Skip to main content
. 2023 May 16;21(5):e07993. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7993

Table I.13.

Association between milk yield and lying behaviour; ↑/↓ = higher/lower (p < 0.05), ns = not significant

Country System n 1 ø Milk yield Variable Analysis 2 Effect Reference
CAN Cubicle 44 34.0–37.0 4 Lying time (h/day) MA ns Morabito et al. (2017)
CAN Cubicle (AMS 3 ) 13 35.1 ± 10.0 4 Lying time (h/day) MA Deming et al. (2013)
Lying bout duration MA
CAN Cubicle 41 33.7 ± 2.8 4 Lying time (h/day) MA ns King et al. (2016)
Lying bout duration MA ns
CAN Cubicle 141 ≥ 7,000 5 Lying time (h/day) MA Solano et al. (2016)
Lying bout duration MA ns
Number of lying bouts/day MA ns
USA (CA) Cubicle 39 na Lying bout duration MA ns Ito et al. (2014)
USA Cubicle 16 42.0 ± 10.5 4 Lying time (h/d) MA ns Gomez and Cook (2010)
Lying bout duration MA ns
Number of lying bouts/day MA ns
AT Various 246 5,700 ± 1425 6 Abnormal rising up/severe difficulty (%) MA Schenkenfelder and Winckler (2021)
Resting on carpus while rising up (%) MA
1

Number of farms.

2

Statistical analysis: MA = multivariable analysis (in the case of univariable pre‐selection of factors only effects of the final models were considered).

3

Automatic milking system.

4

Mean ± standard deviation per cow*day (kg).

5

Mean per cow*year (kg).

6

Mean ± standard deviation of milk delivered per cow*year, calculated based on an extended sample within the study.