new tools to manage reproduction programs
DESCRIPTION
Dr. Paul Fricke presented this information as a webinar for DAIReXNET on Monday, April 22, 2013. For more information, please see our archived webinars page at www.extension.org/pages/15830/archived-dairy-cattle-webinars.TRANSCRIPT
New Tools to Manage Dairy Cattle
Reproduction
Paul M. Fricke, Ph.D.
Professor of Dairy Science University of Wisconsin-Madison
New Tools
• Accelerometer systems for detection of activity/estrus
• Strategies for resynchronization of ovulation
• New methods for nonpregnancy diagnosis
Heatime
Accelerometer Systems
Heatime
Collaborating Farm
Majestic View DairyLancaster, WI
Dairy farmin southwestern Wisconsin milking 1,000 cows
Implemented the Heatime system in late 2009
Experimental DesignCows (n = 112) from 46 to 52 DIM were submitted to a G-P protocol to synchronize estrus:
US + Blood
US + Blood + Kamar
GnRH PGF2
3X US
Mon Mon Wed Thu Fri Mon
US
Cows that failed to synchronize (n = 23) were excluded resulting in 89 cows included in the final analysis
Percentage of cows determined to be in estrus, and distribution of cows by estrous activity and ovulation Valenza et al., 2012; J. Dairy Sci. 95:7115-7127
ItemAccelerometer
systemHeatmount detectors
-------- % (n/n) -------- -------- % (n/n) --------
Estrus 71 (63/89) 66 (59/89)
Ovulation 95 (60/63) 93 (55/59)
No ovulation 5 (3/63) 7 (4/59)
No Estrus 29 (26/89) 34 (30/89)
Ovulation 35 (9/26) 47 (14/30)
No ovulation 65 (17/26) 53 (16/30)
Interval from AI to ovulation Valenza et al., 2012; J. Dairy Sci. 95:7115-7127
Mean = 7.9 ± 8.7 hn = 38 cows
AI too late(after ovulation)
AI too early(before ovulation)
7 Days 56 h
GnRH PGF2 GnRH
16 h
TAI
Pursley, Mee, & Wiltbank, 1995Theriogenology 44:915
24-32 h
Ovulation
Conception Rates of Lactating Cows Receiving TAI at Various Intervals from the Second GnRH Injection of OvsynchPursley et al., 1998. J. Dairy Sci. 81:2139-2144
32%
41%45%
41%37%
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 8 16 24 32
Hours after 2nd GnRH Injection
Con
cept
ion
Rat
e (%
)
Reproductive performance of lactating dairy cows managed for first service using timed artificial insemination with or without detection of estrus using an accelerometer system
P. M. Fricke, A. Valenza, J. O. Giordano, M. C. Amundson, and G. Lopes Jr.
J. Dairy Sci. 2012 abstract
TAIGnRH PGF GnRH
14 d 7 d 56 h 12 h
Estrous Activity
DIM 39±3 VWP = 53±3 65±3 72±3 75±3
Treatment 1
TAIGnRHPGF PGF PGF GnRH
14 d 12 d 7 d 56 h 12 h
Estrous Activity
Treatment 2
TAIGnRHPGF PGF PGF GnRH
7 d 56 h 12 h
Treatment 3
Estrous Activity
Table 1. Effect of treatment on mean (±SD) days to first AI and pregnancies per AI (P/AI).
Treatment
Item 1 2 3
n 326 334 331
Days to 1st AI 67.4 ± 10.4b
(50 - 92)62.6 ±
8.5a
(51 - 78)
74.8 ± 2.2c
(72 - 78)
P/AI (%) at 35 d
31.1 31.1 38.4
a,b,cMeans with different superscripts differ (P<0.0001)Percentages with different superscripts differ (P=0.05)
Treatment 2: Presynch/Ovsynch with AI to activity
DIM
TAIGnRHPGF PGF PGF GnRHCalving
39±3 53±3 65±3 72±3 75±3
14 d 12 d 7 d 56 h 12 h
EstrousActivity
2.2 – Cows without activity receiving TAI31% of cows
P/AI at 35 d = 35% (37/105)
2.1 – Cows inseminated to activity69% of cows
P/AI at 35 d = 29% (67/230)
Treatment 3: Presynch/Ovsynch with 100% TAI
DIM
TAIGnRHPGF PGF PGF GnRHCalving
39±3 53±3 65±3 72±3 75±3
7 d 56 h 12 h
3.1 – Cows with activity receiving TAI70% of cows
P/AI at 35 d = 41% (95/232)
3.2 – Cows without activity receiving TAI30% of cows
P/AI at 35 d = 32% (32/99)
EstrousActivity but
no AI14 d 12 d
Table 2. Effect of treatment and parity on pregnancies per AI (P/AI)1
Parity
Treatment Primiparous Multiparous P-value
1 36.5 (46/126) 27.7 (56/202) 0.10
2 32.3 (41/127) 30.4 (63/207) 0.72
3 47.3 (61/129) 32.7 (66/202) 0.01
Overall 38.7 (148/382) 30.3 (185/611) 0.01
Economic comparison among treatments Treatment
Item 1 2 3
Net Present Value ($/cow/d) 5.85 5.86 5.86
Total activity system cost ($)
72,500 72,500 -
Activity system cost ($/d) 22.35 22.35 -
Activity system cost ($/cow/d)
0.027 0.027 -
Dataflow II System
Activity Graph
Technologies for Resynchronization of Ovulation
Paul M. Fricke, Ph.D.Professor of Dairy ScienceUniversity of Wisconsin-
Madison
Fertility to TAI by AI Number
Bred # %Conc #Preg #Open Other Abort %Tot ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ===== ==== 1 47 211 237 181 19 36 2 30 81 187 84 9 20 3 27 58 159 62 9 16 4 30 44 104 59 2 12 5 28 25 63 42 2 7 6 32 12 25 18 0 3 OTHERS 33 8 16 9 0 2 TOTALS 35 445 821 474 42 100
Effect of Timing of Initiation of Resynch and Presynchronization
with GnRH on Fertility of Resynchronized Inseminations in
Lactating Dairy Cows
G. Lopes Jr., J. O. Giordano, A. Valenza, M. M. Herlihy, J. N. Guenther, M. C. Wiltbank, and P. M. FrickeUniversity of Wisconsin – Madison
Materials and Methods- Conducted on a commercial Farm in Wisconsin milking
8,000 cows from April to December 2010.- Cows were enrolled at 25 ± 3 days after a previous AI.- Pregnancy diagnoses were performed using
transrectal ultrasonography at 32 ± 3 days after AI.
Experimental Design
P TAIAI G2
P TAIAI G2
G1 + Blood
G1 + Blood
GPG 32 (n=289)
GPG 39 (n=219)
0 25±3 32±3 39±3 46±3 49±342±3
Days after previous AI
G1 + Blood P TAIAI
Pre-GnRH G2
GGPG 32 (n=335)
Experimental Design
P TAIAI G2
P TAIAIPre-
GnRH G2
P TAIAI G2
G1 + Blood
G1 + Blood
G1 + Blood
GPG 32 (n=289)
GGPG 39 (n=229)
GPG 39 (n=219)
0 25±3 32±3 39±3 46±3 49±342±3
Days after previous AI
GGPG 32 GPG 32 GGPG 39 GPG 390
10
20
30
40
50
Effect P-value
Day 0.33
GnRH 0.03
Day x GnRH 0.55
37%34%
41%
34%
(n=269) (n=219)(n=335) (n=289)
Effect of Treatment onFertility 32 days after Resynch TAI
Pre
gn
an
cie
s p
er
AI (
%)
7 Days
Pre-
G
56 hPGF G2 12 h TAI
With
CL
32 daysAfter AI
39 d After AI
Preg check with US
Resynch
Strategy
82%
7 Days 56 h
G1 PGF G2
12 h
TAI
With NO CL
Technologies for Nonpregnancy Diagnosis
Paul M. Fricke, Ph.D.Professor of Dairy ScienceUniversity of Wisconsin-
Madison
Chemical Pregnancy Tests
• Three commercial assays have been developed to determine pregnancy status in cattle by measuring PSPB (Sasser et al., 1986)
and PAG’s (Zoli et al., 1991, Green et al., 2005) in maternal blood.
PSPB Concentrations in Pregnant Dairy Cows
Sasser et al., 1986( n = 5 )
PAG Resynch Schedule Silva et al., 2007
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri SatTAI
d 2
d 9
d 16
d 23 GnRH PAG d 30 PGF GnRH TAId 37 d 44
d 51
US d 27
6:30 a.m.
Time from sample collection to
receive outcomes: ~36 h
6:00 p.m
8:00 am
Arrive at Monsanto, St.
Louis, MO
3:00 p.m.
Overnight Express
Accuracy of PAG ELISA for determination of pregnancy status 27 d after timed AISilva et al., 2007; J. Dairy Sci. 90:4612-4622
Sensitivity1
% (no./no.)
Specificity2
% (no./no.)
PPV3
% (no./no.)
NPV4
% (no./no.)
Accuracy5
% (no./no.)
Kappa
95.4(596/625)
94.2(987/1048)
90.7(596/657)
97.1(987/1016)
94.6(1583/1673)
0.89
1Proportion of samples from pregnant cows with a positive PAG ELISA.2Proportion of samples from not-pregnant cows with a negative PAG ELISA.3Proportion of PAG ELISA with a pregnant outcome that truly were pregnant.4Proportion of PAG ELISA with a not-pregnant outcome that truly was not-pregnant.5Proportion of pregnancy status, pregnant and not-pregnant, that was correctly classified.
Accuracy of a PSP-B ELISA compared with transrectal ultrasonography (US) Romano and Larson, 2010; Theriogenology 74:932-939
Day after AI
28 30 35
US (no.) 246 246 246
PSP-B (no.) 246 229 246
Sensitivity (%) 93.9 96.0 97.2
Specificity (%) 95.5 93.9 93.6
PPV (%) 94.7 92.2 92.0
NPV (%) 94.7 96.8 97.8
Accuracy (%) 94.7 94.8 95.1
Uncertain samples (%) 8.5a (21) 4.8ab (11) 3.3b (8)
Kappa value 0.92 0.92 0.95a,bWithin a row, percentages with different superscripts differ
≥35 days postbreeding and 60 days postcalvingFrequency of testing is a consideration
Short communication: Field evaluation of a pregnancy confirmation test using milk samples in dairy cows LeBlanc, 2013
Target population:683 cows on 8 different farms previously diagnosed pregnant by a veterinarian and ≥60 d of gestation
Milk test outcomes were compared to outcomes using transrectal palpation
Sensitivity = 99.2% (98.2 – 99.7%)
Specificity = 95.5% (78.2 – 99.2%)
Positive predictive value = 99.8% (99.1 – 99.96%)
Negative predictive value = 80.8% (61.3 – 90.9%)