Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684bc48f8b-4z9h4 Total loading time: 0.208 Render date: 2021-04-11T13:54:35.338Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Effect of calving date on lifetime productivity of cows in a winter-calving Aberdeen Angus herd

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. A. Garcia Paloma
Affiliation:
Institute de Experimentación y Promoción Agraria, Apartado 13, Villaviciosa, Asturias, Spain
R. Alberio
Affiliation:
EEA Balcarce, CC 276, (7620) Balcarce, Argentina
M. C. Miquel
Affiliation:
EEA Balcarce, CC 276, (7620) Balcarce, Argentina
M. O. Grondona
Affiliation:
Departamento de Estadistica, INTA Castelar, Argentina
J. Carrillo
Affiliation:
EEA Balcarce, CC 276, (7620) Balcarce, Argentina
G. Schiersmann
Affiliation:
EEA Balcarce, CC 276, (7620) Balcarce, Argentina
Get access

Abstract

Lifetime productivity of 408 Aberdeen Angus cows from the Estacion Experimental Agropecuaria (EEA) of Balcarce, Argentina, was analysed during the 1972 to 1983 period according to their date of calving. Cows were allocated to two groups: one group of early first calving (Fl) when cows calved within the first 25 days of the calving period; the other, of late first calving (F2) when cows calved after that date. Independently using similar criteria, the effect of date of second calving on lifetime productivity was analysed in the same cows, groups SI and S2. Early first calving cows weaned more kg of calf when their first four calvings were considered than cows of late first calving (659 v. 628 kg). The same tendency was observed when cows were compared according to their second calving date (653 v. 634 kg). Differences in weaning weight between calves from early and late cows were only significant for the first calving (group Fl v. F2) and for first and second calving (group SI v. S2). This fact was a consequence of the shorter initial calving interval for late cows (F2 and S2) so that subsequent ages of their calves at weaning were similar to early cows (Fl and SI). Groups F2 and S2 cows had first and second calving intervals respectively of 351 and 356 days, while groups Fl and SI cows had intervals of 372 and 371 days. It is concluded that the date of the first calving and the high overall reproductive performance of the herd contributed to a high concentration of early calvings and a high productive efficiency.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Alberio, R., Schiersmann, G., Carou, N. and Mestre, J. 1987. Effect of a teaser bull on ovarian and behavioural activity of suckling beef cows. Animal Reproduction Science 14: 273–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, R. D., Le Du, Y. L. P. and Barker, J. M. 1982. The influence of winter nutrition, grazing system and stocking rate on the performance of spring-calving Hereford × Friesian cows and their calves. 1. Winter nutrition. Animal Production 34: 213224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellows, R. A. and Short, R. E. 1978. Effects of precalving feed level on birth weight, calving difficulty and subsequent fertility, journal of Animal Science 46: 15221528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdon, R. M. and Brinks, J. S. 1983. Calving date versus calving interval as a reproductive measure in beef cattle. journal of Animal Science 57: 14121417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buck, N. C., Light, D., Rutherford, A., Miller, M., Rennie, T. W., Pratchett, B. S., Capper, B. S. and Trail, J. C. M. 1976. Environmental factors affecting beef cow reproductive performance in Botswana. Animal Production 23: 357363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bustamante, J. L. 1971. Estudio de diversos factores que afectan el largo de gestacion y peso al nacimiento de los terneros. Thesis Agricultura Ingenieria Universidad Nacional Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Balcarce, Argentina.Google Scholar
Carrillo, J., Bustamante, J. L. and Cano, A. 1982. Peso de las vacas del rodeo de Reserva 6 (10 anos de datos). Evolucion del peso promedio de las vacas a traves de los anos. Produccion Animal-AAPA (Argentina). 9: 299307.Google Scholar
Carrillo, I., Bustamante, J. L., Sciotti, A. E., Ortiz, A. A. and López, M. 1983. Unidad demostrativa de producción de vacunos para came (Reserva 6 resumen de 15 ejercicios). Boletín técnico, INTA, Estación Experimental Regional Agro-pecuaria Balcarce, Argentina, 92, p. 22.Google Scholar
Coop, J. E. 1965. A review of the equivalent system. New Zealand Agricultural Science 1: 1318.Google Scholar
Corah, L. R., Dunn, T. G. and Kaltenbach, C. C. 1975. Influence of prepartum nutrition on the reproductive performance of beef females and the performance of their progeny, journal of Animal Science 41: 819824.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, D., Schalles, R. R., Kiracofe, G. H. and Good, D. L. 1977. Influence of winter nutrition on beef cow reproduction, journal of Animal Science 46: 430437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, T., Ingalls, J., Zimmerman, D. and Wiltbank, J. 1969. Reproductive performance of 2-years-old Hereford and Angus heifers as influenced by pre- and post-calving energy intake. Journal of Animal Science 29: 719726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, G. J. and Macleod, G. K. 1984. Reproductive function i n beef cows calving in the spring or fall. Animal Reproduction Science 6: 255266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kress, D. D. and Burfening, P. J. 1972. Weaning weight related to subsequent most probable producing ability in Hereford cows, journal of Animal Science 35: 327335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamond, D. R. 1970. The influence of undernutrition on reproduction in the cow. Animal Breeding Abstracts 38: 359372.Google Scholar
Lesmeister, J. L., Burfening, P. J. and Blackwell, R. L. 1973. Date of first calving in beef cows and subsequent calf production. Journal of Animal Science 36: 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowman, B. G., Edwards, R. A., Somerville, S. H. and Jolly, G. M. 1979. The effect of plane of nutrition in early lactation on the performance of beef cows. Animal Production 29: 293303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowman, B. G., Scott, N. A., Deas, D. W. and Prescott, J. H. D. 1980. The importance of length of calving period in the management of suckler cows. Technical note, East of Scotland College of Agriculture, 241 A.Google Scholar
Lowman, B. G. 1985. Feeding in relation to suckler cow management and fertility. Veterinary Record 117: 8085.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morris, S. T., Pleasants, A. B. and Barton, R. A. 1978. Postpartum oestrus interval of single-suckled Angus beef cows. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research. 21: 577581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oetzel, G. R., Petersen, G. C., Whitmore, H. L. and Ely, R. W. 1984. Protein energy malnutrition in a pregnant beef cow. In The compendium on continuing education for the practising veterinarian, pp. 277281. Veterinary Learning Systems.Google Scholar
Orbea, J. R. and Gardner, A. L. 1974. Manejo otofto-invernal de pasturas permanentes diferidas. Produccion Animal-APPA (Argentina) 3: 330344.Google Scholar
Peters, A. R. 1984. Reproductive activity of the cow in the post-partum period. I. Factors affecting the length of the post-partum acyclic period. British Veterinary Journal 140: 7684.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peters, A. R. and Riley, G. M. 1982. Is the cow a seasonal breeder? British Veterinary Journal 138: 533537.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Randel, R. 1990. Nutrition and postpartum rebreeding in cattle. Journal of Animal Science 68: 853862.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richards, M., Spitzer, J. and Warner, M. 1986. Effect of varying levels of postpartum nutrition and body condition at calving on subsequent reproductive performance in beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 62: 300306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santini, F. J., Sarlangue, H., Barbiero, S. and Carrillo, J. 1978. Efecto de la edad de primer entore sobre la productividad en vacas Aberdeen Angus. Produccion Animal-AAPA (Argentina) 6: 664679.Google Scholar
Scott, I. and Montgomery, G. 1987. Introduction of bull induces return of cyclic ovarian function in postpartum beef cows. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 30: 189192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, S. R. and Henderson, H. V. 1978. Annotated computer output for analysis of unbalanced data: SAS GLM. Mimeo series, paper no. BU-641-M. Cornell Ithaca, Biometrics Unit.Google Scholar
Searle, S. R., Speed, F. M. and Milliken, G. A. 1980. Population marginal means in the linear model: an alternative to least squares means. American Statistician 34: 216221.Google Scholar
Short, R. and Adams, D. 1988. Nutritional and hormonal interrelationships in beef cattle reproduction. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 68: 2939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Short, R. E., Bellows, R. A., Staigmiller, R. B., Berardinelli, J. G. and Custer, E. E. 1990. Physiological mechanisms controlling anestrus and infertility in post-partum beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 68: 799816.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smeaton, D., McCall, D. and Clayton, J. 1986. Calving date affects on beef cow productivity. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 46: 149152.Google Scholar
Somerville, S. H., Lowman, B. G. and Deas, D. W. 1979. The effect of plane of nutrition during lactation on the reproductive performance of beef cows. Veterinary Record 104: 9597.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1982. SAS user's guide: statistics. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Stewart, J. D. and Bravo, B. F. 1967. Reserva 6: una unidad experimental intensiva de produccion de vacunos. In simposio sobre intensification de la produccion animal. Boletin tecnico, INTA, Estacion Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce, Argentina, no. 55, pp. 3141.Google Scholar
Symington, R. 1969. Factors affecting postpartum fertility n i cattle with special emphasis on the hormonal aspects of the problem in ranch cows in Southern Africa. Proceedings of the South Africa Society of Animal Production 8: 29.Google Scholar
Thomthwaite, C. W. and Mather, J. R. 1957. Instructions and tables for computing potential evapotranspiration and the balance. Thomthwaite and Mather, Centerton, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Waldhalm, D. G., Hall, R. F., Delong, W. J., Olson, D. P. and Everson, D. O. 1979. Restricted dietary protein in pregnant beef cows. I. The effect of length of gestation and calf mortality. Theriogenology 12: 6168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiltbank, J. N., Rowden, W. W., Ingalls, J. E., Gregory, K. E. and Koch, R. M. 1962. Effect of energy level on reproductive phenomena of mature Hereford cows. Journal of Animal Science 21: 219225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiltbank, J. N., Rowden, W. W., Ingalls, J. E. and Zimmerman, D. R. 1963. Influence of post-partum energy level on reproductive performance of Hereford cows restricted in energy intake prior to calving. Journal of Animal Science 23: 10491053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zalesky, D., Day, M., Garcia-Winder, M., Imakawa, K., Kittok, R., D'Occhio, M. and Kinder, J. 1984. Influence of exposure to bulls on resumption of estrous cycles following parturition in beef cows. Journal of Animal Science 59: 11351139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 4 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 11th April 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Effect of calving date on lifetime productivity of cows in a winter-calving Aberdeen Angus herd
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Effect of calving date on lifetime productivity of cows in a winter-calving Aberdeen Angus herd
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Effect of calving date on lifetime productivity of cows in a winter-calving Aberdeen Angus herd
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *