Reproductive performance of dairy cows resynchronized after pregnancy diagnosis at 31 (±3 days) after artificial insemination (AI) compared with resynchronization at 31 (±3 days) after AI with pregnancy diagnosis at 38 (±3 days) after AI

Richard Van Vleck Pereira, L. S. Caixeta, J. O. Giordano, C. L. Guard, R. C. Bicalho

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

An important part of reproductive management programs on dairy farms is identification of nonpregnant cows and early re-insemination to achieve higher pregnancy rates. The objective of this study was to compare the effect on reproductive performance and pregnancy loss of 2 pregnancy diagnosis protocols: (1) pregnancy diagnosis performed 31. ±. 3 d after artificial insemination (AI) by ultrasonography (ULTRA), and (2) resynchronization started 31. ±. 3 d after AI but with pregnancy diagnosis performed 38. ±. 3 d after AI by palpation per rectum (PALP). Cows were randomly allocated into 1 of the 2 management programs. For cows enrolled in ULTRA, the initial pregnancy diagnosis (P1) was performed by transrectal ultrasonography at 31. ±. 3 d after AI, and nonpregnant cows were enrolled in the Ovsynch protocol for resynchronization of ovulation to receive timed AI (TAI). For cows enrolled in PALP, the Ovsynch protocol for resynchronization of ovulation to receive TAI was initiated at 31. ±. 3 d after AI regardless of pregnancy status, with the initial pregnancy diagnosis (P1) performed by palpation per rectum at 38. ±. 3 d after AI. For both groups, reconfirmation of pregnancy was performed by palpation per rectum at 63. ±. 3 d after AI (P2). Cows were inseminated after detection of estrus by use of activity monitors at any time during the study. Two levels of activity were used as a reference for cows AI after detection of estrus based on activity: an activity level of ≥2 when a cow was coded in DairyComp 305 (Valley Agricultural Software, Tulare, CA) as open (nonpregnant) and an activity level of ≥3 when the pregnancy status of the cow was unknown. Our findings showed that the odds of pregnancy loss cows in ULTRA was 2 times higher between P1 and P2 compared with that of cows in PALP. Furthermore, pregnancy diagnosis method (ULTRA vs. PALP) did not have a significant effect on the Cox proportional hazard of pregnancy at P2. The occurrence of assisted parturition, metritis, or retained placenta was associated with a reduced hazard of pregnancy at P2. An economic analysis was performed by simulating a 1,000-cow commercial dairy herd using a decision support tool to estimate the net present value (NPV; $/cow per yr) from using the 2 different pregnancy diagnosis methods. The analysis revealed minor differences in NPV between the programs, depending on the cost to perform ULTRA or PALP. In summary, we observed no difference in the reproductive performance and only a minor and fluctuating economic difference when using either PALP or ULTRA for pregnancy diagnosis of dairy cows.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)7630-7639
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Dairy Science
Volume96
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Artificial Insemination
pregnancy diagnosis
artificial insemination
reproductive performance
dairy cows
rectum
cows
Pregnancy
Palpation
Rectum
ultrasonography
Ultrasonography
pregnancy
Estrus Detection
estrus detection
Ovulation
ovulation
Economics
Retained Placenta
retained placenta

Keywords

  • Ovsynch
  • Palpation per rectum
  • Pregnancy
  • Ultrasonography

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Food Science
  • Animal Science and Zoology
  • Genetics

Cite this

@article{b13c9d9f984546ffacbbe7f77e372365,
title = "Reproductive performance of dairy cows resynchronized after pregnancy diagnosis at 31 (±3 days) after artificial insemination (AI) compared with resynchronization at 31 (±3 days) after AI with pregnancy diagnosis at 38 (±3 days) after AI",
abstract = "An important part of reproductive management programs on dairy farms is identification of nonpregnant cows and early re-insemination to achieve higher pregnancy rates. The objective of this study was to compare the effect on reproductive performance and pregnancy loss of 2 pregnancy diagnosis protocols: (1) pregnancy diagnosis performed 31. ±. 3 d after artificial insemination (AI) by ultrasonography (ULTRA), and (2) resynchronization started 31. ±. 3 d after AI but with pregnancy diagnosis performed 38. ±. 3 d after AI by palpation per rectum (PALP). Cows were randomly allocated into 1 of the 2 management programs. For cows enrolled in ULTRA, the initial pregnancy diagnosis (P1) was performed by transrectal ultrasonography at 31. ±. 3 d after AI, and nonpregnant cows were enrolled in the Ovsynch protocol for resynchronization of ovulation to receive timed AI (TAI). For cows enrolled in PALP, the Ovsynch protocol for resynchronization of ovulation to receive TAI was initiated at 31. ±. 3 d after AI regardless of pregnancy status, with the initial pregnancy diagnosis (P1) performed by palpation per rectum at 38. ±. 3 d after AI. For both groups, reconfirmation of pregnancy was performed by palpation per rectum at 63. ±. 3 d after AI (P2). Cows were inseminated after detection of estrus by use of activity monitors at any time during the study. Two levels of activity were used as a reference for cows AI after detection of estrus based on activity: an activity level of ≥2 when a cow was coded in DairyComp 305 (Valley Agricultural Software, Tulare, CA) as open (nonpregnant) and an activity level of ≥3 when the pregnancy status of the cow was unknown. Our findings showed that the odds of pregnancy loss cows in ULTRA was 2 times higher between P1 and P2 compared with that of cows in PALP. Furthermore, pregnancy diagnosis method (ULTRA vs. PALP) did not have a significant effect on the Cox proportional hazard of pregnancy at P2. The occurrence of assisted parturition, metritis, or retained placenta was associated with a reduced hazard of pregnancy at P2. An economic analysis was performed by simulating a 1,000-cow commercial dairy herd using a decision support tool to estimate the net present value (NPV; $/cow per yr) from using the 2 different pregnancy diagnosis methods. The analysis revealed minor differences in NPV between the programs, depending on the cost to perform ULTRA or PALP. In summary, we observed no difference in the reproductive performance and only a minor and fluctuating economic difference when using either PALP or ULTRA for pregnancy diagnosis of dairy cows.",
keywords = "Ovsynch, Palpation per rectum, Pregnancy, Ultrasonography",
author = "Pereira, {Richard Van Vleck} and Caixeta, {L. S.} and Giordano, {J. O.} and Guard, {C. L.} and Bicalho, {R. C.}",
year = "2013",
month = "12",
doi = "10.3168/jds.2013-6723",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "96",
pages = "7630--7639",
journal = "Journal of Dairy Science",
issn = "0022-0302",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reproductive performance of dairy cows resynchronized after pregnancy diagnosis at 31 (±3 days) after artificial insemination (AI) compared with resynchronization at 31 (±3 days) after AI with pregnancy diagnosis at 38 (±3 days) after AI

AU - Pereira, Richard Van Vleck

AU - Caixeta, L. S.

AU - Giordano, J. O.

AU - Guard, C. L.

AU - Bicalho, R. C.

PY - 2013/12

Y1 - 2013/12

N2 - An important part of reproductive management programs on dairy farms is identification of nonpregnant cows and early re-insemination to achieve higher pregnancy rates. The objective of this study was to compare the effect on reproductive performance and pregnancy loss of 2 pregnancy diagnosis protocols: (1) pregnancy diagnosis performed 31. ±. 3 d after artificial insemination (AI) by ultrasonography (ULTRA), and (2) resynchronization started 31. ±. 3 d after AI but with pregnancy diagnosis performed 38. ±. 3 d after AI by palpation per rectum (PALP). Cows were randomly allocated into 1 of the 2 management programs. For cows enrolled in ULTRA, the initial pregnancy diagnosis (P1) was performed by transrectal ultrasonography at 31. ±. 3 d after AI, and nonpregnant cows were enrolled in the Ovsynch protocol for resynchronization of ovulation to receive timed AI (TAI). For cows enrolled in PALP, the Ovsynch protocol for resynchronization of ovulation to receive TAI was initiated at 31. ±. 3 d after AI regardless of pregnancy status, with the initial pregnancy diagnosis (P1) performed by palpation per rectum at 38. ±. 3 d after AI. For both groups, reconfirmation of pregnancy was performed by palpation per rectum at 63. ±. 3 d after AI (P2). Cows were inseminated after detection of estrus by use of activity monitors at any time during the study. Two levels of activity were used as a reference for cows AI after detection of estrus based on activity: an activity level of ≥2 when a cow was coded in DairyComp 305 (Valley Agricultural Software, Tulare, CA) as open (nonpregnant) and an activity level of ≥3 when the pregnancy status of the cow was unknown. Our findings showed that the odds of pregnancy loss cows in ULTRA was 2 times higher between P1 and P2 compared with that of cows in PALP. Furthermore, pregnancy diagnosis method (ULTRA vs. PALP) did not have a significant effect on the Cox proportional hazard of pregnancy at P2. The occurrence of assisted parturition, metritis, or retained placenta was associated with a reduced hazard of pregnancy at P2. An economic analysis was performed by simulating a 1,000-cow commercial dairy herd using a decision support tool to estimate the net present value (NPV; $/cow per yr) from using the 2 different pregnancy diagnosis methods. The analysis revealed minor differences in NPV between the programs, depending on the cost to perform ULTRA or PALP. In summary, we observed no difference in the reproductive performance and only a minor and fluctuating economic difference when using either PALP or ULTRA for pregnancy diagnosis of dairy cows.

AB - An important part of reproductive management programs on dairy farms is identification of nonpregnant cows and early re-insemination to achieve higher pregnancy rates. The objective of this study was to compare the effect on reproductive performance and pregnancy loss of 2 pregnancy diagnosis protocols: (1) pregnancy diagnosis performed 31. ±. 3 d after artificial insemination (AI) by ultrasonography (ULTRA), and (2) resynchronization started 31. ±. 3 d after AI but with pregnancy diagnosis performed 38. ±. 3 d after AI by palpation per rectum (PALP). Cows were randomly allocated into 1 of the 2 management programs. For cows enrolled in ULTRA, the initial pregnancy diagnosis (P1) was performed by transrectal ultrasonography at 31. ±. 3 d after AI, and nonpregnant cows were enrolled in the Ovsynch protocol for resynchronization of ovulation to receive timed AI (TAI). For cows enrolled in PALP, the Ovsynch protocol for resynchronization of ovulation to receive TAI was initiated at 31. ±. 3 d after AI regardless of pregnancy status, with the initial pregnancy diagnosis (P1) performed by palpation per rectum at 38. ±. 3 d after AI. For both groups, reconfirmation of pregnancy was performed by palpation per rectum at 63. ±. 3 d after AI (P2). Cows were inseminated after detection of estrus by use of activity monitors at any time during the study. Two levels of activity were used as a reference for cows AI after detection of estrus based on activity: an activity level of ≥2 when a cow was coded in DairyComp 305 (Valley Agricultural Software, Tulare, CA) as open (nonpregnant) and an activity level of ≥3 when the pregnancy status of the cow was unknown. Our findings showed that the odds of pregnancy loss cows in ULTRA was 2 times higher between P1 and P2 compared with that of cows in PALP. Furthermore, pregnancy diagnosis method (ULTRA vs. PALP) did not have a significant effect on the Cox proportional hazard of pregnancy at P2. The occurrence of assisted parturition, metritis, or retained placenta was associated with a reduced hazard of pregnancy at P2. An economic analysis was performed by simulating a 1,000-cow commercial dairy herd using a decision support tool to estimate the net present value (NPV; $/cow per yr) from using the 2 different pregnancy diagnosis methods. The analysis revealed minor differences in NPV between the programs, depending on the cost to perform ULTRA or PALP. In summary, we observed no difference in the reproductive performance and only a minor and fluctuating economic difference when using either PALP or ULTRA for pregnancy diagnosis of dairy cows.

KW - Ovsynch

KW - Palpation per rectum

KW - Pregnancy

KW - Ultrasonography

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84888018722&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84888018722&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3168/jds.2013-6723

DO - 10.3168/jds.2013-6723

M3 - Article

C2 - 24094532

AN - SCOPUS:84888018722

VL - 96

SP - 7630

EP - 7639

JO - Journal of Dairy Science

JF - Journal of Dairy Science

SN - 0022-0302

IS - 12

ER -