cliff lamb - estrus synchronization protocols for cows
Post on 20-Aug-2015
1.288 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Estrus Synchronization Protocols forEstrus Synchronization Protocols for
CowsCows
Cliff LambCliff Lamb
University of FloridaUniversity of Florida
Applied Reproductive Strategies in Beef CattleApplied Reproductive Strategies in Beef Cattle
NCBA ConventionNCBA Convention
January 28, 2010January 28, 2010
Estrous Synchronization Protocols
Two shot PGF
7-11 Synch Select Synch
Ov-synch
CO-synch
MGA/PGF
MGA Select
CIDR/PGF
CO-synch+CIDR Heat Synch
Hybrid Synch
Hybrid Synch+CIDR
One shot PGF
PresynchResynch
US Beef US Beef Semen Semen Sales and CustomSales and CustomCollected SemenCollected Semen
http://www.naab-css.org/sales/table_list.html
4 x 106 units
http://www.nass.usda.gov
US Beef Cow InventoryUS Beef Cow InventoryPercentage of Semen Sold and CollectedPercentage of Semen Sold and Collected
Compared to Beef Cow InventoryCompared to Beef Cow Inventory
11%
DefinitionsDefinitions
!Synchronization Rate:
% of females detected in estrus compared to total
number synchronized.
!Conception Rate:
% of females pregnant compared to number offemales inseminated.
!Pregnancy Rate:
% of females pregnant compared to total number
synchronized.
2 ! Prostaglandin (PGF2!) System
PGF PGF Heat detect
and AI
-14 0 144
Days from PGF Hours from PGF
Select Synch
GnRH PGF Heat detect
and AI
-7 0 144
Days from PGF Hours from PGF
Ovsynch
GnRH PGF AIGnRH
-7 0 48 60-66
Days from PGF Hours from PGF
CO-Synch
GnRH PGF
-7 0 48
Days from PGF Hours from PGF
GnRH
& AI
Select Synch & TAI
GnRH PGF
-7 0 72-84
Days from PGF Hours from PGF
GnRH
& AIHeat detect
& AI
2!PGF2! vs. Select Synch
GnRH PGF Heat detect and AI
Select Synch
PGF PGF Heat detect and AI
2!PGF2!
(Stevenson et al., 2000)
Item 2!PGF2! Select Synch
No. of Cows 294 289
Synchronization rate, % 142/294 (48) 175/289 (61)
Conception rates, % 86/142 (61) 115/175 (66)
Pregnancy rates, % 86/294 (28) 115/289 (38)
(Stevenson et al., 2000)
2!PGF2! vs. Select Synch Select Synch vs. CO-Synch
GnRH PGF Heat detect and AI
Select Synch
GnRH PGFGnRH & AI
CO-Synch
(Grieger et al., 2001)
Item Select Synch CO-Synch
No. of Cows 237 223
Synchronization rate, % 130/237 (55) -
Conception rates, % 93/130 (72) 106/223 (48)
Pregnancy rates, % 93/237 (39) 106/223 (48)
(Grieger et al., 2001)
Select Synch vs. CO-Synch CO-Synch vs. Ovsynch
GnRH PGFGnRH
& AI
CO-Synch
(Geary et al., 2001)
GnRH PGF AIGnRH
Ovsynch
Days relative to PGF Hours relative to PGF
-7 0 48 72
(Geary et al., 2001)
CO-Synch vs. Ovsynch
PGFTAI &GnRH
PGF
GnRH
GnRHTAI &GnRH
-7 0 48
Days relative to PGF Hours relative to PGF
CO-Synch
CO-Synch+CIDRCIDR
CO-synch vs. CO-synch+CIDR
(Lamb et al., 2001)
First Service Pregnancy Rates
Treatments
(Lamb et al., 2001)
Effect of BCS on Pregnancy Rates
(Lamb et al., 2001)
Body condition score
PGFTAI &GnRH
Detect estrus & AI
PGFTAI &GnRH
PGF
PGFTAI &GnRH
Detect estrus & AI
PGFTAI &GnRH
Detect estrus & AI
GnRH
GnRH
GnRH
GnRH
TAI &GnRH
-18 to -16 -7 0 60 84
B BDays relative to PGF Hours relative to PGF
CIDR-PG & TAI
CO-Synch
CO-Synch+CIDR
Select Synch & TAI
Select Synch+CIDR & TAI
CIDR
CIDR
CIDR
Effect of Location on Pregnancy Rates
Locations
(Larson et al., 2006)
Pregnancy Rates after EstrusDetection Alone vs TAI
TreatmentP < 0.05
a ba,bcb
53
43
54 53
58
(Larson et al., 2006)
PGFGnRHTAI &GnRH
-5 d 0 8±2h 72h
CIDR
(Day et al., 2008)
5-day CO-Synch + CIDR
PGF
PGFGnRHTAI &
GnRH
-7 d 0 60-66h
CIDR
7-day CO-Synch + CIDR
PGFGnRHTAI &
GnRH
-5 d 0 8±2h 72h
CIDR
5-day CO-Synch + CIDR
PGF
PGFGnRHTAI &
GnRH
-7 d 0 60-66h
CIDR
PGFGnRHTAI &
GnRH
-5 d 0 8±2h 72h
CIDR
PGF
7-day CO-Synch+CIDR
5-day CO-Synch+CIDR
Distribution of Estrus for 5-day and7-day CO-Synch + CIDR protocols
(Wilson et al., 2010)
Pregnancy rate to 7-dayCO-Synch + CIDR protocol
n > 7,000 n > 2,600
Pregnancy rate to 5-dayCO-Synch + CIDR protocol
n > 2.100 n > 2,000
Control
n = 285
CIDR Natural mating
GnRH PGF
TAI +
GnRH
TAI
n = 263
Natural mating
Effects of a fixed-time AI system onEffects of a fixed-time AI system on
calving distributioncalving distribution
(Rodgers, 2007)
Calving Distribution of Cows Calvingafter TAI or Bull breeding
44.1%vs.
24.7%
(Rodgers, 2007)
Calving Distribution afterSynchronization of Estrous
(Larson et al., 2006)
Does the use of the CO-Synch + CIDRProtocol delay return to estrus?
438 suckled cows were estrous synchronized usingthe 7-day CO-Synch + CIDR Protocol.
PGFGnRHTAI &
GnRHCIDR
(Mercadante et al., 2010)
n=275
n=85
n=37 n=34
90% Overall pregnancy rate
??
Calving Distribution
(Mercadante et al., 2010)
97.5% return toestrus rate!!
Estrus response of cows following the7-day CO-Synch+CIDR protocol
Average Intervalto estrus = 20.9days
(Mercadante et al., 2010)
AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements
PeoplePeople
Dr. Carl Dahlen
Dr. Jamie Larson
Mr. Guilherme Marquezini
Dr. Jeff Stevenson
Graduate Students
Technical staff
Support staff
Collaborators
Co-authors
Beef cattle producers
Funding and ProductFunding and Product
SupportSupportABS Global, Inc.
Blandin Foundation
Intervet Animal Health
IVX/Teva Animal Health
Merial Animal Health
MN-AURI
NAAB
Pfizer Animal Health
Select Sires, Inc.
U of FL
U of MN
USDA-CSREES
Thank You!
Contact Information:Cliff Lamb
University of Florida3925 HWY 71
Marianna, FL 32446Tel: 850-394-9124
Email: gclamb@ufl.edu
top related