Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T19:29:19.138Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Application of light control to shorten the production cycle in two breeds of sheep

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. A. Vesely
J. A. Vesely
Affiliation:
Research Station, Agriculture Canada, Lethbridge, Alberta T1J 4B1, Canada
Get access

Abstract

An average of 60 Rambouillet and 60 Suffolk ewes was maintained under an intensive management system to lamb about every 7 months. Decreased daylength was used for oestrus induction in normally anoestrous periods. The experiment lasted 3·7 years, during which time six lamb crops were produced, three of them as a result of out-of-season mating. Ewes of each breed were subdivided into three experimental groups and each breed-group was maintained under one of three different light treatments before and during out-of-season mating. Imposed Treatment 1 consisted of a pre-mating period under natural daylight followed by a mating period of short daylength (8 h/day). Ewes under imposed Treatments 2 and 3 were exposed to 16 h of light during the pre-mating period and to 8 h of daylight during the mating period. This did not affect conception significantly in the Rambouillet but it did in the Suffolk. Different intensities and wavelengths of light during the long daylight period (16 h/day) were used in Treatments 2 and 3 but did not cause different responses.

In Rambouillet ewes the first mating (out-of-season) gave 73% conception. It was followed by two in-season matings with 72 and 85% conceptions. The last three matings (out-of-season, in-season, out-of-season) resulted in 57, 42, and 58% conceptions. In the Suffolk ewes, the conceptions were 30, 88, 77, 3, 77, and 10% in the same order as those for Rambouillet. The average production ofRambouil-lets on the three treatments was 166 lambs per 100 ewes per year (165, 177, 157) whereas Suffolks produced 132 lambs (120, 143, 135). Control Rambouillet and Suffolk ewes maintained under natural daylight year-round produced 139 and 117 lambs.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , April 1978 , pp. 169 - 176
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ducker, M. J. and Bowman, J. C. 1970a. Photoperiodism in the ewe. 3. The effects of various patterns of increasing daylength on the onset of anoestrus in Clun Forest ewes. Anim. Prod. 12: 465–471.Google Scholar
Ducker, M. J. and Bowman, J. C. 1970b. Photoperiodism in the ewe. 4. A note on the effect on onset of oestrus in Clun Forest ewes of applying the same decrease in daylength at two different times of the year. Anim. Prod. 12: 513–516.Google Scholar
Ducker, M. J., Thwaites, C. J. and Bowman, J. C. 1970a. Photoperiodism in the ewe. 1. The effect of long supplemented daylengths on the breeding activity of pregnant and non-pregnant Teeswater-Clun ewes. Anim. Prod. 12: 107–113.Google Scholar
Ducker, M. J., Thwaites, C. J. and Bowman, J. C. 1970b. Photoperiodism in the ewe. 2. The effects of various patterns of decreasing daylength on the onset of oestrus in Clun Forest ewes. Anim. Prod. 12: 115–123.Google Scholar
Fraser, A. F. and Laino, A. H. 1969. Oestrus induction in ewes with standard treatments of reduced natural light. Vet. Rec. 84: 427–430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kazakov, V. M. 1964. [The control of reproduction in ewes by regulating daylight.] Proc. 5th int. Congr. Anim. Reprod. A. I., Trento. 6: 60–63.Google Scholar
Mimura, K., Asahida, Y. and Morita, H. 1964. The environmental factors on lamb growth, analytically studied with extra-seasonal lambs. II. Extra-seasonal lamb production by the combined treatment of artificial light and hormone. J. Fac. Fish. Anim. Husb. Hiroshima Univ. 5: 419–429.Google Scholar
Newton, J. E. and Betts, J. E. 1972. A comparison between the effect of various photo-periods on the reproductive performance of Scottish half-bred ewes. J. Agric. Sci., Camb. 78: 425–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhind, S. M., Robinson, J. J., Fraser, C. and Phillippo, M. 1977. Effects of season and lactation on ovulation rate, plasma progesterone concentrations in early pregnancy and lamb production in Finnish Landrace × Dorset Horn ewes. Anim. Prod. 24: 128 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Robinson, J. J. 1974. Intensifying ewe productivity. Proc. Br. Soc. Anim. Prod. {New Series) 3: 31–40.Google Scholar
Vesely, J. A. 1975. Induction of lambing every eight months in two breeds of sheep by light control with or without hormonal treatment. Anim. Prod. 21: 165–174.Google Scholar
Walton, P. and Robertson, H. A. 1974. Reproductive performance of Finnish Landrace ewes mated twice yearly. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 54: 35–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiteman, J. V., Zollinoer, W. A., Thrift, F. A. and Gould, M. B. 1972. Post-partum mating performance of ewes involved in a twice-yearly lambing program. J. Anim. Sci. 35: 836–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, R. L., Godley, W. C. and Hurst, V. 1961. Effect of light, temperature, and hormones on the reproductive performance of ewes. J. Anim. Sci. 20: 693–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar