Int J Biometeorol (2012) 56:287295 DOI 10.

1007/s00484-011-0432-7

ORIGINAL PAPER

Misting and fan cooling of the rest area in a dairy barn

Ferdinando Calegari & Luigi Calamari & Ermes Frazzi

Received: 18 January 2011 / Revised: 25 March 2011 / Accepted: 26 March 2011 / Published online: 15 April 2011 # ISB 2011

Abstract This summer study aimed to evaluate the effect on dairy cows, kept in a free stall barn equipped with fans and sprinklers in the feeding area, of the delivery rate of misters in a cooling system in rest areas with different bedding materials. Thirty cows were divided into two homogenous groups according to milk yield and kept in two pens: one had beds with sand (SAMM) while the other had straw (STLM). Each pen was equipped with 2 fans ( 70 cm, 0.50 kW) and 2 misters (delivery rate of 11.2 and 22.5 L/h in STLM and SAMM, respectively) in the rest area. Microclimatic parameters, rectal temperature (RT), breathing rate (BR), milk yield, and some milk traits were recorded. Behavioural routines of the cows (standing and lying) were also continuously recorded during the hotter days. During the trial, two mildmoderate heat waves were observed. During these hotter periods, the daily maximum temperature recorded in the rest areas was 28.9 in SAMM and 31.2 in STLM, and the daily maximum THI was 78.2 in SAMM and 81.5 in STLM. In these periods, the cows in SAMM compared with those in STLM showed lower BR (P <0.05) and greater rest time (10.2 and 7.8 h/day in SAMM and STLM, respectively). The RT did not differ (38.890.29 and 38.880.33C in STLM and SAMM r, espectively). In conclusion, our research suggests that the cooling system using fans plus misters with mild wetting in
F. Calegari (*) : E. Frazzi Sez. Ingegneria Agro-Ambientale Facolt di Agraria, Universit Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Piacenza, Italy e-mail: ferdinando.calegari@unicatt.it L. Calamari Istituto di Zootecnica Facolt di Agraria, Universit Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Piacenza, Italy

rest areas with sand as bedding materials reduces heat stress and improves cow comfort. Keywords Animal housing . Dairy equipment . Cooling system . Bedding

Introduction Practical experience and scientific research have amply demonstrated the negative effects of heat stress on the welfare and the performance of dairy cows, particularly in high yielding animals (Berman 1991). Prolonged exposure to high ambient temperature has a negative impact on the physiological balance of the dairy cows (Bertoni 1998), through reduction of feed intake, increased nutritional requirements and depressed productive and reproductive efficiency (Ronchi et al. 1997; Wolfenson et al. 2000; Kadzere et al. 2002). Milk composition (Bernabucci and Calamari 1998) and milk cheesemaking properties (Calamari and Mariani 1998) are also negatively affected by heat stress. To limit the adverse effects of high ambient temperature, there are several techniques of physical modification of the barn environment, some passive and some active. The first type is essentially concerned with a good thermal insulation of the roof of the barn and with the efficient management of the natural ventilation. These systems are often insufficient in relieving the heat stress on the animals. Among the second type, the system that has given the best results in the last few years is without doubt cooling by surface, namely the direct wetting of the animal with water using sprinklers followed by strong forced ventilation. This allows the body surface of the animal to be subjected to a long and intense evaporation with the consequent exportation of high quantities of latent heat (Flamenbaum et al. 1986; Gebremedhin

288

Int J Biometeorol (2012) 56:287295

and Wu 2000). Many tests carried out in different countries have demonstrated the efficiency of this treatment especially when the body surface of the animal is abundantly wetted and a high evaporation rate is maintained (Bickert and Stowell 1994; Calegari et al. 2005; Frazzi et al. 2002; Lin et al. 1998; Strickland et al. 1989; Turner et al. 1992). The cooling by surface is relatively simple to carry out in both the feeding area and the collecting area of the milking parlour, where the wetting of the floor has no significant negative consequences on the health of the animal, avoiding excess water from sprinklers that may increase the incidence of mastitis (Flamenbaum et al. 1986). Conversely, this treatment does not seem adequate in the rest area, because the high humidity of the bedding could increase the bacteria load of the lying surface; this is related to the bacterial counts of the teats and to the risk of environmental mastitis in relation to the type of bedding (De Palo et al. 2006). Several tests have demonstrated that the cooling of the feeding area alone does not allow the total elimination of the consequences of stress, as reviewed by Armstrong (2000). The animals remain standing longer in the feeding area equipped with cooling system rather than the other areas of the barn, causing tiredness and discomfort (Frazzi et al. 2000; Calegari et al. 2000). Lin et al. (1998) also highlighted the importance of the cooling of the free stall area, but emphasising caution as far as different bedding is concerned. A more cautious approach should be adopted when organic bedding is used. Inorganic bedding seems to offer better prospects. Sand, being a material that is a high thermal conductor and chemically inert, guarantees a fresh and safe bed from the hygienic-sanitary point of view even if not perfectly dry. This is not possible to obtain with straw or other organic materials (Calegari et al. 2004; Rodenburg et al. 1994; Turner 1994; Visser 1994; Vokey et al. 2003). On sand bedding, the cows rest longer (Calamari et al. 2009) and on the whole demonstrate a better tolerance to heat stress (Calegari et al. 2004). The use of sand as bedding, given the physico-chemical characteristics of the material, could allow a type of cooling to be carried out in the rest area similar to that used in the feeding area. The aim of our trial was to evaluate the effect of the type of bedding material and cooling system in a free stall rest area comparing two systems: the first equipped with fans plus misters at high delivery rate in a pen with sand as bedding material, the second equipped with fans plus misters at low delivery rate in a pen with straw as bedding material.

940E; altitude 68 m asl) (Italy). In this barn, the Italian Friesian lactating cows were raised in pens (11.512 m hosting 15 cows each) with two row-free stalls, and with direct access to a large unshaded hard court paddock. The barn was equipped with a cooling system in the feeding area (3.2 m2 per cow), consisting of axial fans (one per pen) and sprinklers. The fans were placed over the feeding line. The airflow was directed in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the building. The fans placed above the feeding area ( 90 cm, 0.75 kW) had a maximum airflow rate of 22,500 m3/h. The fans were thermostatically controlled and were switched on at 25.5C. The air speed obtained in the feeding area with this system is shown in Table 1. In the feeding area, above the feed barrier, a polyethylene pipe (diameter 5 cm, with 4 sprinklers per pen, spaced at 230 cm) was placed (each sprinkler covered a distance of 3 m). These had a delivery rate of 4 L/min each, with a pressure of 150 kPa, with a continuous spray directed towards the feeding area, perpendicular to the airflow of the fans. The sprinklers were thermostatically controlled and were activated at 28C in an uneven way: 50 s of showering and ventilation followed by 5 min of ventilation alone (Fig. 1). Cows were fed total mixed ration once daily ad libitum at 0800 hours. The diet was formulated to meet the requirement calculated according to the NRC (2001). On average, the diet contained 35% DM basis of corn silage, 20% of grass and alfalfa hay and 44% of concentrate (containing mineral and vitamins). Furthermore, the diet was supplied on average with 200 g/day per cow of sodium bicarbonate. Diet had a energy content of 1.56 Mcal/kg DM and crude protein content of 15.7% on DM. Cows were milked twice daily (0330 and 1500 hours) and milk yield of each milking was recorded daily (ALPRO; DeLaval, Tumba, Sweden). The trial was carried out on 30 lactating cows, divided into two homogenous groups according to milk yield, calving number (2.461.39) and days in milk (117 45 day) and kept in two pens (11.5 x 12 m) with external hard court paddock in each (11.510 m). One pen had beds with sand bedding (SAMM) while the other had straw

Table 1 Air speed (m/s) measured longitudinally at 5 m distance from the fan in the feeding area Height from the floor (m) Lateral distance from the fan (m) 0 1 1.13 1.37 1.01 1.93 2 0.96 1.18 2.02 2.12 3 1.28 0.78 0.62 0.52

Materials and methods The trial was carried out in the experimental free stalls barn of the Azienda V. Tadini, located near Piacenza (4501N,

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

0.35 1.40 2.51 2.57

Int J Biometeorol (2012) 56:287295 Fig. 1 Layout of the two pens (SAMM free stall with sand and cooling system with mild misting in rest area; STLM free stall with straw and cooling system with light misting in rest area) inside the free stall barn where the cows were kept during the experiment
12.00 10.00

289

feed alley

free stall free stall alley

SAMM
11.50

sprinklers

paddock

feed driveway

fans

misters

STLM
sprinklers paddock

fans

misters

: Elecronic probes to measure microclimatic parameters

bedding (STLM). A type of straw-bedded pack was used as lying surface in the STLM pen. It was made of a mixture of straw and animal straw waste, which was soft and not slippery, unlike loose straw, and it was added twice a week with 2.5 kg per free stall. In the SAMM pen, a deep-bedded sand was used consisting of about 20 cm of fine sand (particle diameter 0.020.2 cm); the sand was added twice a week. Each experimental pen was equipped, in addition to one fan per pen in the feeding area, with 2 fans ( 70 cm, 0.50 kW, maximum airflow rate of 15,000 m3/h) positioned above the rest area, one per each row of the free stalls (Fig. 1). In the rest area, the air speed measured at 1 m height from the floor was an average of 0.5 m/s. In the rest area, a mister was placed in front of each fan. The misters were thermostatically controlled and were activated at a temperature of 27C and had a working time of 60 s every 2 min. The working time was increased by 5 s every 1C over 27C, while the resting time (without water emission) remained constant. The misters in the rest area with sand bedding had a delivery rate of 22.5 L/h (evaporative cooling and mild misting), while the misters in the rest area with straw bedding had a delivery rate of 11.2 L/h (evaporative cooling); both worked with a pressure of 750 kPa (the misters reaching the remote side of the stalls).

In the two experimental pens, microclimatic parameters were taken through electronic probes at animal height placed in different points and recorded hourly for the entire summer period (temperature and relative humidity). Furthermore, the air speed at different points of each pen was measured by manual probe (LSI, Milan, Italy). Individual representative milk samples were collected monthly during the morning and afternoon milking. Samples of the two milkings were pooled by cow and sampling date and analyzed for fat, protein, and lactose (Milkoscan FT6000; Foss Electric, Hillerd, Denmark) and somatic cell count (optofluorometric method using Fossomatic 5000; Foss Electric). Rectal temperature and breathing rate were measured weekly on cows in the feeding area before milking (1500 hours). For the measurement of the rectal temperature, a digital thermometer was used; the measurement was terminated when an acoustic signal was emitted by the digital thermometer and the probe was retracted from the rectum. The breathing rate of cows was registered counting flank movements during two 30-s cycles. Some normal behavioural routines of the cows (standing and lying in the different areas and animals in the feed bunk) were continuously observed from 28 July to 8 August, using a digital video camera on a revolving

290

Int J Biometeorol (2012) 56:287295

stand with a programmable intervalometer (one frame per second). The data were processed using the statistical program SAS (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). For data relative to the milk yield and physiological parameters (breathing and rectal temperature), the MIXED procedure was used including as fixed factors the treatment, time and time treatment interactions; the random variable was cows within treatment. For data concerning the behaviour, the GLM procedure was used including as fixed factors the treatment, time and time treatment interactions.

Results and discussion Microclimatic data of the trial are presented in Fig. 2. The daily maximum THI indicated that dairy cows were exposed to potential heat stress conditions for 101 days of the 109-day study. According to Armstrong (1994), heat stress of dairy cows is considered to be negligible when THI values are lower than 72. Index values higher than 72, 78 and 88 reflect the potential for mild, high and severe level of heat stress, respectively. Based on index values, the potential existed for dairy cows to suffer high heat stress for 50 d. During the trial, the higher extent of heat stress was seen in the last week of June and July and in the first two weeks of August. During these hotter periods, the daily minimum THI reached values near to the minimum value of the zone delimiting the mild heat stress, representing mildmoderate heat waves (Hahn et al. 1999). On these days, the cows always suffered mild or high heat stress during the day. The cooling system and the delivery rate of the misters in the rest area of the STLM were set to avoid the wetness
Fig. 2 Behavior of minimum daily THI (dashed line) and maximum daily THI (continuous line) observed inside the barn during the trial

of the straw. Conversely, the cooling system and the delivery rate adopted in the rest area of SAMM pen were set to slightly wet the sand during the hotter hours of the day. The values of rectal temperature and breathing rate confirm that the cows have suffered only mildmoderate heat stress, also during the hotter periods. The rectal temperature always remained below the mean value of 39.0C at each weekly check. During the hotter periods (early August), the mean rectal temperature was 38.89 0.29C and 38.880.33C in the STLM and SAMM treatments, respectively. Values of rectal temperature higher than the normal range of dairy cows (38.338.7C) indicate mild heat stress and difficulty to maintain thermoregulation. This situation was observed only in the last week of July and in the first two weeks of August. A greater breathing rate was observed, according to the rectal temperature, during the last week of July and during the first two weeks of August (Table 2). Hahn et al. (1999), suggests a 21C threshold for increased respiration rate. These results confirm that the heat stress was only mildmoderate. The values of rectal temperature were not significantly different between the two groups. Conversely, a greater breathing rate (P <0.05) was observed in STLM animals compared to SAMM animals during the hotter periods (Table 2). To maintain body temperature within the normal range (38.338.7C), cattle need to increase heat loss and reduce the endogenous heat production. These results seem to indicate more favourable conditions for heat dissipation in the pens with sand and mild misting in the rest area compared to pens with straw and light misting in the rest area. The higher delivery rate of the misters in the SAMM versus the STLM pen allows better microclimatic conditions in the rest area of the former during the hotter

Int J Biometeorol (2012) 56:287295 Table 2 Average breathing rate an rectal temperature (Lsmeans and SEM) of the cows kept in the two pens (SAMM free stall with sand and cooling system with moderate misting in rest area; STLM free stall with straw and cooling system with light misting in rest area) during the trial Breathing rate (n/min) Date 11 Jun 17 Jun 30 Jun 05 Jul 13 Jul 29 Jul 03 Aug 10 Aug 17 Aug 03 Sep 10 Sep 22 Sep SAMM 54.9 54.8 55.8 60.4 57.5 56.4** 67.7* 66.8 67.4 60.5** 57.2 58.9 2.34 2.43 2.52 2.52 2.43 2.63 2.43 2.43 2.63 2.34 2.34 2.43 STLM 57.8 53.2 58.1 56.8 55.9 63.1** 72.5* 66.9 67.5 68.7** 57.1 62.3 2.25 2.32 2.18 2.18 2.32 2.18 2.18 2.18 2.18 2.32 2.32 2.40 Rectal temperature (C) SAMM 38.65 38.67 38.57 38.72 38.67 38.67 38.88 38.77 38.88 38.66 38.57 38.80 0.075 0.077 0.080 0.080 0.087 0.080 0.077 0.077 0.083 0.075 0.075 0.077 STLM 38.73 38.61 38.70 38.69 38.67 38.73 38.89 38.88 38.81 38.74 38.53 38.78

291

0.072 0.074 0.070 0.070 0.074 0.070 0.070 0.070 0.070 0.074 0.074 0.072

*P <0.1, **P <0.05

periods (Fig. 3). During the hotter hours of the day (afternoon hours), the air temperature was lower in the SAMM compared with the STLM and the relative humidity was only slightly higher in the former (Fig. 3). Consequently, the THI was lower in the SAMM compared with the STLM, with average values in the afternoon hours (1400 to 1800 hours) during these hotter periods of 77.2 in the SAMM and 79.8 in the STLM. Furthermore, it could also be hypothesised that the free stall with wetted sand as bedding material improved heat loss during hot conditions, mainly by conduction, because this material is characterised by having a higher thermal conductance than straw. The greater heat dissipation reduces the heat dissipation through respiratory heat loss that was assumed to act as a stressor when exceeding 50% of the maximal capacity (Berman 2006). The frequency of lying was higher during the night, after the morning milking and before the feed distribution, and stall occupancy was greater (P <0.05) in the
Fig. 3 Hourly average temperatures (dashed line) and relative humidity (continuous line) measured inside the two pens [SAMM (triangles): free stall with sand and cooling system with mild misting in rest area; STLM (circles): free stall with straw and cooling system with light misting in rest area] during hotter days (29, 30 June; 21, 22, 23 July; 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 11 August)
35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 0 1 2 3

wet sand pen (Fig. 4). Grant and Albright (2001) suggest that the cows require approximately 10 h/day lying or resting time. Recognized benefits of adequate resting time (up to 14 h/day for the most productive cows) include reduced stress on feet, reduced lameness, increased feeding activity, increased rumination activity and greater overall cow health (Grant 2006). Matzke (2003) indicates that one additional hour lying time is associated with 1 kg/ cow per day more milk. In the current study, during the hotter period, the time spent lying was 10.2 and 7.8 h in SAMM and STLM cows, respectively (P <0.05). These results indicate that in free stalls bedded with straw, despite the pen being equipped with an evaporative cooling system, the hot conditions have consistently reduced the time spent lying, below the minimum acceptable time. Conversely, free stalls with sand combined with fans plus mild misting in the rest area have allowed the maintenance of an acceptable lying time during hot conditions (Fig. 4).
Temperature STLM Relative humidity STLM Temperature SAMM Relative humidity SAMM

100 95

85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Hours

Relative humidity (%)

90

Temperature (C)

292 Fig. 4 Hourly average of animals lying in the free stalls (as percentage of total cows in the pen) recorded during the days of a hotter period (28 July to 8 August 2004) recorded in the two pens (SAMM free stall with sand and cooling system with mild misting in the rest area; STLM free stall with straw and cooling system with light misting in the rest area). Values are least squares means and SEM (*P <0.05, **P <0.01)
100

Int J Biometeorol (2012) 56:287295

SAMM 90 80 70 STLM

Animals (%)

60 50 40 30 20 10 0

* *
1 2

* * * **
3 4 5 6 7 8

*
Hour

* *

* *

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

These results seem to indicate that during summer the sand bedding combined with a cooling system with fans and mild misting in the rest area is very useful to maintain an acceptable lying time in free stall. In our previous researches a greater utilization of the free stalls with sand as bedding material compared to mattress and straw was observed during spring (Calamari et al. 2009), and in particular during summer. In other studies a preference for materials other than sand was observed (Shim et al., 1998; Tucker et al. 2000). Manninen et al. (2002) found that cows avoided sand and preferred both straw and soft rubber mat, both in winter and summer. A greater percentage (P<0.05) of cows lying outside in the paddock during the night of the hotter periods was observed in STLM compared with SAMM (Fig. 5). In SAMM the percentage of cows lying in the external paddock during the night was always lower than 50% (on average 27.8%); conversely in STLM the percentage often greater than 50% (on average 39.9%). The time spent outdoor during the night allows the cows to benefit the
Fig. 5 Hourly average of animals in the external paddock (as percentage of total cows in the pen) recorded during the days of a hotter period riod (28 July to 8 August 2004) recorded in the two pens (SAMM free stall with sand and cooling system with mild misting in the rest area; STLM free stall with straw and cooling system with light misting in the rest area). Values are least squares means and SEM (*P <0.05, **P <0.01)
90 80 70

outside microclimatic conditions, that are more favourable than the indoor conditions (in the hottest period the outdoor minimum temperature was 18.8C, and the indoor was 21.3C). This benefit was mainly exploited by the STLM cows; conversely, the majority of the SAMM cows preferred the indoor conditions also during the night, indicating a better comfort of this rest area. The cows kept in the pen with straw and with a cooling system with fans and light misting (STLM) compared with the SAMM cows spent more time standing during the day in the different areas of the barn (mainly in the feeding alley, excluding feeding cows, where the cooling by surface was installed) (Fig. 6) . The increase of this normal behaviour, because standing improves heat dissipation, is a consequence of the greater difficulties in maintaining thermal balance of the STLM compared with the SAMM cows. Hillman et al. (2005) observed that, with or without free stall spray cooling, cows stood and sought cooling when their core body temperatures reached 38.9C.

SAMM

STLM

Animals (%)

60 50 40 30 20 10 0

** **
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

** *
Hours

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Int J Biometeorol (2012) 56:287295 Fig. 6 Hourly average of animals standing (except animals in the feed bunk; as percentage of total cows in the pen) recorded during the days of a hotter period (28 July to 8 August 2004) recorded in the two pens (SAMM free stall with sand and cooling system with mild misting in the rest area; STLM free stall with straw and cooling system with light misting in the rest area). Values are least squares means and SEM (*P < 0.05, **P <0.01)
90
SAMM STLM

293

80 70

Animals (%)

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5

** * *
6 7 8

* * *
Hours

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

The data in Table 3 indicate an average difference in production in the 16 weeks of the experiment (from June to September) of 1.02 kg of milk per animal per day in favour of the sanded area (not significant). If this type of contrast is limited to the hottest period (from 28 July to 8 August) this difference rises to 1.4 kg/day per animal. These not significant results, despite the relatively cool summer with temperatures below the seasonal average, but show the positive effect of the SAAM system. This was seen through higher milk production and an increase in the welfare of the animal in the areas in which this material was present and where cooling through mild misting in the rest area had also been practiced.
Table 3 Average weekly milk yield trend (kg/day) recorded during the trial in the two pens (SAMM free stall with sand and cooling system with moderate misting in the rest area; STLM free stall with straw and cooling system with light misting in the rest area) week 31 May 6 Jun 7 Jun 13 Jun 14 Jun 20 Jun 21 Jun 27 Jun 28 Jun 4 Jul 5 Jul 11 Jul 12 Jul 18 Jul 19 Jul 25 Jul 26 Jul 1Aug 2 Aug 8 Aug 23 Aug 29 Aug 24 Aug 29 Aug 30 Aug 5 Sep 6 Sep 12 Sep 13 Sep 19 Sep 20 Sep 26 Sep SAMM 33.8 33.8 33.6 34.7 31.9 32.8 31.8 32.8 32.6 31.9 31.7 30.4 31.2 30.3 29.5 28.2 SE 1.68 1.66 1.65 1.74 1.62 1.62 1.61 1.61 1.62 1.60 1.66 1.60 1.74 1.63 1.60 1.67 STLM 34.0 33.8 33.5 32.7 32.4 30.9 30.5 30.8 31.2 30.7 30.3 28.9 31.1 28.9 28.5 26.5 SE 1.48 1.45 1.44 1.55 1.44 1.43 1.42 1.42 1.44 1.40 1.46 1.41 1.61 1.44 1.42 1.52

Fat and protein content of milk were in the normal range and were not affected by treatments. During the hotter periods, milk fat content was 3.610.53 and 3.66 0.59% in STLM and SAMM, respectively; protein content was 3.310.20 and 3.310.26%, and lactose was 5.130.11 and 5.100.20% in STLM and SAMM, respectively. A time effect was observed only for protein content. High humidity of the bedding could increase the bacteria load of the lying surface, increasing the risk of environmental mastitis in relation to the type of bedding (De Palo et al. 2006). During the hotter period, the somatic cell count increased in both treatments, without significant interaction between treatments and time. The somatic cell count was only numerically greater in SAMM compared with STLM [on average 5.31 and 5.11 log(n/ml) respectively; not significant]. The incidence of clinical mastitis was also low during the summer. There were two more cases of clinical mastitis (not significant) in the sanded areas; Control of environmental mastitis depends on reducing exposure of the teat end to environmental pathogens through maintenance of dry, clean bedding material in rest areas and diligent premilking udder preparation (Smith and Hogan 1993). Rates of teat-end contamination and clinical mastitis have been correlated to bacterial loads in bedding (Hogan et al. 1989; Zdanowicz et al. 2004), and use of inorganic bedding, such as sand, is recommended as an effective means of environmental sanitation and mastitis prevention (National Mastitis Council 1999). Our results obtained with an inorganic free stall surface and mild misting in the rest area did not seem to impact negatively on udder health. Sand can also create problems for equipment used for the removal and management of manure (scrapers, pumps); however, these difficulties can be overcome by using appropriate devices.

294

Int J Biometeorol (2012) 56:287295 bedding in the summer. In: Proceedings of the 2004 CIGR International Conference, Paper 20-155A, CD-ROM of CIGR, 1114 October, Beijing, China Calegari F, Frazzi E, Calamari L (2005) Productive response of dairy cows raised in a cooling system barn located in the Po Valley. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Livestock Environment Symposium, 1820 May, Beijing, China, ASAE, pp 115121 De Palo P, Tateo A, Zezza F, Corrente M, Centoducati P (2006) Influence of free-stall flooring on comfort and hygiene of dairy cows during warm climatic conditions. J Dairy Sci 89:4583 4595 Flamenbaum I, Wolfenson D, Mamen M, Berman A (1986) Cooling dairy cattle by a combination of sprinkling and forced ventilation and its implementation in the shelter system. J Dairy Sci 69:31403147 Frazzi E, Calamari L, Calegari F (2000) Behavior of dairy cows with different barn cooling systems during the summer. Trans ASAE 43:387394 Frazzi E, Calamari L, Calegari F (2002) Productive response of dairy cows to different barn cooling systems. Trans ASAE 45:395405 Gebremedhin KG, Wu B (2000) A model of evaporative cooling of wet skin surface and fur layer. ASAE Paper, #004114. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI Grant RJ (2006) Incorporating dairy cow behavior into management tools. Penn State Dairy Cattle Nutrition Workshop, pp 3141 Grant RJ, Albright JL (2001) Effect of animal grouping on feeding behavior and intake of dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 84(E. Suppl): E156E163 Hahn GL, Mader TL, Gaughan JB et al. (1999) Heat waves and their impacts on feedlot cattle. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Society Biometeorology Congress, Sydney, Australia, pp 353357 Hillman PE, Lee CN, Willard ST (2005) Thermoregulatory responses associated with lying and standing in heat-stressed dairy cows. Trans ASAE 48:795801 Hogan JS, Smith KL, Hoblet KL, Todhunter DA, Schoenberger PS, Hueston WD, Pritchard GL, Bowman GL, Heider LE, Brockett BL, Conrad HR (1989) Bacterial counts in bedding materials used on nine commercial dairies. J Dairy Sci 72:250258 Kadzere CT, Murphy MR, Silanikove N, Maltz E (2002) Heat stress in lactating dairy cows: a review. Livest Prod Sci 77:5991 Lin JC, Moss BR, Koon JL, Flood CA, Smith RC, Cummins KA, Coleman DA (1998) Comparison of various fan, sprinkler, and mister systems in reducing heat stress in dairy cows. Appl Eng Agric 14:177182 Manninen E, De Passil AM, Rushen J, Norring M, Saloniemi H (2002) Preferences of dairy cows kept in unheated buildings for different kind of cubicle flooring. Appl Anim Behav Sci 75:281 292 Matzke WC (2003) Behavior of large groups of lactating dairy cattle housed in a free stall barn. MS thesis, University of Nebraska, Lincoln National Mastitis Council (1999) Laboratory handbook on bovine mastitis. National Mastitis Council, Madison NRC (2001) Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, 7th rev edn. NationalAcademy of Science, Washington, DC Rodenburg J, House HK, Anderson NG (1994) Free stall base and bedding materials: effect on cow comfort. In: Dairy Systems for the 21st Century, Proceedings of the Third International Dairy Housing Conference, 25 February, Orlando, Florida. ASAE, pp 159164 Ronchi B, Bernabucci U, Lacetera N, Nardone A (1997) Effetti dello stress termico sullo stato metabolico nutrizionale di vacche Frisone in lattazione. Zoot Nutr Anim 23:315 Shim EH, Shanks RD, McCoy GC (1998) Cow preference to filler materials in stall mattresses. J Dairy Sci 81:47

Conclusions In conclusion, at the end of the experiments we can affirm that the cooling system with fans and mild misting of the rest area with sand bedding (SAMM) compared with light misting of the rest area with straw bedding (STLM) seem to increase the comfort of the rest area during hot conditions, with the maintenance of an acceptable resting time, and a lower increase of idle standing time. During the night, there was a preference to lie in free stalls in the SAMM cows and to lie outside in the external paddock in the STLM cows, confirming a better comfort of SAMM during the cooler hours as well. In the SAMM system, the temperature and THI during the hotter hours of the day were lower than those observed with STLM, with a lower increase of breathing rate and a tendency to better maintenance of milk yield during the hotter periods. The mild delivery rate of the misters in the SAMM system did not seem to increase the risk of udder disease. Further research is needed to study the interaction between the cooling system of the rest area, the type of bedding and udder health.
Acknowledgement This research was supported by MIUR (Ministero dellIstruzione, dellUniversit e della Ricerca).

References
Armstrong DV (1994) Heat stress interaction with shade and cooling. J Dairy Sci 77:20442050 Armstrong DV (2000) Methods to Reduce Heat Stress for Dairy Cows. In: Proceedings of the 2000 Heart of America Dairy Management Conference, 2122 June, pp 1319 Berman A (1991) Reproductive responses under high temperature condition. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium Animal husbandry in warm climates, E.A.A.P. publication no. 55, pp 6067 Berman A (2006) Extending the potential of evaporative cooling for heat-stress relief. J Dairy Sci 89:38173825 Bernabucci U, Calamari L (1998) Effects of heat stress on bovine milk yield and composition. Zoot Nutr Anim 24:247258 Bertoni G (1998) Effects of heat stress on endocrine-metabolic and reproductive status of the dairy cows. Zoot Nutr Anim 24:273282 Bickert WG, Stowell RR (1994) Planning guide for free stall systems. Hoard, Fort Atkinson Calamari L, Mariani P (1998) Effects of the hot environment conditions on the main milk cheesemaking properties. Zoot Nutr Anim 24:259272 Calamari L, Calegari F, Stefanini L (2009) Effect of different free stall surfaces on behavioural, productive and metabolic parameters in dairy cows. Appl Anim Behav Sci 120:917 Calegari F Calamari L Frazzi E (2000) Effects of housing system on the behaviour and welfare of dairy cows during hot periods and under environment conditioning. In: Proceedings of the XIV Memorial CIGR World Congress 2000, Tsukuba, (Japan), pp 13171322 Calegari F, Frazzi E, Chiesa D (2004) Analysis of behavior and milk yield of cows raised in different climatization systems and

Int J Biometeorol (2012) 56:287295 Smith KL, Hogan JS (1993) Environmental mastitis. Vet Clin North Am 9:489498 Strickland JT, Bucklin RA, Nordstedt R, Beede DK, Bray DR (1989) Sprinkler and fan cooling systems for dairy cows in hot, humid climates. Appl Eng Agric 5:231236 Tucker CB, Weary DM, Fraser D et al. (2000) Bedding material for dairy cattle: preferences and effects on behaviour. In: Proceedings of the 34th International Congress of the ISAE 93 Turner LW, Chastain JP, Hemken RW, Gates RS, Crist WL (1992) Reducing heat stress in dairy cows through sprinkler and fan cooling. Appl Eng Agric 8:251256 Turner LW (1994) Geotexile pad design an use for dairy loafing and feeding area. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Dairy Housing Conference, January 2830, St. Louis, Missouri, ASAE, pp 3743

295 Visser RQ (1994) A comparison of bedding material for dairy cows. In: Dairy Systems for the 21st Century, Proceedings of the Third International Dairy Housing Conference, 25 February, Orlando, Florida. ASAE, pp186-191 Vokey FJ, Guard CL, Erb HN et al. (2003) Observation on flooring and stall surfaces for dairy cattle housed in a free-stall barn. In: Proceedings of the Fifth international dairy housing conference, Fort Worth, Texas, 2931 January, ASAE, pp165-170 Wolfenson D, Roth Z, Meidan R (2000) Impaired reproduction in heat-stressed cattle: basic and applied aspects. Anim Reprod Sci 6061:535547 Zdanowicz M, Shelford JA, Tucker CB, Weary DM, Von Keyserlingk MAG (2004) Bacterial populations on teat ends of dairy cows housed in free stalls and bedded with either sand or sawdust. J Dairy Sci 87:16941701