Regression Models for Milk Yield and Intake in Dairy Ration Optimization: An Observational Study at the Chichak-Sud Commercial Dairy Farm

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Department of Information Technologies, Azerbaijan State Agricultural University, Ganja, Azerbaijan.
Abstract
Predictive models may help dairy farms allocate feed, but their use requires biological and economic checks. This observational study compared five regression approaches and linked animal-level predictions to a linear programming scenario for ration formulation. The dataset comprised 2,911 cow-month records from 82 Holstein cows at a commercial farm in Azerbaijan during 2023–2025. Predictors described body size, lactation stage, parity, body condition and dietary nutrient composition. Ordinary least squares, ridge, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, elastic net and second-degree polynomial regression were compared using training and test sets separated by cow. Elastic net had the lowest reported test errors: root mean squared errors of 2.36 liters per day for milk yield and 1.18 kilograms of dry matter per day for intake, with coefficients of determination of 0.84 and 0.80, respectively. The optimization summary reported feed costs of 5.07 and 4.39 Azerbaijani manat per cow per day for standard and candidate rations, with predicted milk volumes of 22.8 and 22.6 liters per day. However, a consistency audit found that the reported ingredient quantities and composition matrix did not reproduce the ration nutrient totals. The economic estimates therefore remain provisional. The framework supports further evaluation of ration decisions; reconciliation of the input matrices, additional nonlinear and seasonal comparisons, milk-composition data, external validation and a controlled feeding trial are required before implementation.
Keywords
Subjects

1.   Bach, A., Terré, M. and Vidal, M. 2020. Symposium review: Decomposing efficiency of milk production and maximizing profit. J. Dairy Sci., 103(6): 5709-5725. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2019-17304
2.   Bellingeri, A., Gallo, A., Liang, D., Masoero, F. and Cabrera, V. E. 2020. Development of a linear programming model for the optimal allocation of nutritional resources in a dairy herd. J. Dairy Sci., 103(11): 10898-10916. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2020-18157
3.   Campos, L. M., Ringer, H., Chung, M. and Hanigan, M. D. 2023. Application of a mathematical framework for the optimization of precision-fed dairy cattle diets. Animal, 17(Suppl. 5): 101001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2023.101001
4.   Efron, B. and Tibshirani, R. J. 1993. An introduction to the bootstrap. Chapman and Hall, New York, USA.
5.   Ferguson, J. D., Galligan, D. T. and Thomsen, N. 1994. Principal descriptors of body condition score in Holstein cows. J. Dairy Sci., 77(9): 2695-2703. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(94)77212-X
6.   Ghavi Hossein-Zadeh, N. 2014. Comparison of non-linear models to describe the lactation curves of milk yield and composition in Iranian Holsteins. J. Agric. Sci., 152(2): 309–324. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859613000415
7.   National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle. 8th revised edition. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA. https://doi.org/10.17226/25806
8.   National Research Council. 2001. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle. 7th revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA. https://doi.org/10.17226/9825
9.   Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M. and Duchesnay, E. 2011. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. J. Mach. Learn. Res., 12: 2825–2830.
10.  State Statistical Committee of the Republic of Azerbaijan. 2025. The agriculture of Azerbaijan 2025. Statistical publication. SSC, Baku, Azerbaijan. https://www.stat.gov.az/menu/6/statistical_yearbooks/source/agriculture_2025.pdf
11.  State Statistical Committee of the Republic of Azerbaijan. 2026. Social and economic development of Azerbaijan: January–December 2025. Report No. 12, 19 January 2026. SSC, Baku, Azerbaijan. https://stat.gov.az/news/source/doklad_2025-12.pdf
12.  Tekerli, M., Akinci, Z., Dogan, I. and Akcan, A. 2000. Factors affecting the shape of lactation curves of Holstein cows from the Balikesir Province of Turkey. J. Dairy Sci., 83(6): 1381-1386. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(00)75006-5
13.  Tibshirani, R. 1996. Regression shrinkage and selection via the LASSO. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B, 58(1): 267-288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1996.tb02080.x
14.  Tozer, P. R. and Stokes, J. R. 2001. A multi-objective programming approach to feed ration balancing and nutrient management. Agric. Syst., 67(3): 201-215. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-521X(00)00056-1
15.  Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., Haberland, M., Reddy, T., Cournapeau, D., Burovski, E., Peterson, P., Weckesser, W., Bright, J., van der Walt, S. J., Brett, M., Wilson, J., Millman, K. J., Mayorov, N., Nelson, A. R. J., Jones, E., Kern, R., Larson, E., Carey, C. J., Polat, İ., Feng, Y., Moore, E. W., VanderPlas, J., Laxalde, D., Perktold, J., Cimrman, R., Henriksen, I., Quintero, E. A., Harris, C. R., Archibald, A. M., Ribeiro, A. H., Pedregosa, F., van Mulbregt, P. and SciPy 1.0 Contributors. 2020. SciPy 1.0: Fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python. Nat. Methods, 17(3): 261–272. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2
16.  Wood, P. D. P. 1967. Algebraic model of the lactation curve in cattle. Nature, 216: 164-165. https://doi.org/10.1038/216164a0
17.  Zou, H. and Hastie, T. 2005. Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B, 67(2): 301-320. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9868.2005.00503.x

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 24 October 2026