English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Our objective was to determine which of 2 split-time AI programs applied to suckled beef cows would result in greater pregnancy risk. Suckled beef cows (n = 1,062) at 12 locations in 4 states (CO, KS, MY, and WA) were enrolled. Cows were treated on d -7 with a progesterone insert concurrent with 100 µg GnRH and on d 0 with 25 mg PGF plus removal of the insert. Estrus-detection patches were affixed to cows at insert removal. The study was designed as a completely randomized experiment of 2 treatment combinations. Within location and balanced for parity (primiparous vs. multiparous), cows were assigned randomly to 2 treatment times (55 vs. 65 h after CIDR insert removal) at which time estrus-detection patches were assessed. Estrus was defined to have occurred when an estrus-detection patch was &gt; 50% colored (activated). Cows determined to be in estrus were inseminated at either 55 or 65 h, whereas the residual nonestrous cows in both treatment times received GnRH at 55 or 65 h but were inseminated 20 h later at 75 or 85 h, respectively. Pregnancy outcomes were determined at 36 d after AI and at the end of the breeding season. Thus, pregnancy outcomes of interest were compared between the 55 + 75-h treatment combination and that of the 65+85-h combination. Expression of estrus was greater ( = 0.001) by 65 h after PGF than by 55 h (62.0% vs. 41.9%), respectively, and this proportion was influenced by parity (time x parity interaction; = 0.006). As a result, proportionally more ( &lt; 0.001) cows received the timed AI at 75 than 85 h (59.4% vs. 40.6%). Similar proportions of cows not in estrus by 55 or 65 h were detected in estrus by 75 or 85 h (40.1% vs. 39.3%), respectively. The cumulative proportion of cows in estrus by 75 h was less ( &lt; 0.001) than that by 85 h (66.7% vs. 76.7%), respectively. Pregnancy risks at 36 d differed among treatments, with cows detected in estrus and inseminated at 55 or 65 h having greater pregnancy risks than their time-inseminated herd mates at 75 or 85 h (62.3% vs.49.7%), respectively. Overall pregnancy risk for cows in the 65+85-h treatment combination was greater at 36 d than for cows in the 55 + 75-h treatment combination (61.0% vs. 51.4%), respectively. We conclude that the 65 + 85-h treatment combination produced more pregnancies than the 55 + 75-h combination, but its implementation may be somewhat less convenient in terms of cow handling times.

Two split-time artificial insemination programs in suckled beef cows1,2