Beef Semen Sales

2015 ARSBC, UC-Davis 1

CONTROL OF ESTRUS AND OVULATION

IN BEEF HEIFERS AND COWS

DJ Patterson, JM Thomas, BE Bishop, JM Abel, and MF Smith Division of Animal Sciences

University of Missouri

The next 30 minutes…..

Ø  Management considerations related to FTAI

§  Heifers and Cows

Ø  Overview of protocols

§  Heifers and Cows

Ø  Questions and discussion - later

Beef Semen Sales

Management Considerations Related to Estrus Synchronization &

FIXED-TIME AI

Do we know what to expect at calving from cows that conceive on

the same day to the same sire?


02468101214161820

-14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 402468101214161820

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 802468101214161820

-11 -9 -7 -5 -3 -1 1 3 5 7

02468101214161820

-12 -8 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 1502468101214161820

-13 -11 -9 -7 -5 -3 -1 1 3 5 7 902468101214161820

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8

Location 1; Sire A (Angus) BW EPD -0.3; CED = +11 Range 271-290 Mean = 281

Location 1; Sire B (Angus) BW EPD +3.5; CED = +6 Range 275-292 Mean = 281

Location 1; Sire C (Angus) BW EPD -1.1; CED = +11 Range 274-287 Mean = 281

Location 2; Sire D (Red Angus) BW EPD +2.3; CED = -2 Range 273-300 Mean = 283



Consider the impact of estrus synchronization on calving distribution………

Ø  Increased profits Ø  Moving later calving cows forward toward the

first and second calving intervals

Ø  High production herds Ø  61% of the calves born by day 21 Ø  85% by day 42 Ø  94% by day 63

Hughes, 2005

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

%

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61 65 69 73 77Day of calving season

4 years; 11 herds; 1511 calves

Calving distribution for entire calving season

Thompson (04-07), FSRC (05, 07); Greenley (05-07); MFA (06-07) Cumulative Calf % by:

day 15 = 65%

day 21 = 70%

day 30 = 82%

day 42 = 93%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 16 31 46

Perc

enta

ge

Day of calving season

Natural Service (3 years; n = 526) Estrus Detection & AI (5 years; n = 1040) Fixed-time AI (4 years; n = 766)

Cumulative calf crops (MU Thompson Research Center) for the first 46 days over 12 calving seasons

Considerations Related to Heifer Management


Ø  Heifers that conceive earlier during their first breeding season Ø  Stay in the herd longer Ø  Produce more pounds of beef over

their lifetime

Heifer Management Reproductive management prior to the first breeding season

§  Health platform Ø  Prebreeding evaluation

§  Target weight Ø  Reproductive tract scores (RTS) §  Pelvic measurements

§  Estrous synchronization §  Sire selection (BW or CE EPD)

Reproductive Tract Scores

RTS

Cycling status

Uterine horns

Ovaries 1

infantile

no tone

no palpable follicles

2

non-cycling

> 30 d to puberty

no tone

8 mm follicles

3

non-cycling

< 30 d to puberty

slight tone

8-10 mm follicles

4

Estrous cycling Follicular phase

coiled

> 10 mm follicles

5

Estrous cycling

Luteal phase

distended

corpus luteum present


RTS

Cycling status

Uterine horns

Ovaries 1

infantile

no tone


2

non-cycling

> 30 d to puberty

no tone

8 mm follicles

3

non-cycling

< 30 d to puberty

slight tone

8-10 mm follicles

4


coiled

> 10 mm follicles

5

Estrous cycling

Luteal phase

distended



RTS

Cycling status

Uterine horns

Ovaries 1

infantile

no tone


2

non-cycling

> 30 d to puberty

no tone

8 mm follicles

3

non-cycling

< 30 d to puberty

slight tone

8-10 mm follicles

4


coiled

> 10 mm follicles

5

Estrous cycling

Luteal phase

distended



RTS

Cycling status

Uterine horns

Ovaries 1

infantile

no tone


2

non-cycling

> 30 d to puberty

no tone

8 mm follicles

3

non-cycling

< 30 d to puberty

slight tone

8-10 mm follicles

4


coiled

> 10 mm follicles

5

Estrous cycling

Luteal phase

distended



Ø  RTS: 4 to 6 weeks before breeding or 2 weeks before estrous synchronization

Ø  Begin synchronization when ≥ 50% of

the heifers have RTS of 4 or 5

Heifer Management

FIXED-TIME AI PROTOCOLS FOR HEIFERS

FIXED-TIME AI

14-day CIDR®-PG

CIDR® 0 14

PG

30 33

GnRH

AI

66 ± 2 hr ... 16 d …

GnRH

0 7

PG

9

GnRH

AI CIDR®

7-day CO-Synch + CIDR®

.. 54 ± 2 hr ..

MGA®-PG

MGA® 1 14

PG

33 36

GnRH

AI … 19 d …

72 ± 2 hr

Short-term Protocols

5

PG GnRH

0 7

GnRH

AI CIDR®


…..60 ± 4 hr..

PG

8±2 hr

Long-term Protocols

How do the long-term protocols compare in heifers?

MGA-PG protocol for heifers

MGA

1 14 … 17 to 19 days …

33

PG

Treatment day

Brown et al., 1986; Deutscher et al., 2000; Lamb et al., 2000

PG

0 14 30 …66 hr

AI

GnRH

CIDR®

Treatment day

14-d CIDR-PG protocol for heifers

Mallory et al., 2011


PG

PG MGA

CIDR

1 14

0 14

…19 days…

…16 days…

33

30

39

36

Heat detection and AI

Heat detection and AI

Mallory, et al., 2009

Estrous distribution after MGA or CIDR

0 5

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 NR Interval after progestin removal, treatment d

Estru

s, %

MGA-PG

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 NR Interval after progestin removal, treatment d

Estru

s, %

14-day CIDR-PG

Distribution of estrus after PG

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0-12

12-24

24-36

36-48

48-60

60-72

72-84

84-96

96-10

8

108-1

20

120-1

32

132-1

44

NR

Interval after PG administration, h

Estru

s, %

MGA-PG 14-day CIDR-PG

MGA-PG vs 14-d CIDR-PG

§  Insemination performed on the basis of observed estrus §  No differences in synchronized conception or pregnancy

rates (Mallory et al., 2009)

§  FTAI §  No differences in pregnancy rates

(Vraspir et al., 2013)

The Multi-State CIDR Trial

Lamb et al., 2006

0 7 ……………………..84 h

CIDR (7 d)

PG

GnRH

AI

0 7 …....... 60 h

CIDR (7 d)

PG

GnRH

AI

0 7 …............................84 h

CIDR (7 d)

GnRH PG

GnRH

AI

0 7 …..........60 h

CIDR (7 d)

GnRH PG

GnRH

AI

Detect estrus & AI Detect estrus & AI

Lamb et al., 2006

FTAI FTAI


Multi-state CIDR trial

§  GnRH at CIDR insertion did not improve pregnancy rates after FTAI

§  GnRH at CIDR insertion did not alter the percentage of heifers detected in estrus or the distribution of estrus after PG

§  A combination of detecting estrus and AI before clean-

up AI enhanced pregnancy rates over FTAI

Lamb et al., 2006

5-day CO-Synch + CIDR

5-d CO-Synch + CIDR

GnRH

..8 ± 2 h..…....60 ± 4 h

CIDR (5-d)

AI

PG 5-d CO-Synch + CIDR

FTAI at 60 h PG

GnRH

Pregnancy rates after FTAI Protocol comparison Heifers (N) Pregnancy rate (%) P-value

7-day CO-Synch + CIDR vs


2921 52 vs 62 0.09

6652 47 vs 57 0.05

14-day CIDR-PG

vs 5-day CO-Synch + CIDR

3033 70 vs 70 > 0.10

5244 53 vs 62 0.13

18875 55 vs 56 > 0.10

Ahmadzadeh et al., 20101; Sparks et al., 20122; Bridges and Lake, 20113; Perry et al., 20124; Kasimanickam and Whittier, 20135

Pregnancy rates after FTAI Protocol comparison Heifers (N) Pregnancy Rate (%) P-value

7-d CO-Synch + CIDR vs

5-d CO-Synch + CIDR

2921 52 vs 62 0.09

6652 47 vs 57 0.05

14-d CIDR-PG

vs 5-d CO-Synch + CIDR

3033 70 vs 70 > 0.10

5244 53 vs 62 0.13

18875 55 vs 56 > 0.10

Ahmadzadeh et al., 20101; Sparks et al., 20122; Bridges and Lake, 20113; Perry et al., 20124; Kasimanickam and Whittier, 20135

Field data

Show-Me-SelectTM Replacement Heifer Program


SHOW-ME-SELECT REPLACEMENT™ HEIFER PROGRAM

RTS and FTAI Pregnancy Rate

1 2 3 4 5

Total 8/103

8% 203/336

32% 2389/5216

46% 2998/6111

49% 3490/6714

52%

Thomas et al, 2015


RTS and FTAI Pregnancy Rate (N = 18,667)

FTAI Protocol Non-Cycling Cycling

7-Day CO-Synch + CIDR 112/306

37%a,x 278/612 45%b,x

MGA - PG 81/230

35%a,x 265/564 47%b,x

14-Day CIDR - PG 2399/5316

45%a,y 5945/11649

51%b,y

a,bPercentages within rows with different superscripts differ P < 0.01. x,yPercentages within columns with different superscripts differ P < 0.01.


RTS and FTAI Pregnancy Rate (18,677 heifers)

FTAI Protocol Non-Cycling Cycling

7-Day CO-Synch + CIDR 112/306 37%a,x

278/612

45%b,x

MGA - PG 81/230 35%a,x

265/564

47%b,x

14-Day CIDR - PG 2399/5316 45%a,y

5945/11649

51%b,y

a,bPercentages within rows with different superscripts differ P < 0.01. x,yPercentages within columns with different superscripts differ P < 0.01.

PG

0 14 30 …66 hr

AI

GnRH

CIDR®

Treatment day

Combining health & reproduction in a single management step……….

14-d CIDR-PG protocol for heifers

Take home points… HEIFERS

Take Home Points

§  The protocols work……

§  Choosing a protocol for FTAI in heifers §  Consider pre-treatment estrous cyclicity status

§  RTS 4 to 6 weeks before breeding

§  Protocol compliance will determine success §  Product administration §  Timing of insemination


FIXED-TIME AI PROTOCOLS FOR COWS

FIXED-TIME AI for Cows

GnRH

0 7

PG

9

GnRH AI CIDR®


.. 60-66 hr ..

5

PG GnRH

0 7

GnRH

AI CIDR®


…..72 ± 4 hr..

PG

8±2 hr

GnRH

CIDR (7-d)

…...………..

..…............

CIDR (5-d)

AI

PG

7-d CO-Synch + CIDR

PG

PG

AI

GnRH

GnRH

5-d and 7-d comparison Wilson et al., 2010; Whittier et al., 2013

GnRH

5-d CO-Synch + CIDR

Pregnancy rates resulting from FTAI in cows Treatment Time of AI Pregnancy rate


FTAI @ 66 hr

140/209

67%

FTAI @ 69 hr

498/906 55%a


FTAI @ 72 hr

140/210 67%

FTAI @ 72 hr

528/911 58%b

Wilson et al., 2010; Whittier et al., 2013; a,bP<0.05

Pregnancy rates resulting from FTAI in cows Treatment Time of AI Pregnancy rate

7-day CO-Synch + CIDR1 FTAI @ 66 hr 4327/7028 62

5-day CO-Synch + CIDR2 FTAI @ 72 hr 1357/2189 62 1Patterson et al., 2009 2Johnson et al., 2010

§  When considering a choice between the 5-d and 7-d protocols …….

§  Both protocols work effectively in postpartum beef cows, with evidence of up to a 3% advantage to the 5-d protocol.

§  Beef producers must carefully consider the increased labor and treatment costs associated with the 5-d protocol.

Take Home Points Wilson et al., 2010; Whittier et al., 2013


Take Home Points §  The protocols work……

§  Choosing a protocol for FTAI in cows §  Cow age §  Average number of days postpartum §  Body condition

§  Protocol compliance will determine success §  Product administration §  Timing of insemination

Can higher pregnancy rates be achieved with

split-time AI?

Background and Rationale

•  Females that have not expressed estrus prior to FTAI achieve lower pregnancy rates.

Time relative to ovulation (h)

Estrus X

28 h interval from LH to ovulation

-30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5

Estrous Expression & Resulting Pregnancy

Pregnancy rates Estrous expression

Yes No Busch et al., 2008 75% (123/164) 56% (150/270)

Nash et al., 2012 73% (91/124) 45% (99/220)

Martin, 2012 69% (103/150) 45% (108/240)

Total (n=1168)

72% (317/438)

49% (357/730)

•  Hypothesis: Delaying insemination of non-estrous females after GnRH would improve fertility by better aligning the window of sperm fertility with ovulation

•  Experimental Aim: Development of a strategy that

would optimize male fertility by better managing females that do not express estrus prior to FTAI

Split-time AI trials – Thomas et al., 2014

1.  Split-time AI to optimize the use of sex-sorted semen

2.  Split-time AI using conventional semen in heifers

3.  Split-time AI using conventional semen in cows

Split-time AI trials – Thomas et al., 2014


•  ESTROTECTTM estrous detection aids were applied at PGF2α administration

•  Activation of estrous detection aid recorded at GnRH administration

In each trial………..

Modification for non-estrous cows GnRH PG CIDR GnRH AI … 66 hr … … 20 hr …

0 7 10 11

7-Day CO-Synch + CIDR

GnRH PG AI

CIDR GnRH … 66 hr …

0 7 10

Cow Protocols – Thomas et al., 2014

14-d CIDR-PG (Heifers)

AI

CIDR PG GnRH … 66 hr …

0 14 30 33

Modification for non-estrous heifers

CIDR PG GnRH AI … 66 hr … … 20 hr …

0 14 30 33 34

Heifer Protocols – Thomas et al., 2014 Split-time AI trials – Thomas et al., 2014

•  Split-time AI increased pregnancy rates by 34% among non-estrous cows inseminated with sex-sorted semen.

•  Split-time AI increased pregnancy rates by 15% among non-estrous heifers using conventional semen.

•  No significant improvement in pregnancy rates were observed with split-time AI using conventional semen in non-estrous cows.

Can we determine when to administer GnRH based on estrous response with STAI?

Experimental Objectives – Bishop et al., 2015

Hypothesis: When using STAI, delayed administration of GnRH to 90 h after PG:

Ø Increase estrous response in beef heifers and cows prior to AI

Ø Increase pregnancy rates resulting from AI


Experimental design – Bishop et al., 2015

u  816 heifers u Four locations u 14-d CIDR-PG protocol u Two treatments

u  622 cows u Six locations u 7-d CO-Synch + CIDR protocol u Two treatments

Treatments (heifers) – Bishop et al., 2015

GnRH @ 66 h

GnRH @ 90 h

Pregnancy Rates – Bishop et al., 2015

Pregnancy rate based on estrous response and treatment.

Split-time AI, GnRH @ 66 h Split-time AI, GnRH @ 90 h Proportion % Proportion %

Estrous by 66 h 175/284 62 180/283 64

Estrous by 90 h 36/61 59 45/74 61

Non-estrous by 90 h 13/60 22 11/54 20

Total 224/405 55 236/411 57


Pregnancy rate based on estrous response and treatment


Estrous by 66 h 175/284 62 180/283 64

Estrous by 90 h 36/61 59 45/74 61

Non-estrous by 90 h 13/60 22 11/54 20

Total 224/405 55 236/411 57




Estrous by 66 h 175/284 62 180/283 64

Estrous by 90 h 36/61 59 45/74 61

Non-estrous by 90 h 13/60 22 11/54 20

Total 224/405 55 236/411 57




Estrous by 66 h 175/284 62 180/283 64

Estrous by 90 h 36/61 59 45/74 61

Non-estrous by 90 h 13/60 22 11/54 20

Total 224/405 55 236/411 57


0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

18-24

24-30

30-36

36-42

42-48

48-54

54-60

60-66

66-72

72-78

78-84

84-90

90-96

96-10

2

102-1

08

108-1

14

114-1

20

120-1

26

126-1

32

132-1

38

NR

Estrus Expression (by 6 h intervals)

0-66 h 74%

66-90 h 14%

>90 h 5%

Non-Responders 7%

Leitman et al. (2009a), Leitman et al. (2009b), Mallory et al. (2010)

u  511 heifers on Heat Watch®

14-d CIDR-PG protocol timing and distribution of estrus Comparing pregnancy rates after

estrus detection and AI to STAI

Estrous Expression

Detect estrus for 6 days (Heat Watch) & AI*

Split-time AI GnRH @ 66 h


Proportion % Proportion % Proportion %

0 – 66 h 229/378 61 175/284 62 180/283 64

66 h – 90 h 39/73 53 36/61 59 45/74 61

>90 h & NR 19/60 32 13/60 22 11/54 20

Total 287/511 56 224/405 55 236/411 57

*Leitman et al. (2009a), Leitman et al. (2009b), Mallory et al. (2010), Bishop et al., 2015

Estrous

Expression





0 – 66 h 229/378 61 175/284 62 180/283 64

66 h – 90 h 39/73 53 36/61 59 45/74 61

>90 h & NR 19/60 32 13/60 22 11/54 20

Total 287/511 56 224/405 55 236/411 57


Comparing pregnancy rates after estrus detection and AI to STAI

Estrous

Expression





0 – 66 h 229/378 61 175/284 62 180/283 64

66 h – 90 h 39/73 53 36/61 59 45/74 61

>90 h & NR 19/60 32 13/60 22 11/54 20

Total 287/511 56 224/405 55 236/411 57



Estrous

Expression





0 – 66 h 229/378 61 175/284 62 180/283 64

66 h – 90 h 39/73 53 36/61 59 45/74 61

>90 h & NR 19/60 32 13/60 22 11/54 20

Total 287/511 56 224/405 55 236/411 57



Treatments - Cows

GnRH @ 66 h

GnRH @ 90 h

(Bishop et al., 2015)


Split-time AI in cows

§ Delayed administration of GnRH …..

§  Increased total estrous response by 5% § 85 vs 90%; P < 0.05

§ No resulting improvement in pregnancy rate § 57 vs 58%; P > 0.10

Conclusions – when considering STAI

Ø It is not necessary to administer GnRH to heifers or cows that express estrus prior to 66 h Ø  14-d CIDR-PG in heifers Ø  7-d CO-Synch + CIDR in cows

Ø GnRH may be administered concurrent with AI at 90 h for heifers or cows that fail to express estrus prior to 66 h. Ø This results in a greater overall estrous

response in cows

Bishop et al., 2015

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements Financial Support

Acknowledgements Cooperators

§  MU Faculty, students, staff §  MU Thompson Research Center §  Circle A Angus §  4-M Ranch §  MFA, Inc. §  Mason-Knox Ranch §  Ogren Angus §  Genex (Stan Lock)

Acknowledgements Zoetis Merial Bayer

Estrotect Sexing Technologies

ABS Global Acclerated Genetics

Genex Select Sires, Inc.

Beef Semen Sales

Documents

Transcript of Beef Semen Sales