ESTRUS SYNCHRONIZATION AND CALVING EASE AMONG FIRST CALF HEIFERS. D.G. Landblom and J.L. Nelson

Similar documents
USE OF MONENSIN SODIUM IN RATIONS FED TO REPLACEMENT HEIFER CALVES DURING THE WINTERING PERIOD. J.L. Nelson and D.G. Landblom

ESTRUMATE, LUTALYSE AND SYNCHROMATE-B COMPARED FOR SYNCHRONIZING HEAT CYCLES IN BEEF HEIFERS BY D. G. Landblom and J. L. Nelson

Replacement Heifer Development. Changing Minds for the Change In Times Brian Huedepohl, DVM Veterinary Medical Center Williamsburg, Iowa

Proceedings, The Applied Reproductive Strategies in Beef Cattle Workshop, September 5-6, 2002, Manhattan, Kansas

Managing Reproduction in the Cowherd

Pennsylvania Premier Bred Heifer Program

Factors Affecting Calving Difficulty and the Influence of Pelvic Measurements on Calving Difficulty in Percentage Limousin Heifers

Purebred Cattle Series Synchronization of Estrus in Cattle

Beef Cattle Handbook

2017 Consignment Sale Guidelines

Reproductive Management Considerations for Herd Expansion CLIFF LAMB

difficulty encountered; usually 30 minutes or more required to deliver calf. 5. Caesarean birth - 6. Posterior presentation -

Estrous Synchronization Systems for Beef Heifers. Bob L. Larson, DVM, PhD, ACT

RELATIONSHIPS AMONG WEIGHTS AND CALVING PERFORMANCE OF HEIFERS IN A HERD OF UNSELECTED CATTLE

Boosting the Calf Crop Percentage in Your Beef Herd

Reproductive Management. of Beef Cattle Herds. Reproductive Management. Assessing Reproduction. Cow and Heifer Management

TIMELY INFORMATION Agriculture & Natural Resources

Dairy Industry Overview. Management Practices Critical Control Points Diseases

WHY DO DAIRY COWS HAVE REPRODUCTIVE PROBLEMS? HOW CAN WE SOLVE THOSE REPRODUCTIVE PROBLEMS? Jenks S. Britt, DVM 1. Why Manage Reproduction?

Alabama Beef Cattle Improvement Association 40 County Road 756 Clanton, AL

Regina Esterman 1 Brad Austin Steaven Woodall Erin McKinniss Joel Yelich

MP383 Synchronization of Estrus in Cattle

ESTROUS SYNCHRONIZATION AND THE CONTROL OF OVULATION. PCattle PSmall ruminants PPigs

Effects of MGA on Prepubertal Beef Heifers

Alabama Beef Cattle Improvement Association 40 County Road 756 Clanton, AL

Synchronizing Heats in Beef Cows and Heifers

Comparison of the Efficiency and Accuracy of Three Estrous Detection Methods to Indicate Ovulation in Beef Cattle 1

Dairy Herd Reproductive Records

Acceptance into the program will be first come first serve, based on availability of space.

COMMERCIAL BRED HEIFER MANUAL

Reproduction is the single most important factor for profitable beef production. Rick Funston, University of Nebraska. Heifer Development Systems

Heat Detection in the Dairy Herd

Calving Heifers at 24 Months Is it an Option?

BEEF SUCKLER HERD FERTILITY. Dr Arwyn Evans B.V.Sc., D.B.R., M.R.C.V.S. Milfeddygon Deufor

Once-bred heifers from the suckler herd

Anestrus and Estrous Detection Aids

Beef Calving Statistics (01/07/ /06/2016)

Effects of Day of Cycle at Initiation of a Select Synch/CIDR + Timed-artificial Insemination Protocol in Suckled Angus and Brangus Cows

UNDERSTANDING FIXED-TIME ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION (FTAI) A GUIDE TO THE BENEFIT OF FTAI IN YOUR HERD DAIRY CATTLE

Lifetime Production Performance by Suffolk x Rambouillet Ewes in Northwestern Kansas

Evaluation of Horn Flies and Internal Parasites with Growing Beef Cattle Grazing Bermudagrass Pastures Findings Materials and Methods Introduction

Understanding EBV Accuracy

UPDATE ON OVULATION-CONTROL PROGRAMS FOR ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION OF LACTATING DAIRY COWS. J. S. Stevenson

Importance of docility

FALL BRED HEIFER SALE. Saturday, April 30 Noon. Featuring 140 certified heifers. Coffeyville Livestock Market Coffeyville, KS

Crossbreeding for the Commercial Beef Producer

Reproductive Vaccination- Deciphering the MLV impact on fertility

Rearing heifers to calve at 24 months

Assessment Schedule 2012 Agricultural and Horticultural Science: Demonstrate knowledge of livestock management practices (90921)

Objectives. ERTs for the New Beef Industry. Ancient History. The EPD we produce entirely depends on the tools we have to use them.

COMMERCIAL HEIFER SHOW HALLETTSVILLE JUNIOR LIVESTOCK SHOW 2018

2 progesterone or Busereline acetate treatments. Pregnancy diagnosis was carried out after 60 days of AI by rectal palpation in animals not returning

Calf and heifer management

Erin McKinniss 1 Regina Esterman Steaven Woodall Brad Austin Joel Yelich

A Few Economic and Management Considerations for Dairy Heifers

The infection can be transmitted only by sexual intercourse and not by the environment. Bovine trichomoniasis is not transmitted to people.

New French genetic evaluations of fertility and productive life of beef cows

Estrumate Prostaglandin in Beef Herds

The Condition and treatment. 1. Introduction

Luteolysis and Pregnancy Outcomes in Dairy Cows after Treatment with Estrumate or Lutalyse

Simple ways to use genetics to improve reproduction in beef cattle David Johnston

Belted Galloway Junior Association Artificial Insemination Project

North Florida Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Marianna, FL 2

Diseases of Concern: BVD and Trichomoniasis. Robert Mortimer, DVM Russell Daly, DVM Colorado State University South Dakota State University

Heifer Reproduction. A Challenge with a Payback. Jerry Bertoldo, DVM. Extension Dairy Specialist NWNY Team CCE/PRO-DAIRY

WYOMING PREMIUM HEIFER PROGRAM

5 th ANNUAL CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI REPLACEMENT HEIFER SALE

Birth Weight, Calving Ease Direct, Calving Ease Maternal, Heifer Pregnancy Rate, Docility, Milk, Mature Weight

Considerations Related to Heifer Management. Heifer Management CONTROL OF ESTRUS IN HEIFERS

THIS ARTICLE IS SPONSORED BY THE MINNESOTA DAIRY HEALTH CONFERENCE.

DAIRY HERD INFORMATION FORM

If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me via at

reproduction Cow-calf operations: calendar of operations Animal Science 144 Beef Cattle & Sheep Production R. D. Sainz Lecture 05

RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PERFORMANCE TRAITS, INDIVIDUAL EXPECTED PROGENY DIFFERENCES AND SALE PRICES OF CENTRALLY TESTED BULLS

Controlled Breeding Programs for Heifers

Bringing Feed Efficiency Technology to the Beef Industry in Texas. Gordon E. Carstens Department of Animal Science Texas A&M University

Alachua County Youth Fair Cattleman s Study Guide

Herd Health Plan. Contact Information. Date Created: Date(s) Reviewed/Updated: Initials: Date: Initials: Date: Farm Manager: Veterinarian of Record:

Johnston County 4-H Heifer Project Guide

HOW CAN TRACEABILITY SYSTEMS INFLUENCE MODERN ANIMAL BREEDING AND FARM MANAGEMENT?

The Economics of Sexed Semen in Dairy Heifers and Cows 1

Cost of Routine Veterinary Services Compared to Economic Benefit to. Beef Producers in Saskatchewan

Igenity Angus Gold Results Key

As a promotional item for the first year inauguration the annual ranch enrollment fee will be waived for 2012 only. Application and tag fees

BREEDPLAN A Guide to Getting Started

Consignor Packet. Table of Contents

Control of Reproduction

OPTIMISING HEIFER HEALTH: SOUTHERN BEEF PROGRAM. Give your heifers the best chance of reproductive success.

Suckler cow management. Dai Grove-White.

Case Study: Dairy farm reaps benefits from milk analysis technology

Genetic Value Bull & Female Sale

Quality Standards for Beef, Pork and Poultry

Replacement Heifer Record Book mcfa.org

Sudan is considered one of the most African countries rich with its wide range of genetic resources diversity There was no animal census carried

Across Breed EPD and multibreed genetic evaluation developments

2017 SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA BCIA INFLUENCED BRED HEIFER SALE RULES & REGULATIONS

What will Diamond D Angus Genetics do for you?

4-H Swine Bowl Learning Information

TREASURE VALLEY DAIRY REPLACEMENT HEIFER PROJECT APPLICATION PACKET

TECH NOTE JOINING PERIODS

Transcription:

28 ESTRUS SYNCHRONIZATION AND CALVING EASE AMONG FIRST CALF HEIFERS D.G. Landblom and J.L. Nelson Managing heifer replacements so they will calve as two year olds with a minimum of difficulty has been, and continues to be, a problem for many cow-calf producers. In beef cattle production, selection pressure is placed on maximum performance, which tends to increase birth weight. Birth weight has been shown in several detailed studies to be highly correlated with difficult births. Conformation, while important, hasn t been as highly correlated with calving difficulty as has birth weight. The first calf heifer is a special problem indeed, because, although she is still growing, the economics of beef production give producers no alternative but to strive for maximum production. While selection for maximum performance is often associated with heavier birth weights, individual sires have been identified that sire calves with light birth weights and possess above average pre and post-weaning performance. Easiest access to these type sires is through artificial insemination. Artificial insemination has not been widely used in beef herds for many reasons, but a few of the major ones are: special training and handling facilities are required, extra handling of cows and heifers is necessary, time for heat detection and insemination is often limited, and pounds of calf lost among females that don t conceive is costly. The advent of estrus synchronization has changed some of the previously accepted disadvantages. Most notably labor is not eliminated, but is substantially reduced and within the time frame of a conventional 21-day A.I. breeding period, synchronized females will show two heat cycles. In this heifer breeding management study we have combined some well established management techniques with the advanced technology of estrus synchronization. In executing the study we ve incorporated the following: 1. Heifers have been sorted into groups according to weaning weight and fed to weigh 700 pounds by the start of the breeding season. 2. All heifers were inseminated once artificially. 3. A.I. sires were selected on progeny test data for calving ease and pre and post-weaning gain. 4. Heifers were synchronized with Lutalyse (R) using either a single or double injection method. 5. Texas Longhorn bulls were used for clean-up breeding to insure calving ease. 6. A short 45-day breeding season was used.

29 Primary objectives as they relate to the design of this study are to evaluate two methods of synchronization with Lutalyse (R) to determine whether or not calving difficulty can be minimized through the use of progeny tested sires while cleaning up with the Longhorn breed, and to evaluate the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the heifer management system being suggested. In order for estrus synchronization to be successful, beef females must be sexually mature and cycling properly. In 1979, KaMar heat detection devices and rectal palpation were used to identify those heifers that were cycling. This method was found to be totally unacceptable and a waste of time and money. In all other years of the study epididectomized sterile bulls with marking harnesses have been used to measure pre-breeding estrus activity. All animals that were wintered, with limited exceptions, were used in the breeding studies and were not eliminated until identified as open after being pregnancy tested. Two breeding groups are being used in this study to evaluate two different management methods for using the estrus synchronizing compound, Lutalyse. A single injection of Lutalyse is being compared with the recommended double injection. Group One was synchronized using the single injection method. With this method, heifers are inseminated conventionally during the first five days of the breeding season. On the sixth day at 8:00 A.M. all heifers not inseminated during the first five days of breeding are given 25 mg Lutalyse. After the Lutalyse is administered, A.I. breeding is continued until 80 hours has elapsed. At that time all remaining undetected heifers were inseminated as a group. Following the group insemination and a five-day waiting period, the heifers were exposed to a Longhorn clean-up bull equipped with a chin-ball marker. Group Two was synchronized with the double injection method. Using this method, two injections of Lutalyse separated by eleven days are used. None of the heifers were inseminated during the eleven day period between injections. Our abbreviated description of how each group was synchronized is shown in Table 1.

30 Table 1. Design for Estrus Synchronization Single Injection Method: Day of Breeding Season: 1 2 Period I 3 4 Period II 7 8 Inseminate normally 1 st five days of breeding season. 5 6 8 A.M. administer 25 mg. Lutalyse to all heifers not inseminated during Period I. Continue breeding normally until 80 hrs. post-injection time. 9 At 4 P.M. (80 hrs. after the Lutalyse injection) all heifers not inseminated during Periods I and II were inseminated as a group without regard to standing heat. Double Injection Method: Day of Breeding Season: 11 days before start of breeding season Administer 25 mg Lutalyse. 1 The 2 nd injection of Lutalyse is given at 8 A.M. on the 11 th day, which is the start of the breeding season. 2 3 Inseminate normally all heifers found in standing heat until 80 hrs. post-injection time. 4 At 4 P.M. (80 hrs. after the 2 nd injection of Lutalyse) all heifers not inseminated during the 80 hr. period are inseminated as a group without regard to standing heat.

31 The heifers were placed with a Longhorn clean-up bull after a five day waiting period. Semen from an Angus sire, Shoshone Monitor 17An50, was purchased from Minnesota Valley Breeders Assn. in 1979, and in 1980 and 1981 semen from an Angus bull, Kadence Shoshone 7An47, was purchased from Select Sires, Plain City, Ohio. In 1982, Angus semen was purchased from American Breeder Service. Sires used were Stardust Expansion 17An1337, Northern Prospector 29An1329 and Prairie Lane Rito 29An1343. Accumulated breeding results, calving difficulty, birth weights, actual and adjusted weaning weights and economic analysis are given in Tables 2, 3, 4 and 5. Summary: 1. Four years of synchronization and calving data, and three years of weaning data have been summarized in this progress report. 2. Synchronized estrus conception rates have been variable. In the double injection group a four year average conception rate of 51% was recorded and ranged from a low of 19% to a high of 62%, and using the single injection method resulted in 42% of the heifers conceiving with yearly variations ranging from a low of 5% to a high of 74%. In years when extremely low conceptions were experienced, only a small number of heifers had cycled before the start of the breeding season; demonstrating the need to have heifers sexually mature before engaging in a synchronization program with heifers using prostaglandin synchronizing compounds. 3. Economically, it was substantially less expensive to use the single injection method but required three additional days of labor. The single injection group cost for semen and Lutalyse per heifer conceiving was $26.33 as compared to $34.34 in the double injection group. 4. Each management method is being evaluated to determine which will return the most net dollars from sale of weaned calves. Economic analysis to date favors the single injection method by a small margin in spite of it being the group recording the lowest four year synchronized estrus conception rate. Most of the difference is due to the added cost of Lutalyse under the double injection regime. 5. A major objective in this study was to reduce calving difficulty and still have satisfactory performance from the calves. Performance was about as expected from any group of young unproven heifers. Calving difficulty, however, was not minimized with the progeny tested bull used in this study. Forty percent of the Angus sired calves required assistance whereas only 2.8% of the Longhorn calves were assisted. Angus bull calves weighing seventy pounds or more were the source of difficulty in a ratio of 2:1 when compared to the Angus heifers. Longhorn sired calves were excellent for calving ease; however, pounds of beef are significantly reduced.

32 Table 2. Double Injection Method of Synchronization among First Calf Heifers Double Injection Breeding/Calving Year 1979-80 1980-81 1981-82 1982-83 4-Yr. Total No. head 21 24 18 29 92 No. in heat before breeding 7 21 18 No. in heat + insemination before 80 hrs. 4 18 14 18 54 (58.7%) No. not showing heat but inseminated at 80 hrs. 17 6 4 11 38 (41.3%) No. open 1 3 1 5 10 (10.8%) Conception rate for synchronization estrus 4 (19%) 14 (58%) 11 (61%) 18 (62%) 47 (51%) Economics: Semen + Lutalyse expense 1/, $ 336 432 324 522 = 1614 No. Conceiving to Synchronization 4 14 11 18 = 47 4-Year Avg. Cost/Heifer Conceiving $34.34 1/ Average Lutalyse cost was $5.00/injection; semen averaged $7.50/head. Table 3. Single Injection Method of Synchronization among First Calf Heifers Single Injection Breeding/Calving Year 1979-80 1980-81 1981-82 1982-83 4-Yr. Total No. head 20 24 19 29 92 No. in heat before breeding 3 21 19 No. Inseminated 1 st 5 days of Breeding 5 9 5 7 26 (28.2%) No. in heat + insemination before 80 hours 0 9 10 8 27 (29.3%) No. not showing heat but inseminated at 80 hours 16 6 4 14 40 (43.5%) No. open 1 8 0 1 10 (10.8%) Conception rate for synchronization estrus 1 (5%) 11 (46%) 14 (74%) 39 (42%) Economics: Semen + Lutalyse expense 1/, $ 200 267 222 338 = 1027 No. Conceiving to Synchronization 1 11 14 13 = 39 4-Yr. Avg. Cost/Heifer Conceiving $26.33 1/ Average Lutalyse cost was $5.00/Heifer for 66 head not cycling during first 5 days of breeding; semen averaged $7.50 per head.

33 Table 4. Calving Difficulty and Birth Weights among First Calf Heifers Single Injection Double Injection Management Method 1979-1980- 1981-1982- 4-Yr. 1979-1980- 1981-1982- 4-Yr. Calendar Year 80 81 82 83 Total 80 81 82 83 Total No. Calving 19 16 18 1/ 27 80 20 21 17 24 82 No. Unassisted 18 16 10 17 61 17 21 9 15 62 Calving Difficulty 2/ : A.I. Angus: Shoshone Monitor- (17An50) 1/1 -- -- -- 1 4/2 -- -- -- 2 Kadence Shoshone- (7An47) -- 11/0 13/8 -- 8 -- 14/6 11/7 -- 7 Stardust Expansion- (17An1337) -- -- -- 6/5 5 -- -- -- 6/5 5 Northern Prospector (29An1329) -- -- -- 4/4 4 -- -- -- 11/4 4 Prairie Lane Rito (29An1343) -- -- -- 3/0 0 -- -- -- 1/0 0 Angus Clean-up Bull (A-94) 2/0 -- -- -- 0 5/1 -- -- -- 1 Longhorn Clean-up Bull 16/0 5/0 5/0 14/1 1 11/0 7/0 6/1 6/0 1 Angus Sired 18 All Angus 19 Percent Calving Difficulty 40 = 45% Longhorn 1 40 = 2.5% 52 = 36.5% Longhorn 1 30 = 3.3% Birth Weight Summary: 4- Year Avg. Bulls Heifers Bulls Heifers A.I. Angus: Shoshone Monitor 72 -- 85 72 Kadence Shoshone 72 68.5 71.3 69.5 Stardust Expansion 75 71 75 75 Northern Prospector 69 71 71 63 Prairie Lane Rito 66 64 -- 70 Angus Clean-up Bull 73 -- 67 70 Longhorn Clean-up Bull 61 55 61 57 1/ 2/ One heifer died. First number indicates number of calves sired/second number indicates calving without difficulty.

34 Table 5. Three Year Actual and Adjusted Weaning Weights, and Partial Economic Analysis When Comparing Two Synchronization Methods 1/ Single Injection Double Injection Management Bulls Heifers Bulls Heifers Method Actual Adj. Actual Adj. Actual Adj. Actual Adj. Angus Calves: No. Head 10 12 17 11 Total Wt., lbs. 4524 4916 5323 5977 6951 7599 5019 5868 Avg. Wt., lbs. 452.4 491.6 443.5 498.1 408.9 477 456.3 533.5 Longhorn Calves: No. Head 13 13 11 10 Total Wt., lbs. 4632 5411 4580 6084 4051 4646 3188 3814 Avg. Wt., lbs. 356.3 416.2 352.3 468 368.3 422.4 318.8 381.4 Economics: Angus Bulls @ 65, $ 2,940.60 4,518.15 Angus Heifers @57, $ 3,034.11 2,860.83 Longhorn Bulls @58, $ 2,686.56 2,349.58 Longhorn Heifers @55, $ 2,519.00 1,753.40 Gross Return, $ 11,180.27 11,481.96 Deduction for Semen + Lutalyse, $ -1,027.00-1,641.00 Net Return, $ 10,153.27 9,867.96 Difference Favoring Single Injection, $ 285.31 1/ Heifer weights are adjusted to bull basis.