential to cause livestock to experience stress.
The Temperature Humidity Index (THI) was developed to assess the impact of thermal environmental conditions on the thermoregulation status of livestock. The THI index value is a combination of ambient temperature and relative humidity which is used as an easy and practical way to assess the risk of heat stress in livestock. The THI value in asbestos-roofed cages and tile- roofed cages in People's Animal Husbandry,
Pujon District after 1 month of research in the area is included in the low THI category or good category, this is because the environment around the asbestos-roofed cages and cages tiled roofs have relatively good temperature and humidity conditions for FHC dairy cows.
Rectal Temperature in FHC Cows
Data in Table 3 shows that the average body temperature value of FHC cows in asbestos cages is 38.62 ± 0.46°C and the average body temperature value of FHC cows in tile pens is 38.32 ± 0.30°C. The data on the average body temperature value of FHC cattle in Table 3 is the data on body temperature values of FHC cattle during the day (12.00 WIB). This data was chosen because during the day (12.00 WIB) the air
temperature reaches its peak and is the most critical time for dairy cows to maintain a stable body temperature.
The data in Table 3 shows that the different types of asbestos-roofed pens and tile-roofed pens had a significant effect (P<0.05) on the body temperature of FHC cattle. The results of the analysis show that there is significant, but the data on the average body temperature value of FHC dairy cattle in tile-roofed and asbestos cages show normal body temperature values, this is corresponds to the statement of Amir, et al. (2017) that body temperature is a manifestation of the temperature of the organs inside and outside the cow's body with an average value of the normal body temperature range of 38.3-38.6°C.
Table 3. Averages of Rectal Temperature FHC cows in Tile Roof and Asbestos Roof
Pen Rectal Temperature (°C) P<0,05
Asbestos roof 38,62±0,46
0,0159482
Tile roof 38,33±0,30
The body temperature of dairy cows did not show a significant difference because it was seen from the THI values during the day (12.00 WIB) in the asbestos cages and tile cages, namely THI <72 (see in Table 2) indicating that the dairy cows were still in a comfortable condition or did not feel heat stress. This is because the dairy cattle that are kept have adapted for quite a long time to the environment in this research location, even though there is an increase in air temperature, especially during the day (12.00 WIB). Daytime air temperature (12.00 WIB) in asbestos-roofed cages and tile-roofed cages also showed normal values of 25.50°C and 24.75°C. This is in accordance with the statement of Suherman and Purwanto (2015) that the comfortable temperature range or thermoneutral zone for dairy cows is in the air temperature range between 13°-25°C. Cattle body temperature will adjust with an increase or decrease in ambient temperature. Novianti, et al. (2013) stated that an increase in the body temperature of dairy cows of 1°C or less is enough to reduce livestock performance
which will create a heat stress response in the cow. During the day the body temperature of livestock is higher than in the morning or evening. This is due to the hot ambient temperature during the day so that the cow responds to an increase in environmental temperature in the form of an increase in rectal temperature and an increase in respiratory rate in an effort to reduce or release heat received from outside the body of the livestock.
The response to heat stress is different for each individual livestock. The body temperature can be used as an indicator of heat stress in cattle due to temperature and humidity in the cage and the amount of feed consumption. Extreme environmental temperature conditions will indicate the function of the livestock body to work extra to achieve heat balance by releasing heat.
Cattle experiencing heat stress can reduce dry matter consumption by as much as 30%
(Wheelock, et al., 2010). In 12.00 WIB in asbestos-roofed cages and tile-roofed cages also showed normal values of 25.50°C and 24.75°C. This is in accordance with the
statement of Suherman and Purwanto (2015) that the comfortable temperature range or thermoneutral zone for dairy cows is in the air temperature range between 13°-25°C.
Cattle body temperature will adjust with an increase or decrease in ambient temperature. Novianti, et al. (2013) stated that an increase in the body temperature of dairy cows of 1°C or less is enough to reduce livestock performance which will create a heat stress response incow. During the day the body temperature of livestock is higher than in the morning or evening. This is due to the hot ambient temperature during the day so that the cow responds to an increase in environmental temperature in the form of an increase in rectal temperature and an increase in respiratory rate in an effort to reduce or release heat received from outside the body of the livestock. The response to heat stress is different for each individual livestock. Body temperature can be used as an indicator of heat stress in cattle due to temperature and humidity in the cage and the amount of feed consumption. Extreme environmental temperature conditions will indicate the function of the livestock body to
work extra to achieve heat balance by releasing heat. Cattle experiencing heat stress can reduce dry matter consumption by as much as 30% (Wheelock, et al., 2010).
Respiration rates in FHC Cows
The respiration rates of the cows in two type of roofs can be seen in Table 4.
Based on the data in Table 4, it shows that the average respiratory frequency of FHC cattle in asbestos-roofed pens is 38.01 ± 5.23 times/minute and tile-roofed pens are 36.14
± 6.00 times/minute.
The data on the average respiratory frequency value of FHC cattle in Table 4 is the data on respiratory frequency values of FHC cattle during the day (12.00 WIB). This data was chosen with the consideration that the respiratory frequency of FHC cattle reached a peak during the day at 12.00 WIB.
The frequency of breathing during the day is higher than in the morning or evening because the highest environmental temperature occurs during the day, this triggers an increase in the frequency of respirations carried out by livestock to sufficiently expel the heat load in the body (Mariana, et al., 2019)
Table 4. Mean of Respiration Rates in Tile Roof and Asbestor Roof
No Type of Pen Frequency (times/mnt) Significance
1 Asbestos roof 38,01±5,23
0,2638043
2 Tile roof 36,14±6,00
Based on the data in Table 4, it shows that the average respiratory frequency of FHC cattle in asbestos-roofed pens is 38.01
± 5.23 times/minute and tile-roofed pens are 36.14 ± 6.00 times/minute. The data on the average respiratory frequency value of FHC cattle in Table 4 is the data on respiratory frequency values of FHC cattle during the day (12.00 WIB). This data was chosen with the consideration that the respiratory frequency of FHC cattle reached a peak during the day at 12.00 WIB. The frequency of breathing during the day is higher than in the morning or evening because the highest environmental temperature occurs during the day, this triggers an increase in the frequency of respirations carried out by
livestock to sufficiently expel the heat load in the body (Mariana, et al., 2019) The data in Table 4 shows that the different types of asbestos-roofed sheds and tile-roofed sheds had an insignificant effect (P>0.05) on the respiratory frequency of FHC cattle.
Kartiko, et al (2019) stated that there were no significant changes in rectal temperature and respiratory rate, which were one unit that influenced each other and had a mechanism. The difference in the type of asbestos-roofed cages and tile-roofed cages did not have a significant effect because the dairy cattle kept had adapted long enough to the environment of the study site, although the average respiratory frequency during the day showed the highest value compared to
the average respiratory frequency in the morning and evening.
The increase in respiratory frequency is in line with the increase in air temperature and THI values in the cage (Suherman and Purwanto. 2020). In Table 2 it can be seen that there was an increase in THI values from morning to noon and decreased from noon to evening. This means that the THI value during the day is the highest THI value in the asbestos cage and the tile cage, but the THI values during the day in the asbestos cage and the roof tile cage are 67.79 ± 2.20 and 69.46 ± 1.89 indicating lower values. It is normal for livestock to feel comfortable in the cage or cattle are not threatened with environmental heat stress even though there is an increase in the frequency of respiration in cattle. The average respiratory frequency values of FHC cattle in asbestos-roofed pens and tile-roofed pens shown in Table 4 are still within the normal range. Yani, et al.
(2007) stated that the average respiratory frequency range of normal dairy cows ranges from 27-40 times/minute.
Respiratory frequency is influenced by several factors, namely body size, age, environmental temperature, gestation period, animal health condition, anxiety, physical activity and position of the livestock (Serang, et al., 2016).
Breathing is done to maintain the body heat balance of livestock when experiencing heat stress. The main function of respiration for livestock is to provide oxygen to the blood and take carbon dioxide from the blood. The respiratory system in the alveoli functions to adjust the body temperature of livestock by regulating the temperature and humidity of the air that enters the body. The respiratory frequency of dairy cows is more sensitive to changes in air temperature and relative humidity in the pen (Suherman and Purwanto. 2020). An increase in respiratory frequency occurs when cattle are active and when livestock are exposed to high environmental temperatures and humidity.
Increasing the frequency of breathing helps
livestock to increase heat dissipation in the body through breathing (Novianti, et al., 2013). The higher the air temperature and humidity in the cage, the higher the respiratory rate in dairy cows.
Based on statistical test results on the HTC data of asbestos-roofed cages and tile- roofed cages showed no significant difference (P>0.05). The mean FHC value of dairy cows in tile sheds and asbestos sheds were 2.57 ± 0.26 and 2.66 ± 0.24. The HTC value of dairy cows in tile and asbestos cages is still in a comfortable condition, this is in accordance with the statement of Praanda, et al. (2016) that cattle are said to be in comfortable conditions if the HTC value = 2 or the higher the HTC value, the lower the level of livestock resistance to environmental hot conditions.
The HTC value of dairy cattle kept in tile-roofed and asbestos cages indicates that the cattle are able to adapt to hot conditions in the environment occupied by these cattle.
This is reinforced by the THI values, body temperature values, and respiratory frequency values of FHC dairy cows which are in normal conditions. Air temperature and air humidity are the main factors for livestock to maintain body heat conditions in normal conditions.
The highland area of Pujon has an ambient temperature suitable for keeping dairy cows.
Rinca, et al. (2022) stated that dairy cows reared in the highlands had better resistance compared to dairy cows raised in the lowlands. The response to the normal condition of the livestock body is influenced by the altitude of the area where the cattle are reared. The altitude of an area can increase or decrease the level of heat resistance of livestock. High ambient temperature will cause heat stress of dairy cows. The negative effect of heat stress on dairy cows is that the livestock's appetite will decrease which can affect the concentration of hormones in the blood as the main metabolism in the body.
Table 5. Mean of HTC in Tile Roof and Asbestos Roof
No Type of pen HTC Significance
1 Tile roof 2,57±0,26 0,022995437
2 Asbestos roof 2,66±0,24
Milk Production in Dairy Cattle FHC From the statistical test results on the average value of milk production in asbestos-roofed cages and tile-roofed cages, there was a highly significant difference (P<0.01). Seen in the data from Table 6, the average value of milk production for FHC dairy cows in tile-roofed cages was higher, namely 12.47 ± 3.84 liters compared to milk production in asbestos-roofed cows, which was 9.06 ± 4.23 liters.
The results of the analysis showed that the different types of asbestos-roofed sheds and tile-roofed sheds had a significant (P<0.05) effect on the productivity of FHC dairy cows. This is related to the influence of asbestos and tile roofing materials on the microenvironment in the cage, namely air temperature and humidity. The roof of the cage made of asbestos absorbs heat so that it will further increase the heat load inside the cage (Kartiko, et al., 2019) and according to
the research results of Syukriani, et al.
(2022) stated that tile roofs are better because the tile material does not absorb much heat and the outside air can enter through the cracks. The difference in heat absorption between asbestos and tile type roofing materials shows that heat absorption through the roof of the cage is able to provide efficient heat stress so as to reduce the productivity of dairy cattle (Yani, et al., 2007).
The results of this study did show that the different types of asbestos-roofed cages and tile-roofed sheds had a significant effect (P<0.05) on the milk production of FHC cows, however, when viewed from the THI values in both asbestos and tile-roof cages in Table 2, it was still is in the normal range and proves that the condition of dairy cows is not experiencing heat stress conditions so that dairy cows are still in a comfortable condition to produce milk optimally.
Table 6. Mean of Daily Milk Porduction Susu in Tile Roof and Asbestos Roof
No Type of Pen Milk Production (ltr) Significance
1 Tile roof 12,47±3,84 b
0,0057272
2 Asbestos roof 9,06±4,23 a
Different superscripts in the same column mean highly significantly different
Data on the average daily milk production value of FHC cows in tile cages and asbestos cages for FHC cows in Table 6 shows a low number compared to the standard daily milk production for FHC cows. The results of research from Kusumawati, et al. (2018) stated that the milk production of FHC dairy cows in Indonesia averaged 10 liters/head/day or approximately 3,050 kg/lactation. The amount of milk produced by FHC cows has a direct relationship to the reproductive characteristics of FHC cows. Research results from Pasaribu, et al. (2015) stated that the factors that affect the level of milk production in dairy cows are the amount of
feed, the amount of drinking water, the age of the cattle, and the milking interval.
The management of livestock rearing by farmers during this research was quite good. Dairy cattle in this study were given feed in the form of abundant forage and high quality concentrates. The amount of animal feed given by the farmers during this study did not contain an appropriate dose for the needs of livestock milk production. Farmers measure feed according to the habits of farmers every day and the amount of feed given every day is sometimes not always the same. This can cause a decrease in livestock milk production according to the statement of Pasaribu, et al. (2015) that an increase in
the amount of feed will cause an increase in milk production or vice versa, if the amount of feed decreases it will cause a decrease in livestock milk production. The average value of daily milk production varied in this study due to differences in the age of each animal used as the research sample.
Differences in the age of dairy cattle can cause differences in the level of livestock milk production. In this study, samples of FHC dairy cattle were used with a range of 3-5 years. This is in accordance with the results of research from Kusumawati, et al.
(2015) stated that the age of the mother had an effect on milk production, ages 5-6 years had the best effect on milk production than ages 3-4 years and ages 7-8 years. Milk production of cattle aged 5-6 years is higher due to maximum body growth and the number of cells in the udder also increases.
The milk production of dairy cows aged 7-8 years has decreased due to reduced activity of the udder glands.
It should be noted that the livestock studied in this study were livestock that were affected by FMD (Foot and Mouth Disease).
Sudarsono (2022) states that the impact of PMK in an area can be seen with the naked eye, such as a drastic decrease in milk production in dairy cows. Based on the results of Firman's research, et al. (2022) states that the impact of PMK is divided into direct (visible) impacts and indirect (invisible) impacts. Some examples of the direct impact of PMK are loss of milk production, loss of body weight, decreased fertility and death of livestock. Based on the results of the several studies above, it can be seen that the low value of milk production from the results of this study is also affected by the declining reproductive system of livestock due to the impact of FMD.
CONCLUSION
Tile-roofed pens and asbestos-roofed pens had an effect on body temperature and milk production of FHC dairy cows, however, tile-roofed pens and asbestos- roofed pens had no effect on the adaptive ability in livestock such as HTC and
respiratory frequency and did not have a significant effect on microclimatic elements.
including air temperature and humidity in the cage.
REFERENCES
Adhianto, K., Siswanto, S., & Nindya Kesuma, C. (2015). Pengaruh frekuensi penyiraman air menggunakan sprinkler terhadap respon fisiologis dan pertumbuhan sapi peranakan Simmental. Buletin Peternakan, 39(2), 109-115.
Amir, A., Purwanto, B. P., & Permana, I. G.
(2017). Respon Termoregulasi Sapi Perah Pada Energi Ransum Yang Berbeda (Thermoregulation Response of Dairy Cows on Different Energy Content). Jurnal Ilmu dan Teknologi Peternakan, 5(2), 72-79.
Firman, A., Trisman, I., & Puradireja, R. H.
(2022). Economic impact of foot and mouth diseases outbreak on cattle and buffalo in Indonesia. Jurnal Pemikiran Masyarakat Ilmiah Berwawasan Agribisnis, 8(2), 1123- 1129.
Gantner, V., Mijić, P., Kuterovac, K., Solić, D., & Gantner, R. (2011).
Temperature-humidity index values and their significance on the daily production of dairy cattle.
Mljekarstvo: časopis za unaprjeđenje proizvodnje i prerade mlijeka, 61(1), 56-63.
Heraini, D., Purwanto, B. P., & Suryahadi, S. (2019). Perbandingan suhu lingkungan dan pengaruh pakan terhadap produktivitas sapi perah di daerah dengan ketinggian berbeda. Jurnal ilmiah peternakan terpadu, 7(2), 234-240.
Kartiko, M. A., Sambodho, P., & Harjanti, D. W. (2019). Respon fisiologis sapi laktasi akibat modifikasi lingkungan kandang. AGROMEDIA: Berkala Ilmiah Ilmu-ilmu Pertanian, 37(2), 76-82.
Kusumawati, E. D., Rahadi, S., Peso, J., &
Nugroho, A. T. Pengaruh umur lepas
sapih dan umur induk terhadap produksi susu sapi perah Peranakan Friesian Holstein (PFH). JITRO. 5(1):
62-68.
Mariana, E., Sumantri, C., Astuti, D. A., Anggraeni, A., & Gunawan, A.
(2019). Mikroklimat, termoregulasi dan produktivitas sapi perah Friesians Holstein pada ketinggian tempat berbeda. Jurnal Ilmu Teknologi dan Peternakan Tropis, 6(1), 70-77.
Novianti, J., Purwanto, B. P., & Atabany, A.
(2013). Respon fisiologis dan produksi susu sapi perah FH pada pemberian rumput gajah (Pennisetum purpureum) dengan ukuran pemotongan yang berbeda. Jurnal Ilmu Produksi dan Teknologi Hasil Peternakan, 1(3), 138-146.
Pasaribu, A., Firmansyah, F., & Idris, N.
(2015). Analisis faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi produksi susu sapi perah di Kabupaten Karo Provinsi Sumatera Utara. Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu- Ilmu Peternakan, 18(1), 28-35.
Pradana, A. P., Busono, W., & Maylinda, S.
(2016). Karakteristik sapi Madura betina berdasarkan ketinggian tempat di Kecamatan Galis dan Kadur Kabupaten Pamekasan. TERNAK TROPIKA Journal of Tropical Animal Production, 16(2), 64-72.
Rinca, K. F., Mubdi, R., Kristanto, D., Putra, I. P. C., Luju, M. T., Bollyn, Y. M. F.,
& Gultom, R. (2022). Faktor resiko yang mempengaruhi respon termoregulasi ternak ruminansia.
Jurnal Peternakan Indonesia (Indonesian Journal of Animal Science), 24(3), 304-314.
Riski, P., Purwanto, B. P., & Atabany, A.
(2016). Produksi dan kualitas susu sapi FH laktasi yang diberi pakan daun pelepah sawit. Jurnal Ilmu Produksi dan Teknologi Hasil Peternakan, 4(3), 345-349.
Serang, P. M., Suartha, I. N., & Arjentinia, I. P. G. Y. (2016). Frekuensi respirasi sapi bali betina dewasa di sentra pembibitan sapi bali Desa Sobangan,
Kecamatan Mengwi, Kabupaten Badung. Buletin Veteriner Udayana, 8(1), 25-29.
Siska, I., & Anggrayni, Y. L. (2020). Body Condition Score (BCS), Tingkat laktasi dan hubungannya dengan produksi susu sapi perah Peranakan Friesian Holstein (PFH). Jurnal Ilmu Ternak Universitas Padjadjaran, 20(2), 115-125.
Sudarsono, R. P. E. (2022). Epidemiological study of suspected occurrence of foot and mouth disease in Lamongan Regency. Journal of Basic Medical Veterinary, 11(1), 56-63.
Suherman, D., & Purwanto, B. P. (2020).
Model estimasi suhu kritis atas pada sapi perah dara berdasarkan manajemen pakan. Jurnal Sain Peternakan Indonesia, 15(2), 200- 211.
Suherman, D., & Purwanto, B. P. (2015).
Respon fisiologis sapi perah dara Fries Holland yang diberi konsentrat dengan tingkat energi berbeda. Jurnal Sain Peternakan Indonesia, 10(1), 13- 21.
Suherman, D., Purwanto, B. P., Manalu, W.,
& Permana, I. G. (2013). Model penentuan suhu kritis pada sapi perah berdasarkan kemampuan produksi dan manajemen pakan. Jurnal Sain Peternakan Indonesia, 8(2), 121-138.
Suwarno, N., & Mushawwir, A. (2019).
Model prediksi metabolit melalui jalur glikogenolisis berdasarkan fluktuasi mikroklimat lingkungan kandang sapi perah. Jurnal Ilmu dan Industri Peternakan, 5(2), 97-107.
Syaefullah, B. L., Herawati, M., Timur, N.
P. V. T., & Widayati, O. (2021). Effect of temperature humidity index on drinking water consumption and performance of super native chickens by addition of phytobiotics red fruit oil encapsulation. Jurnal Ilmu Peternakan dan Veteriner Tropis (Journal of Tropical Animal and Veterinary Science), 11(3), 274-283.
Syukriani, D., Irda, I., & Kurnia, D. (2022).
Ilmu Ternak Perah. Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh: Lima Puluh Kota.
Wheelock, J. B., Rhoads, R. P., VanBaale, M. J., Sanders, S. R., & Baumgard, L.
H. (2010). Effects of heat stress on energetic metabolism in lactating Holstein cows. Journal of dairy science, 93(2), 644-655.
Yani, A. H. M. A. D., Suhardiyanto, H., Hasbullah, R., & Purwanto, B. P.
(2007). Analisis dan simulasi distribusi suhu udara pada kandang sapi perah menggunakan computational fluid dynamics (CFD). Media Peternakan, 30(3), 218-228.
