HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Johnson, S. K. Articles by Parkhurst, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Johnson, S. K. Articles by Parkhurst, A.

Relationships of Pelvic Structure, Body Measurements, Pelvic Area and Calving Difficulty^1,2,3,

University of Nebraska West Central Research and Extension Center, North Platte 69101 and South Dakota State University, Brookings 57007

Abstract

Data on 186 Hereford heifers from five South Dakota ranches were collected to evaluate the relationships of pelvic structure and body measurements with calving difficulty (CD) and pelvic area. Body measurements obtained prebreeding and precalving included two internal pelvic and seven external rump measurements, three pelvic angles and two slope of rump measurements. A calving difficulty score (CDS) of 1 (unassisted) to 8 (Caesarean) was assigned at birth, and calf birth weight was recorded. Data were analyzed using both regression and discriminant analyses. Stepwise regression analysis including all 49 variables showed that calf birth weight was the most important variable influencing CDS (R² = .33), with precalving pelvic area ranking second (cumulative R² = .45). Prediction equations that included all variables or only prebreeding variables accounted for 63% and 25% of the variation in CDS, respectively. Pelvic angles and slope of rump variables had low correlations with CDS and pelvic area. Ratios of prebreeding and precalving pelvic areas to calf birth weight significantly decreased as CDS increased. A prebreeding ratio of 4.7 cm²/kg may be beneficial in selection of replacement heifers. In discriminant analyses, the most informative variable in differentiating among levels of CD was calf birth weight. All models significantly discriminated between two CD categories (assisted and unassisted). Models using prebreeding variables only performed as well as those based on precalving variables. Percentage of cases correctly classified by prebreeding variables was 66.7%. In general, calf birth weight and precalving pelvic area accounted for the most variation in CDS, whereas external body measurements and pelvic angles did not explain significant additional variation.

¹ Published as Paper No. 8238 Journal Ser., Nebraska Agric. Exp. Sta.

² Published as Paper No. 2212 Journal Ser., South Dakota Agric. Exp. Sta. Data collected in South Dakota by Deutscher.

³ Send reprint requests to G. H. Deutscher, Rt. 4, Box 46A, North Platte, NE 69101.

⁴ Dept. of Biometrics, Univ. of Nebraska, Lincoln 68583.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. P. Berry, J. M. Lee, K. A. Macdonald, and J. R. Roche Body Condition Score and Body Weight Effects on Dystocia and Stillbirths and Consequent Effects on Postcalving Performance J Dairy Sci, September 1, 2007; 90(9): 4201 - 4211. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]