Article ID Journal Published Year Pages File Type
10894484 Theriogenology 2013 8 Pages PDF
Abstract
The objective was to evaluate the efficacy and economic benefits of three synchrony programs in 1137 heifers from 10 pasture-based dairy herds. Heifers were randomly assigned to one of three treatments within each herd on Day −13 (Day 0 = start of the breeding program). They were treated with: (1) PGF2α on Days −13 and −2, with AI after detection of estrus between Days 0 and 3 (Double PG); (2) GnRH, PGF2α, and GnRH on Days −9, −2, and 0, respectively, with placement of an intravaginal progesterone (P4)-releasing device between Days −9 and −2, and set time AI on Day 1 (GPG + P4); or (3) same as the GPG + P4 group but with the set time AI on Day 0 (Cosynch + P4). Plasma P4 concentrations were determined on Days −20 and −13 to determine pubertal status. The Cosynch + P4 treatment had a higher (P < 0.05) conception rate to AI (57% vs. 47% vs. 48% for Cosynch + P4, GPG + P4, and Double PG, respectively), 21-day in-calf rate (76% vs. 72% vs. 63% for Cosynch + P4, GPG + P4, and Double PG), and a shorter median interval from the start of the breeding program to conception (0, 14, and 19 days for Cosynch + P4, GPG + P4, and Double PG). Heifers that had reached puberty before breeding, compared with those that had not, had higher (P < 0.05) in-calf rates to AI (53% vs. 47%) at 21 days (74% vs. 64%) and at 42 days (91% vs. 84%). Pubertal status was associated with herd, breed, age, and body condition score at the start of mating (P < 0.05). A partial budget model demonstrated that, compared with the Double PG program, there was an economic benefit from the Cosynch + P4 (mean, NZ$25.73; 95% confidence interval, 2.99-50.69), but not the GPG + P4 program (mean, NZ$−0.65; 95% confidence interval, −21.87 to 21.58). We concluded that the Cosynch + P4 program resulted in the highest fertility and economic benefit of the three programs evaluated, and that reproductive response was affected by pubertal status.
Related Topics
Life Sciences Agricultural and Biological Sciences Animal Science and Zoology
Authors
, , ,