|
|
||||||||
ANIMAL GROWTH, PHYSIOLOGY, AND REPRODUCTION |

* Department of Animal Science,
and
Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Missouri, Columbia 65211
2 Correspondencephone: 573-882-7519; fax: 573-882-4798; e-mail: pattersond{at}missouri.edu.
Abstract
Two progestin-based protocols for estrus synchronization in postpartum beef cows were compared following treatment administration on the basis of estrous response, interval to and synchrony of estrus, and pregnancy. Cows were assigned to one of the two treatment protocols by age, body condition score (BCS), and days postpartum (DPP). The MGA Select-treated cows (MGA Select; n = 109) were fed melengestrol acetate (MGA; 0.5mgcow-1d-1) for 14 d, fed carrier for 8 d, GnRH (100 µg of Cystorelin) was injected i.m. 12 d after MGA withdrawal, and PG (25 mg of Lutalyse) was administered i.m. 7 d after GnRH. Cows assigned to the 7-11 Synch protocol (7-11 Synch; n = 111) were fed carrier for 15 d, fed MGA for 7 d, injected with PG on d 22 (d 7 of MGA), injected with GnRH on d 26, and injected with PG on d 33. Mean BCS (4.8 ± 0.1, MGA Select; 4.7 ± 0.1, 7-11 Synch) and DPP (40 ± 1, MGA Select; 40 ± 1, 7-11 Synch) did not differ between treatments. Blood samples were collected 8 d and 1 d before feeding of MGA or carrier to determine the pretreatment estrous cyclicity (progesterone
1 ng/mL; 10/109 [9%], MGA Select; 12/111 [11%], 7-11 Synch), and again at PG on d 33 to evaluate treatment response (81/109 [74%], MGA Select; 84/111 (76%), 7-11 Synch). Serum concentrations of progesterone at PG on d 33 differed (P < 0.01) between treatments (3.3 ± 0.3 ng/mL [MGA Select] vs. 1.7 ± 0.1 ng/mL [7-11 Synch]). HeatWatch was used for 6 d after PG on d 33 to detect estrus, and AI was performed 12 h after the onset of estrus. Estrous response did not differ between treatments (100/109 [92%], MGA Select; 101/111 [91%], 7-11 Synch). Mean interval to estrus (65 ± 2.7 h, MGA Select; 52 ± 1.8 h, 7-11 Synch) and synchrony of estrus differed (P < 0.01) between treatments. Synchronized conception and pregnancy rates (61/100 [61%], 61/109 [56%], MGA Select; 71/101 [70%], 71/111 [64%], 7-11 Synch), and final pregnancy rates (94/109 [86%], MGA Select; 99/110 [90%], 7-11 Synch) did not differ between treatments. In summary, estrous response and fertility did not differ among cows assigned to the MGA Select or 7-11 Synch protocols. Synchrony of estrus, defined as the variance in the interval to estrus from PG, however, was improved following treatment with the 7-11 Synch protocol.
Key Words: Artificial Insemination Estrus Synchronization Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Progestin
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
D. J. Schafer, J. F. Bader, J. P. Meyer, J. K. Haden, M. R. Ellersieck, M. C. Lucy, M. F. Smith, and D. J. Patterson Comparison of progestin-based protocols to synchronize estrus and ovulation before fixed-time artificial insemination in postpartum beef cows J Anim Sci, August 1, 2007; 85(8): 1940 - 1945. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. C. Busch, D. J. Wilson, D. J. Schafer, N. R. Leitman, J. K. Haden, M. R. Ellersieck, M. F. Smith, and D. J. Patterson Comparison of progestin-based estrus synchronization protocols before fixed-time artificial insemination on pregnancy rate in beef heifers J Anim Sci, August 1, 2007; 85(8): 1933 - 1939. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. E. Larson, G. C. Lamb, J. S. Stevenson, S. K. Johnson, M. L. Day, T. W. Geary, D. J. Kesler, J. M. DeJarnette, F. N. Schrick, A. DiCostanzo, et al. Synchronization of estrus in suckled beef cows for detected estrus and artificial insemination and timed artificial insemination using gonadotropin-releasing hormone, prostaglandin F2{alpha}, and progesterone J Anim Sci, February 1, 2006; 84(2): 332 - 342. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. F. Bader, F. N. Kojima, D. J. Schafer, J. E. Stegner, M. R. Ellersieck, M. F. Smith, and D. J. Patterson A comparison of progestin-based protocols to synchronize ovulation and facilitate fixed-time artificial insemination in postpartum beef cows J Anim Sci, January 1, 2005; 83(1): 136 - 143. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |