Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T20:06:58.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of dietary repletion on reproductive activity in cows after a long anoestrous period

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

E. Zerbini ,
A. G. Wold  and
T. Gemeda
E. Zerbini
Affiliation:
International Livestock Research Institute, PO Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
A. G. Wold
Affiliation:
Institute of Agricultural Research, PO Box 2003, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
T. Gemeda
Affiliation:
Institute of Agricultural Research, PO Box 2003, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Get access

Abstract

This study examined whether a prolonged anoestrus had any long-term effect on subsequent fertility of cows and estimated the relationship between repletion and resumption of reproductive activity. Twelve low body-condition, non-milking, non-cycling (depletion state) F1 crossbred dairy cows (Friesian × Boron and Simmental × Boran) were stratified to two diets (H: natural grass hay offered ad libitum and mineral lick +3 kg concentrate, and H + P: H + 7 h/day natural pasture grazing) according to parity, body weight, body condition score and calving intervals. Daily dry-matter intake was similar between cows on the two diets, but total intake of nitrogen was proportionately about 0·10 greater for cows with access to pasture. The calculated metabolizable energy intake was more than twice the estimated maintenance requirement for cows on both diets. Live weights increased from depletion to ovulation, to oestrus and to conception, but were not significantly different between cows on both diets. Body condition score increased from depletion time to first oestrus and to repletion and was greater for H + P than for H cows at first oestrus and at conception. After an average of 45 days of repletion, cows were already ovulating with no significant differences between cows on either diet. Days to onset of oestrus were 83 and 44 days for diet H and H + P, respectively. Time to conception was similar between coivs on both diets. Conception occurred when cows on H and H + P diets had recovered proportionately 0·51 and 0·58 of their live-weight and 0·84 and 1·27 of their body condition loss, respectively. Interval to repletion weight was 178 and 139 days for cows on the H and H + P diet, respectively. Cows subjected to an exceptionally long depletion period were able to resume ovarian cyclic activity and to conceive in less than 3 months when given twice maintenance requirements. These results have important management implication for on-farm situations in the tropics where fluctuations of food availability and quality occur.

Keywords

anoestrusbody conditioncowsdepletionreproductive performance
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 62 , Issue 2 , April 1996 , pp. 217 - 223
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1996

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

Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1980. Official methods of analysis. 13th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Australian Agricultural Council. 1990. Feeding standards for Australian livestock. Ruminants. Ruminant subcommittee, CSIRO, Australia.Google Scholar
Cheong, F. H. and Salt, F. J. 1968. A rapid wet digestion method for the determination of chromic oxide in faeces. Laboratory Practice 17: 199–200.Google Scholar
Dhuyvetter, D. V., Peterson, M. K., Ansotegui, R. P., Bellows, R. A., Nisley, B., Brownson, R. and Tess, M. W. 1993. Reproductive efficiency of range beef cows fed different quantities of ruminally undegraded protein before breeding. Journal of Animal Science 71: 2586–2593.Google Scholar
Ellis, K. J., Laby, R. H., Costigan, P., Zirkler, K. and Choice, P. G. 1982. Continuous administration of chromic oxide to grazing cattle. Proceeding of the Nutrition Society of Australia 7: 177.Google Scholar
Espinoza, J. E., McDowell, L. R., Wilkinson, N. S., Conrad, J. H., Martin, F. G. and Williams, S. N. 1991. Effect of dietary phosphorus level on performance and mineral status of grazing cattle in warm climate region of Central Florida. Livestock Research for Rural Development 3: 28–40.Google Scholar
Hale, D. H. 1975. Nutrition, hormones and fertility. Rhodesia Agricultural Journal 72: 69–73.Google Scholar
Harrison, L. M. and Randel, R. D. 1986. Influence of insulin and energy intake on ovulation rate, luteinizing hormone and progesterone in beef heifers. Journal of Animal Science 63: 1228–1235.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. S., Wegner, T. N. and Ray, D. E. 1987. Effect of elevating serum lipids on luteinizing hormone response to gonadotropin releasing hormone challenge in energy-deficient anestrous heifers. Theriogenology 7: 421–429.Google Scholar
Khalili, M., Lindgren, E. and Varvikko, T. 1991. A survey of mineral status of soils, feeds and cattle in the Ethiopian Highlands. In Development of appropriate feeding systems for dairy cattle in the Ethiopian highlands (ed. Varvikko, T.). International Livestock Centre for Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
Kirkwood, R. N., Cumming, D. C. and Aherne, F. X. 1987. Nutrition and puberty in the female. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 46: 177–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kock, S. W. and Preston, R. L. 1979. Estimation of bovine carcass composition by the urea dilution technique. Journal of Animal Science 48: 319–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louw, B. P. and Thomas, C. R. 1988. The influence of loss and gain of body mass on ovarian activity in beef cows. South African Journal of Animal Science 18: 1–7.Google Scholar
Lowman, B. G. 1985. Feeding in relation to suckler cow management and fertility. Veterinary Record 117: 80–85.Google Scholar
Momont, P. A. and Pruitt, R. J. 1989. Effects of body condition on reproductive performance of range beef cows. Journal of Animal Science 67: suppl. no. 2, p. 89 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland and Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland. 1984. Energy allowances and feeding systems for ruminants. Reference book no. 433. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Nicholson, M. J. and Butterworth, M. H. 1986. A guide to condition scoring of zebu cattle. International Livestock Centre for Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
Niekerk, A. van. 1982. The effect of body condition as influenced by winter nutrition, on the reproductive performance of the beef cow. South African Journal of Animal Science 12: 383–387.Google Scholar
Richards, M. W., Wettemann, R. P. and Schoenemann, H. M. 1989. Nutritional anestrus in beef cows: body weight change, body condition, luteinizing hormone in serum and ovarian activity. Journal of Animal Science 67: 1520–1526.Google Scholar
Rule, D. C., Arnold, R. N., Hentges, E. J. and Beitz, D. C. 1986. Evaluation of urea dilution as a technique for estimating body composition of beef steers in vivo: validation of published equations and comparison with chemical composition, Journal of Animal Science 63: 1935.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schneider, B. H. and Flatt, W. P. 1975. The evaluation of feeds through digestibility experiments. University of Georgia Press, Athens.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1989. SAS/STAT user's guide, version 6, 4th edition, vol. 2. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute Inc., Cary NC.Google Scholar
Tilley, J. M. A. and Terry, R. A. 1963. A two-stage technique for in vitro digestion of forage crops. Journal of British Grassland Society 18: 104.Google Scholar
Topps, J. H. 1977. The relationship between reproduction and undernutrition in beef cattle. World Review of Animal Production 13: 43–49.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. and Robertson, J. B. 1985. Analysis of forages and fibrous foods. Cornell University, Laboratory Manual for Animal Science 613.Google Scholar
Wada, H., Yuhara, M., Ikemoto, T., Senovo, M., Okushima, S., Fukushima, S. and Morita, M. 1988. Intake of forage by Jersey heifers grazing on a ladino clover dominant pasture, and its influence on fertility and udder of the cattle. Proceedings of Faculty of Agriculture, Kyushi, Tokai University 7: 37–45.Google Scholar
Zerbini, E., Gemeda, T., Franceschini, R., Sherington, J. and Wold, A. G. 1993a. Reproductive performance of F1 crossbred dairy cows used for draught: effect of work and diet supplementation. Animal Production 57: 361–368.Google Scholar
Zerbini, E., Gemeda, T., Tegegne, A., Wold, A. G. and Franceschini, R. 1993b. Effects of work and diet on progesterone secretion, short luteal phases and ovulations without estrus in postpartum F1 crossbred dairy cows. Theriogenology 43: 471–484.Google Scholar
Zerbini, E., Gemeda, T., Wold, A. G., Nokoe, S. and Demissie, D. 1995. Effect of draught work on performance and metabolism of crossbred cows. 2. Effect of work on roughage intake, digestion, digesta kinetics and plasma metabolites. Animal Science 60: 369–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar