Literature DB >> 23881678

Effect of postweaning diet on ovarian development and fertility in replacement beef heifers.

D R Eborn1, R A Cushman, S E Echternkamp.   

Abstract

Programs for developing replacement heifers are designed for heifers to calve at 2 yr of age and to extend their stayability in the herd and minimize feed cost. The experimental objective was to determine whether developing prepubertal heifers on less dietary energy and to a BW of 55% rather than 65% of mature BW at 14 mo of age would compromise ovarian development and reduce fertility. In a 3-yr study, 8-mo-old Angus (n = 60/yr) and composite MARC II (n = 60/yr) heifers were assigned equally by age, BW, and breed to receive either a low (LG) or high (HG) BW gain diet fed to achieve an ADG of either 0.45 or 0.8 kg/d from 8 to 15 mo of age, including the first 21 d of breeding, and then transferred to pasture. At 14 mo, heifers were housed with fertile bulls for 47 d. Estrus was monitored for 21 d. Within 12 h after detection of estrus, ovarian length and height, preovulatory follicle diam., and antral follicle count (AFC) were measured by transrectal ultrasonography. Corpus luteum (CL) volume and plasma progesterone concentration were measured 5 to 15 d after estrus. Data were analyzed by ANOVA with treatment, breed, and year and their 2-way interactions as independent variables. At breeding, HG heifers were heavier than LG heifers (419.9 vs. 361.8 ± 7.5 kg; P < 0.01); ADG for the treatment period was 0.79 vs. 0.47 ± 0.04 kg/d (P < 0.01), respectively. In 2010 and 2011, 97.2% of heifers were cyclic by 21 d of breeding. Size of the ovary, preovulatory follicle, CL, and AFC did not differ between HG and LG, but preovulatory follicle diam. and ovarian length were greater (P ≤ 0.05) for MARC II vs. Angus heifers. Progesterone concentrations were less for LG vs. HG heifers (P ≤ 0.02), whereas CL volume was not affected by treatment or breed but was correlated positively with preovulatory follicle size (P < 0.01). Total AFC ranged from 5 to 49 and was correlated positively with ovarian volume but was not associated with fertility. A greater proportion of HG vs. LG heifers conceived within the first 21 d of the breeding period (64.4% vs. 49.2% ± 3.8%, respectively; P < 0.01), but overall pregnancy rate was not affected by treatment (83.0% vs. 77.7% ± 3.1%, respectively; P > 0.10). Pregnancy rate was 10% less (P < 0.01) for Angus vs. MARC II heifers. Developing beef heifers at a lesser ADG to a lighter BW (55% vs. 64% of mature BW) at breeding did not influence postweaning ovarian development or AFC or compromise pregnancy rate during the 47-d breeding period.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23881678     DOI: 10.2527/jas.2012-5877

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  5 in total

1.  Higher feeding diets effects on age and liveweight gain at puberty in crossbred Nelore × Hereford heifers.

Authors:  Júlio Otávio Jardim Barcellos; Gabriel Ribas Pereira; Eduardo Antunes Dias; Concepta McManus; Leonardo Canellas; Mari Lourdes Bernardi; Adriana Tarouco; Enio Rosa Prates
Journal:  Trop Anim Health Prod       Date:  2014-04-23       Impact factor: 1.559

2.  Effect of postweaning heifer development system on average daily gain, pregnancy rates, and subsequent feed efficiency as a pregnant heifer.

Authors:  S A Springman; H R Nielson; T L Meyer; R N Funston
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 3.  BEEF SPECIES-RUMINANT NUTRITION CACTUS BEEF SYMPOSIUM: Influence of management decisions during heifer development on enhancing reproductive success and cow longevity1.

Authors:  Adam F Summers; Shelby L Rosasco; Eric J Scholljegerdes
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  Effects of administration of a growth promoting implant during the suckling phase or at weaning on growth, reproduction, and ovarian development in replacement heifers grazing native range.

Authors:  Shelby L Rosasco; Emily A Melchior-Tiffany; Cierrah J Kassetas; Shad H Cox; Richard L Dunlap; Jennifer A Hernandez Gifford; Eric J Scholljegerdes; Robert A Cushman; Adam F Summers
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 3.338

5.  Vulvar width and rima length as predictors of the ovarian follicular reserve in bovine females.

Authors:  Nelson Fijamo Mesquita; Renata Maculan; Luciana França Smith Maciel; Nathalia Alves; Rafaela Rodrigues DE Carvalho; Gabriel Miranda Moreira; José Camisão DE Souza
Journal:  J Reprod Dev       Date:  2016-08-19       Impact factor: 2.214

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.