Controlled breeding schemes for oestrous detection constitutes a proactive technical response that balances the infrastructural requirement for a profitable dairy operation and the demands for optimal animal performance. The present study compared (a) the reproductive response of a treatment based on a short vs longer-acting PGF2α analogue (tiaprost vs luprostiol), and (b) the reproductive response after a treatment of GnRH-PGF2α vs PGF2α alone for synchronizing dairy cows. Holstein-Friesian cows averaging 9000 kg milk/lactation and fed according to their requirements were used in the study. Cows were cyclic, at least 60 days post partum and were clinically sound before being considered for the experiments. In Experiment 1, animals were synchronised using an i.m. injection of either 15 mg of luprostiol or 0.75 mg of tiaprost, based on ultrasonic diagnosis of a corpus luteum. Animals were inseminated at observed oestrus. In Experiment 2, cows were synchronised, at random, by either an injection of 10pg ofbuserelin (day 0) followed by 0.75 mg of tiaprost at day 7 (GnRH-PGF2α) orjust 0.75 mg of tiaprost (PGF2α). For both treatments only cows with an ultrasonically detected corpus luteum were treated. Animals were inseminated at oestrus. At the time of treatment and again 3 days later, milk samples were collected and assayed for progesterone by RIA. Cows with progesterone concentrations >1 ng/ml were considered to have corpus luteum. Luteolysis was considered to have occurred when concentrations of progesterone were > 1 ng/ml at day 0 and <0.8 ng/ml at day 3. In Experiment 1, both analogues gave similar results in terms of induced luteolysis [luprostiol: 36/39 (92.3%) vs tiaprost: 36/41 (87.8%)], oestrous detection efficiency [luprostiol: 26/36 (72.2%) vs tiaprost: 30/36 (83.3%], oestrous distribution [day 2, 3 and 4, respectively: luprostiol: 26.9%, 50.0%, 19.2% vs tiaprost: 36.7%, 50.0%, 13.3%], and conception rates [luprostiol: 12/25 (48.0%) vs tiaprost: 14/28 (50.0%); P>0.05]. In Experiment 2, oestrous detection efficiency, interval to oestrus and conception rate were similar between treatments [97/149 (65.1%), 71.1 h, 43/95 (45.3%) for PGF2α vs 130/188 (69.1%), 68.2h, 65/126 (51.6%) for GnRH-PGF2α, respectively]. However the oestrous distribution was more concentrated in GnRH-PGF2α treated animals (P<0.01).