doi: 10.15389/agrobiology.2016.2.247rus

UDC 636.2:591.1:57.04(470.64)



M.B. Ulimbashev, Zh.T. Alagirova

V.M. Kokov Kabardino-Balkarian State Agrarian University,
1 v, prosp. V.I. Lenina, Nal’chic, Kabardino-Bal-karian Republic, 360030 Russia,

Received January 18, 2016


Use of artificial insemination technologies and a purebred animal international trading led to global spreading commercial American and West-European breeds, which possess high productivity potential, but are very demanding to the feed quality, stuff experience and zoohygiene conditions. The highest genetic potential is characteristic of the Holstein cattle from the USA and Canada. Wide use of the Holstein breed in the Russian Federation resulted in rise of dairy productivity and improvement of dairy cattle technological parameters, but some problems of imported animals’ health and adaptation have been revealed. The high dairy productivity inevitably leads to the weakening immunity, decreased fertility and less stress resistance. Disease susceptibility, in its turn, also ultimately decreases the productivity, fertility and the time of farming use in highly-productive cows. Nowadays a great importance is given to breeding for production traits, while the lack of resistance to the external factors as a cause of diseases and reduced performance is still remaining less studied. Our main aim was to study the adaptive abilities of the Holstein cattle of Russian and the US origin which were moved to Kabardino-Balkarian Republic in comparison with Black-motley animals long reared under the local conditions of Kabardino-Balkaria. The investigations were carried out on the farms of a pre-mountain zone (Agro-Concern Golden Kolos LLC, Soyuz-Agro LLC). The heifers were divided into 3 groups, 30 animals per each, with regard to age, physiological state, origin and productivity. The Black-motley heifers were the control group, the Russian Holstein heifers were the group 1, and the American Holstein heifers were the group 2. In the groups we studied blood bactericidal, lysozyme, complement and phagocyte activity. The dairy production was estimated monthly during the first two lactations. Fat and protein levels in milk, and cow weight were recorded, and the milkiness index was calculated. The superiority of Black-motley heifers and first-calf cows in blood bactericidal activity (by 5.7-8.3 %, Р > 0.999, and 5.4-7.5 %, Р > 0.999, respectively), blood lysozyme activity (by 2.2-3.1 %, Р > 0.999, and 1.8-4.5 %, Р > 0.999, respectively), blood complement activity (by 0.4-0.6 %, Р > 0.95-0.99, and 3.2-5.0 %, Р > 0.99-0.999) was found, whereas the Russian and American Holsteins were shown to possess more intensive phagocytosis (i.e., 4.9-7.7 % higher in heifers, Р > 0.99-0.999, and 2.6-3.8 % higher in first-calf cows, Р > 0.95-0.99). There was a true milk yield priority of 2227 kg (Р > 0.999) in the first lactation and 2465 kg (Р > 0.999) in the second lactation in the Holsteins originated from the US when compared to domestic Black-motley cows of the same age. However, the Black-motley cows surpassed the Holstein coevals of foreign origin due to higher milk fat and protein. Note, for the whole observation in all breeds studied the milk fat and protein were higher compared to the breed standards. Though milk quality was higher in the Black-motley cows, the total milk fat and protein yield was higher in the Holsteins, so that during the first lactation the difference in milk fat and protein output between the first-calf cows averaged 47.9-74.8 kg (P > 0.999) and 41.0-63.3 kg (P > 0.999), respectively, and the same trend was found in the second lactation. The maximum milking index was observed in Holstein cows of the US breeding which were superior to Black-motley cows and Russian Holstiens of the same age on average by 366-373 kg (P > 0.999) and 135-141 kg (P > 0.95), respectively. Thus Holstein cows bred in Russia and the US are quite successfully adapted to the conditions of Kabardino-Balkaria.

Keywords: Black-motley cattle, selection, adaptation, dairy productivity.


Full article (Rus)

Full text (Eng)



  1. Rodionov G.V., Rykhlik A.N. Zootekhniya, 1991, 8: 7-10 (in Russ.).
  2. Turbina I.S. Kharakteristika bykov-proizvoditelei po razlichnym geneticheskim markeram. Kanidatskaya disertatsiya [Characterization of bull sires on different genetic markers PhD Thesis (in Russ.)]. Moscow, 2006.
  3. Beever D.E. The impact of controlled nutrition during the dry period on dairy cow health, fertility and performance. Anim. Reprod. Sci., 2006, 96: 212-226 CrossRef
  4. García-Ispierto I.,  López-Gatius F., Santolaria P., Yániz J.L., Nogareda C., López-Béjar M. Factors affecting the fertility of high producing dairy herds in northeastern Spain. Theriogenology, 2007, 67: 632-638 CrossRef
  5. López-Gatius F. Factors of a noninfectious nature affecting fertility after artificial insemination in lactating dairy cows: a review. Theriogenology, 2012, 77: 1029-1041 CrossRef
  6. McNamara J.P., Shields S.L. Reproduction during lactation of dairy cattle: Integrating nutritional aspects of reproductive control in a systems research approach. Animal Frontiers, 2013, 3(4): 76-83 CrossRef
  7. Dobson H., Smith R.F., Royal M.D., Knight C.H., Sheldon I.M. The high producing dairy cow and its reproductive performance. Reprod. Domest. Anim., 2007, 42(2): 17-23 CrossRef
  8. Inskeep E.K., Dailey R.A. Embryonic death in cattle. Vet. Clin. Food Anim., 2005, 21: 437-461 CrossRef
  9. Jamrozik J., Fatehi J., Kistemaker G.J., Schaeffer L.R. Estimates of genetic parameters for Canadian Holstein female reproduction traits. J. Dairy Sci., 2005, 88: 2199-2208 CrossRef
  10. LeBlanc S. Using DHI records on-farm to evaluate reproductive performance. Adv. Dairy Technol., 2005, 17: 319-330.
  11. Chagas L.M., Bass J.J., Blache D., Burke C.R., Kay J.K. Invited review: New perspectives on the roles of nutrition and metabolic priorities in the subfertility of high-producing dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci., 2007, 90: 4022-4032 CrossRef
  12. Diskin M.G., Morris D.G. Embryonic and early foetal losses in cattle and other ruminants. Reprod. Domest. Anim., 2008, 43: 260-267 CrossRef
  13. Morris D., Diskin M. Effect of progesterone on embryo survival. Animal, 2008, 8: 1112-1119 CrossRef
  14. Chapinal N., Carson M.E., LeBlanc S.J., Leslie K.E., Godden S., Capel M., Santos J.E.P., Overton M.W., Duffield T.F. The association of serum metabolites in the transition period with milk production and early-lactation reproductive performance. J. Dairy Sci., 2012, 95: 1301-1309 CrossRef
  15. Thatcher W.W., Thatcher W.W., Santos J.E.P., Staples C.R. Dietary manipulations to improve embryonic survival in cattle. Theriogenology, 2012, 76: 1619-1631 CrossRef
  16. Eremina M.A., Ezdakova I.Yu. Zootekhniya, 2013, 10: 25-26 (in Russ.).
  17. Morozova O.V. Osobennosti populyatsionnykh protsessov pri golshtinizatsii krupnogo rogatogo skota v Krasnoyarskom krae. Doktorskaya dissertatsiya [Population processes in cattle of Krasniyarsk region crossed with Holstines. DSc Thesis (in Russ.)]. Krasnoyarsk, 2000.
  18. McNamara J.P. Integrating nutritional, genetic and reproductive management in early lactation dairy cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 2012, 90: 1846-1854.
  19. Gus'kova S.V., Turbina I.S., Eskin G.V., Kombarova N.A. Molochnoe i myasnoe skotovodstvo, 2014, 3: 10-14.
  20. Kozyrev S.G. Fiziologicheskie mekhanizmy sovershenstvovaniya produktivnykh kachestv golshtinizirovannogo skota cherno-pestroi porody v usloviyakh Tsentral'nogo Predkavkaz'ya. Avtoreferat doktorskoi dissertatsii [Physiological aspects in improving productivity and performace of Holstein Blck-and-White cattle reared in the central part of the Big Caucasus foothill. DSc Thesis (in Russ.)]. Moscow, 2010.
  21. Sudarev N.P., Sharkaeva G.A., Abylkasymov D., Prokudina O.P., Kuznetsova Yu.S. Zootekhniya, 2015, 2: 7-8 (in Russ.).
  22. Rauw W.M. Resource allocation theory applied to farm animals. CAB International, 2009.
  23. Zink V., Lassen J., Stipkova V. Genetic parameters for female fertility and milk production traits in first-parity Czech Holstein cows. Czech J. Anim. Sci., 2012, 57: 108-114.
  24. Miglior F., Muir B.L., Doormaal Van B.J. Selection indices in Holstein cattle of various countries. J. Dairy Sci., 2005, 88: 1255-1263 CrossRef 
  25. Getokov O.O. Biologicheskie osobennosti i produktivnye kachestva golshtinizirovannogo skota Kabardino-Balkarii. Avtoreferat doktorskoi dissertatsii [Biological and production traits of Hostein Kabardinian cattle. DSc Thesis (in Russ.)]. Lesnye Polyany, 2000.
  26. Shevkhuzhev A.F., Ulimbashev M.B. Molochnoe skotovodstvo Severnogo Kavkaza: monografiya [Diary cattle farming in the North Caucasus - a monograph (in Russ.)] Moscow, 2013.
  27. Bukharin O.V., Sozykin V.L. V sbornike: Faktory estestvennogo immuniteta [In: Factors of natural immunity (in Russ.)]. Orenburg, 1979: 43-45.
  28. Chumachenko V.E., Vysotskii A.M., Serdyuk N.A., Chumachenko V.V. Opredelenie estestvennoi rezistentnosti i obmena veshchestv u sel'skokhozyaistvennykh zhivotnykh [Evaluation of natural resistance and metabolism in farm animals (in Russ.)]. Kiev, 1990.
  29. Kugenev P.V., Barabanshchikov N.V. Praktikum po molochnomu delu [Dairy cattle farming: a workshop (in Russ.)]. Moscow, 1988.
  30. Kalashnikov A.P., Fisinin V.I., Kleimenov N.I. Normy i ratsiony kormleniya sel'skokhozyaistvennykh zhivotnykh: spravochnoe posobie [Feeding standards and rations for farm animals: a handbook (in Russ.)]. Moscow, 2003.
  31. Plokhinskii N.A. Rukovodstvo po biometrii dlya zootekhnikov [Guide to biometrics for zootechnicians (in Russ.)]. Moscow, 1969.