9. Thursday Presentations prof adam lock michigan state uni - supplemental fat - which, when and for what outcome

2018 © Board of Trustees of Michigan State University
2018 © Board of Trustees of Michigan State University.
All Rights Reserved. No part of this presentation may be
recorded, transmitted, or modified in any form or by
electronic, mechanical, or other means without the
written permission of Michigan State University.
Contact Details:
Dr Adam L. Lock
Department of Animal Science
Michigan State University
allock@msu.edu
517-802-8124

Supplemental Fat:
Which, When, and for What Outcome?
Feedworks 2018 Conference
Performance Through Science
Twin Waters Resort
Queensland, Australia
September 19-21, 2018
Adam L. Lock
Department of Animal Science
Michigan State University

Impact of Dietary Fatty Acids on Digestion,
Metabolism, and Nutrient Use in Lactating Dairy Cows
16:0; 18:0; 18:1; 18:2; 18:3
Rumen
Mammary
Gland
Small Intestine
Adipose
Liver
EffectsonDMI
FADigestibility
Useof FAfor other puposes
– Energyand/or glucosesparing
– Deliveryof n-3 + n-6 FA
BHor UFA
ShiftsinBHpathways
Effectsonmicrobial populations
Effectsof NDF/Starch
EffectsonNDF/StarchKd
Milk
Fat / Lactose
Balanceof 18-C+ denovoFA
Direct effect of speciﬁc FA
MFDintermediates
[] milk fat synthesis
[] BW/BCS
ê ê

Effects of Supplemental Fatty Acid
on Lactating Dairy Cows:
• Will discuss and answer (hopefully) questions related to:
- Do supplemental FA impact NFD digestibility?
- Do all dietary FA have the same digestibility?
- Does the effect of fat supplements on FA digestibility matter?
- Do all sources of supplemental FA have the same impact on yield of milk and
milk components?
- Do cows at different levels of milk production respond differently to blends of
supplemental FA?
- Can different FA impact energy partitioning?
- Should we feed supplemental FA to early lactation dairy cows?
 Are all fat supplements the same?

Many Fat/FA Supplement Options
A BAG OF FAT IS NOT JUST A BAG OF FAT!
FA profile of a fat supplement is the
first factor in determining the response to it

Saturated free FA
Supplements
Fatty Acid,
g/100 g
Ca-salt
PFAD
Mix
C16:0-
enriched
C14:0 2.0 2.7 1.6
C16:0 51.0 32.8 89.7
C18:0 4.0 51.4 1.0
C18:1 (n-9) 36.0 5.8 5.9
C18:2 (n-6) 7.0 0.8 1.3
3 Major Categories of FA Supplements Available
• None of these FA
supplements were
designed with the cow in
mind!
• All simply took the ’best’
by-product for the
respective manufacturing
technology

Recent Focus on Palmitic, Stearic, and Oleic Acids
• C18:0, under typical
feeding situations, is the
predominant FA available
for absorption by the dairy
cow (due to BH)
• Represent the majority of
FA in milk fat and adipose
tissue
• Predominant FA in the 3
main categories of dietary
FA supplements
Palmitic acid (C16:0)
Stearic acid (C18:0)
Oleic acid (C18:1)
ADIPOSEADIPOSE
MAMMARY
GLAND
60%
90%

Recent Focus on Palmitic, Stearic, and Oleic Acids
• All three FA are important
for dairy cow metabolism
• Is there an “ideal” ratio
among C16:0, C18:0, and
C18:1 to optimize their
utilization
• Interactions with other
dietary and animal factors
Palmitic acid (C16:0)
Stearic acid (C18:0)
Oleic acid (C18:1)
ADIPOSEADIPOSE
MAMMARY
GLAND
60%
90%

Effect of Dietary
FA on NDF and FA
Digestibility
16:0; 18:0; 18:1; 18:2; 18:3
Rumen
Mammary
Gland
Small Intestine
Adipose
Liver
EffectsonDMI
FADigestibility
BHor UFA
ShiftsinBHpathways
Milk
Fat / Lactose
MFDintermediates
[] BW/BCS
ê ê

Effect of Altering the FA Profile of Supplemental Fats
on Apparent Total Tract NDF Digestibility
• Supplement blends fed at 1.5% DM
• Blends of 3 commercially available
FA supplements:
- C16:0-enriched free FA supplement
- C16:0 and C18:0 free FA supplement
- Ca-salt palm FA
• Blended in different ratios to alter
content of C16:0, C18:0, and C18:1
• 24 cows in a 4 x 4 Latin square with
21 d periods
42
43
44
45
46
Control 80% C16:0 40% C16:0 +
40% C18:0
45% C16:0 +
35% C18:1
NDFdigestibility,%
0.9%
-1.3%
0.8%
de Souza et al. 2018. J. Dairy Sci. 101:172–185

Effect of Increasing C16:0 Intake on ttNDFd
y = 0.010x + 38.4
R² = 0.54
P < 0.01
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 200 400 600 800 1000
NDFDigestibility,%
C16:0 intake, g/d
de Souza & Lock (ADSA Abstract, 2016)

Effect of Altering the FA Profile of Supplemental Fats
on Apparent Total Tract FA Digestibility
P value
FA treatment = 0.01
60
65
70
75
80
85
Control 80% C16:0 40% C16:0 +
40% C18:0
45% C16:0 +
35% C18:1
TotalFAdigestibility,%
a
b
b
c
2.0%
-10%
• Supplement blends fed at 1.5% DM
• Blends of 3 commercially available
FA supplements:
- C16:0-enriched free FA supplement
- C16:0 and C18:0 free FA supplement
- Ca-salt palm FA
• Blended in different ratios to alter
content of C16:0, C18:0, and C18:1
• 24 cows in a 4 x 4 Latin square with
21 d periods

Linear effect: P-value = <0.01
Quadratic effect: P-value =
0.12
0 vs. 60 effect: P-value =
<0.01
55
60
65
70
0 20 40 60
TotaltractFAdigestibility,%
Oleic Acid Infusion, g/d
8.0%
Abomasal Infusion of Oleic Acid Improves
Total Tract Fatty Acid Digestibility
Prom & Lock (ADSA Abstract, 2018)

Effect of Dietary FA
on Milk Production
and Energy
Partitioning
16:0; 18:0; 18:1; 18:2; 18:3
Rumen
Mammary
Gland
Small Intestine
Adipose
Liver
EffectsonDMI
FADigestibility
BHor UFA
ShiftsinBHpathways
Milk
Fat / Lactose
MFDintermediates
[] BW/BCS
ê ê

1.68
1.59
1.50
1.55
1.60
1.65
1.70
1.75
PA SA
MilkFatYield(kg/d)
3.66 3.55
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
PA SA
MilkFatConc
C16:
0
• Results were independent
of level of milk production
• Higher yielding cows
responded more positively
to C18:0
• Results were independent
of level of milk production
Responses to Supplemental C16:0 and C18:0
Piantoni et al. 2013. J. Dairy Sci. 96:7143–7154
Piantoni et al. 2015. J Dairy Sci. 98:1938–1949
Rico et al. 2014. J. Dairy Sci. 97:1057–1066
Supplemental C16:0 Supplemental C18:0 Supplemental C16:0 vs. C18:0

2018 © Board of Trustees of Michigan State University Rico et al. 2017. J. Animal Sci. 95:436-446
Dose Response to Supplemental C16:0
1.50
1.60
1.70
1.80
1.90
0.00 0.75 1.50 2.25MilkFatYield(kg/d)
C16:0 dose, % of ration DM
LOW FAT
HIGH FATIngredients, % of DM Soyhulls Cottonseed
Alfalfa Haylage 11.8 11.8
Corn silage 27.0 27.0
Wheat Straw 3.1 3.1
Ground Corn 15.5 15.5
Cottonseed 0.0 16.7
Soyhulls 25 8.3
Soybean meal 14.7 14.7
Nutrient Composition, % of DM
NDF 31.8 30.1
CP 15.8 16.6
FA 2.2 3.5
Soyhulls Diet
Cottonseed Diet

Relationship Between C16:0 Intake and Milk Fat Yield
y = 0.25x + 1429
R² = 0.34
P < 0.01
900
1100
1300
1500
1700
1900
0 200 400 600 800 1000
TotalmilkFA,g/d
C16:0 intake, g/d
de Souza & Lock. 2018. TSDNC

Effect of Long-Term C16:0 Supplementation on ECM Yield
de Souza & Lock. 2018. J. Dairy Sci. 101: 3044-3056
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
0 7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63 70
ECM,kg/d
Day
CON PA
P values
Treatment <0.01, Time <0.01
Treatment x Time= 0.18
4.1 kg
Variable Control PA P value
DMI, kg/d 28.4 30.3 <0.01
Milk, kg/d 45.6 49.4 0.03
ECM,
kg/d 43.4 47.5 0.02
Fat, kg/d 1.41 1.56 0.03
Protein, kg/d 1.31 1.40 0.06
Body Weight, kg 689 698 0.45

Treatment by Parity Interactions
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Primiparous Multiparous
BWchange,kg/d
CON PA
P values
Treatment = 0.01, Parity = 0.39
Treatment x Parity = 0.09
• PA increased DMI ~ 1.5 kg/d
• ECM increased to a greater extent in multiparous (2.1 vs. 5.7 kg)
• BW increased in primiparous but not multiparous
30
33
36
39
42
45
48
51
54
Primiparous Multiparous
ECM,kg/d
CON PA
P values
Treatment <0.01, Parity <0.01
Treatment x Parity = 0.04
de Souza & Lock. 2018. J. Dairy Sci. 101: 3044-3056

Effect of Altering the FA Profile of Supplemental Fats on ECM and BW
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
Control 80% C16:0 40% C16:0 +
40% C18:0
45% C16:0 +
35% C18:1
ECM,kg/d
P value
FA treatment = 0.01
c
a
b b
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
1.20
Control 80% C16:0 40% C16:0 +
40% C18:0
45% C16:0 +
35% C18:1
BWChange,kg/d
P value
FA treatment = 0.01
a
a
a
b

Effect of Altering the Palmitic to Oleic Ratio of
Supplemental Fats on DMI and BW
• 36 cows in an incomplete 4 x 4 Latin square with 35 d periods
• Supplements fed at 1.5% DM
• Blends made using combinations of commercially available C16:0-enriched and Ca-salts palm oil supplements
de Souza & Lock (ADSA Abstract 2017)
Ratio of C16:0 to cis-9 C18:1 in FA blend Ratio of C16:0 to cis-9 C18:1 in FA blend
0.00
0.30
0.60
0.90
1.20
BWchange,kg/d
80:10 73:17 66:24 60:30
22.0
24.0
26.0
28.0
30.0
32.0
DMI,kg/d
80:10 73:17 66:24 60:30
P values
Treatment =0.09, Production <0.01
Treatment x Production= 0.74
P values

Treatment X Production Level Interactions
P values
de Souza & Lock (ADSA Abstract 2017)
• 36 cows in an incomplete 4 x 4 Latin square with 35 d periods
• Supplements fed at 1.5% DM
• Blends made using combinations of commercially available C16:0-enriched and Ca-salts palm oil supplements
Ratio of C16:0 to cis-9 C18:1 in FA blend
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
Low Medium High
ECM,kg
Production Level
80:10 73:17 66:24 60:30
2.7 kg
6.7 kg
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
Low Medium High
ECM,kg
Production Level
80:10 73:17 66:24 60:30
2.7 kg
6.7 kg
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
Low Medium High
ECM,kg
Production Level
80:10 73:17 66:24 60:30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
Low Medium High
ECM,kg
Production Level
80:10 73:17 66:24 60:30

Fatty Acid
Supplementation to
Early Lactation
Cows?
16:0; 18:0; 18:1; 18:2; 18:3
Rumen
Mammary
Gland
Small Intestine
Adipose
Liver
EffectsonDMI
FADigestibility
BHor UFA
ShiftsinBHpathways
Milk
Fat / Lactose
MFDintermediates
[] BW/BCS
ê ê

Fatty Acid Supplementation to Early Lactation Cows?
• When Should Fat Feeding Begin?
- Ideally, fat probably should be left out of the diet
immediately postpartum
- Numerous trials have indicated that there was little benefit
from feeding fat during the first 5 to 7 wk postpartum
- The lack of early lactation response seems to be related to
depression in feed intake which offsets any advantage that
may be gained by increasing energy density of the diet
Grummer. 1992.
Large Dairy Herd
Management, 2nd Edition
• Should not feed supplemental FA to
cows in negative energy balance
• Already too much circulating FA

CON (n = 26)
PA (n = 26)
CON (n = 13)
PA (n = 13)
PA (n = 13)
CON (n = 13)
Fresh period (1 to 24 DIM) Peak period (25 to 67 DIM)
C16:0 Supplementation to Early Lactation Cows?
• C16:0 responses have
only been evaluated
in post peak cows
• Concern regarding:
- Negative energy
balance
- Reduced DMI of cows
in early lactation
- Increased risk of
metabolic disorders
• PA fed at 1.5% DM
• 52 multiparous Holstein cows
• Block design; assigned by parity, 305ME, and BCS

P values
FR = 0.75, Peak = 0.01
FR x Peak = 0.93
Effect of Supplemental C16:0 on DMI and Milk Yield
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control
PA
CON-CON
CON-PA
PA-CON
PA-PA
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control PA
CON-CON CON-PA
PA-CON PA-PA
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
29
31
33
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
DMI,kg
Week Postpartum
P value
FR = 0.92
P values
FR = 0.38, PK = 0.68
FR x PK= 0.75
35
38
41
44
47
50
53
56
59
62
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
MilkYield,kg
Week Postpartum
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control
PA
CON-CON
CON-PA
PA-CON
PA-PA
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control PA
CON-CON CON-PA
PA-CON PA-PA
P value
FR = 0.39
3.5 kg

Effect of Supplemental C16:0 on Yield of Fat and ECM
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control
PA
CON-CON
CON-PA
PA-CON
PA-PA
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control PA
CON-CON CON-PA
PA-CON PA-PA
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control
PA
CON-CON
CON-PA
PA-CON
PA-PA
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control PA
CON-CON CON-PA
PA-CON PA-PA
1.60
1.80
2.00
2.20
2.40
2.60
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FatYield,kg
Week Postpartum
P value
FR < 0.01
P values
FR = 0.66, Peak <0.01
FR x Peak = 0.07
45.0
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
ECM,kg
Week Postpartum
P values
FR = 0.92, Peak <0.01
FR x Peak = 0.95P value
FR = 0.02
4.7 kg 4.8 kg0.28 kg

Effect of Supplemental C16:0 on Yield of Fat and ECM
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control
PA
CON-CON
CON-PA
PA-CON
PA-PA
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control PA
CON-CON CON-PA
PA-CON PA-PA
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control
PA
CON-CON
CON-PA
PA-CON
PA-PA
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control PA
CON-CON CON-PA
PA-CON PA-PA
1.60
1.80
2.00
2.20
2.40
2.60
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FatYield,kg
Week Postpartum
P value
FR < 0.01
P values
FR = 0.66, Peak <0.01
FR x Peak = 0.07
45.0
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
ECM,kg
Week Postpartum
P values
FR = 0.92, Peak <0.01
FR x Peak = 0.95P value
FR = 0.02
4.7 kg 4.8 kg0.28 kg 0.21 kg

Effect of Supplemental C16:0 on Body Weight and NEFA
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control
PA
CON-CON
CON-PA
PA-CON
PA-PA
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control PA
CON-CON CON-PA
PA-CON PA-PA
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control
PA
CON-CON
CON-PA
PA-CON
PA-PA
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control PA
CON-CON CON-PA
PA-CON PA-PA
600
630
660
690
720
750
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
BW,kg
Week Postpartum
P values
FR = 0.01, Peak = 0.06
FR x Peak = 0.25
P value
FR = 0.05
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NEFA,mEq/L
Week Postpartum
P value
FR = 0.03
P values
FR = 0.46, Peak = 0.41
FR x Peak = 0.13
-26 kg -10 kg 0.06 mEq/L

Effect of Supplemental C16:0 on Energy Intake and Balance
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control
PA
CON-CON
CON-PA
PA-CON
PA-PA
30
35
40
45
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NDFDigestibility,%
Week Postpartum
Control PA
CON-CON CON-PA
PA-CON PA-PA
P values
FR = 0.91, Peak = 0.05
FR x Peak = 0.92
P value
FR = 0.05
P value
FR < 0.01
P values
FR = 0.97, Peak = 0.03
FR x Peak = 0.12
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
DEintake,Mcal/d
Week Postpartum
30
35
40
45
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Milkenergyoutput,Mcal/d
Week Postpartum
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
EnergyBalance,Mcal/d
Week Postpartum
P value
FR = 0.03
P values
FR = 0.84, Peak = 0.19
FR x Peak = 0.81
Predicting NEL from dietary composition during the FR period using the NRC model would estimate that PA increased
NEL intake by only 1 Mcal/d, whereas our actual calculated increase in NEL intake was 2.5 Mcal/d.

y = 0.03x + 8.3
R² = 0.55
P=0.01
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
80 120 160 200 240 280 320
EnergypartitioningtoBW,%
C18:1 intake, g/d
Palmitic and Oleic Effects on Energy Partitioning
(Post Peak Cows)
de Souza & Lock (Unpublished)
y = 0.004x + 62.3
R² = 0.46
P=0.01
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Energypartitioningtomilk,%
C16:0 intake, g/d

Abomasal Infusion of Oleic Acid Increases
Plasma Insulin in Post Peak Cows
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
0 20 40 60
PlasmaInsulin,µg/dL
Oleic Acid Infusion, g/d
Linear effect: P-value = <0.01
Quadratic effect: P-value = 0.05
Prom et al. (ADSA Abstract, 2018)

650
660
670
680
690
700
710
720
730
1 2 3
BW,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10
45
47
49
51
53
55
57
1 2 3
ECM,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1 2 3
DMI,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10
Effect of Altering the Palmitic to Oleic Acid Ratio
of Supplemental Fats to Fresh Cows
• CON: Control diet (no supplemental fat)
• FA supplement blends fed at 1.5% DM
• Supplemental fat blends fed from calving for first 3 wk of lactation
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.19
Linear = 0.14
Quadratic= 0.94
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.01
Linear = 0.41
Quadratic= 0.71
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.71
Linear = 0.10
Quadratic= 0.69
de Souza, St-Pierre, & Lock (ADSA 2018)

650
660
670
680
690
700
710
720
730
1 2 3
BW,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10
45
47
49
51
53
55
57
1 2 3
ECM,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1 2 3
DMI,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10 70:20 60:30
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.19
Linear = 0.14
Quadratic= 0.94
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.01
Linear = 0.41
Quadratic= 0.71
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.71
Linear = 0.10
Quadratic= 0.69

650
660
670
680
690
700
710
720
730
1 2 3
BW,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10
45
47
49
51
53
55
57
1 2 3
ECM,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10 70:20 60:30
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1 2 3
DMI,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10 70:20 60:30
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.19
Linear = 0.14
Quadratic= 0.94
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.01
Linear = 0.41
Quadratic= 0.71
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.71
Linear = 0.10
Quadratic= 0.69

650
660
670
680
690
700
710
720
730
1 2 3
BW,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10 70:20 60:30
45
47
49
51
53
55
57
1 2 3
ECM,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10 70:20 60:30
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1 2 3
DMI,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10 70:20 60:30
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.19
Linear = 0.14
Quadratic= 0.94
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.01
Linear = 0.41
Quadratic= 0.71
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.71
Linear = 0.10
Quadratic= 0.69

2018 © Board of Trustees of Michigan State University de Souza, St-Pierre, & Lock (ADSA 2018)
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Insulin,ug/L
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10 70:20 60:30
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
BHB,mg/dL
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10 70:20 60:30
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
NEFA,meq/L
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10 70:20 60:30
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.14
Linear = 0.10
Quadratic= 0.91
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.02
Linear = 0.07
Quadratic= 0.55
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.57
Linear = 0.03
Quadratic= 0.87

45
50
55
60
65
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
ECM,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10 70:20 60:30
630
650
670
690
710
730
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
BW,kg
Week Postpartum
CON 80:10 70:20 60:30
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.76
Linear = 0.15
Quadratic= 0.80
Carry Over Period Common Diet Carry Over Period Common Diet
P values
CON vs. FAT = 0.02
Linear = 0.42
Quadratic= 0.61
4.3 kg

Caloric vs. Non-Caloric Effects of Fatty Acids
• Effect of specific fatty acids:
- Yield of milk and milk
components
- Maintenance of body condition
- Nutrient digestion
- Nutrient partitioning
- Reproduction
- Health

How to Make an Informed Decision on Whether to
Feed FA Supplements to Dairy Cows?
• Identify what you are trying to achieve, then design your nutritional program (including
FA supplementation) around those objectives
• Evaluate the effects of individual FA and commercial FA supplements:
- Production performance:
 Cows at different stages of lactation/levels of milk production
 Different diets
- Tangible factors not measured daily in the tank
 BW/BCS/Energy Balance
 Reproduction
• Economics of the marginal return (in milk, milk components, health and reproduction)
should drive the decision and be continually evaluated/considered

16:0; 18:0; 18:1; 18:2; 18:3
Milk
Fat / Lactose
MAMMAR
Y GLAND
RUMEN
BH of UFA
Shifts in BH pathways
Effects on microbial populations
Effects of NDF/Starch
Effects on NDF/Starch Kd
LIVER
Use of FA for
other purposes
- Energy &/or glucose sparing
- Delivery of n-3 + n-6 FA
SMALL
INTESTINEEffects on DMI
FA Digestibility
MFD Intermediates
 milk fat synthesis
 BW/BCS
Balance of 18-C + de novo FA
Direct effect of specific FA
ADIPOSEADIPOSE
Use of supplemental FA in the fresh period should be considered; new research suggests that FA supplementation
increases performance in fresh cows
Profile of supplemental FA key in determining production responses and energy partitioning
1) C16:0 drives increases in milk fat yield and ECM partially due to a decrease in BW
2) C16:0 and C18:1 drives increases in milk yield and ECM without changing BW loss compared to non-supplemental
diet
3) Feeding FA supplements in the fresh period has carryover effects on early lactation
Recommendation: consider use of FA supplements containing C16:0 and C18:1
Important to consider possible effects of FA in the rumen (BH/MFD/NDFd), in the small intestine (DMI/digestibility), in
the mammary gland (increased incorporation/substitution), and energy partitioning between tissues
Digestibility appears to be a good indicator of inclusion or not of a FA in a supplement, assuming that this source of FA
does not markedly affect DMI
Presented research focusing on specific FA and how dairy cows respond differently to combinations of FA
Our understanding of FA digestion and metabolism in dairy cows has advanced significantly in the last few decades
Opportunity and challenge will be to continue to improve our understanding of how and which FA affect nutrient
digestion, energy partitioning, and milk synthesis in lactating dairy cows, applying this knowledge in the feeding and
management of todays high producing dairy cows

Acknowledgements

allock@msu.edu
http://dairynutrition.msu.edu
https://www.facebook.com/MSUDairyNutritionProgram

9. Thursday Presentations prof adam lock michigan state uni - supplemental fat - which, when and for what outcome

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 9. Thursday Presentations prof adam lock michigan state uni - supplemental fat - which, when and for what outcome

Similar to 9. Thursday Presentations prof adam lock michigan state uni - supplemental fat - which, when and for what outcome (20)

More from 2damcreative

More from 2damcreative (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

9. Thursday Presentations prof adam lock michigan state uni - supplemental fat - which, when and for what outcome