Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T08:16:06.123Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The reproductive performance of Finnish Landrace × Dorset Horn and Border Leicester × Scottish Blackface ewes mated three times in 2 years

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

A. W. Speedy  and
J. FitzSimons
A. W. Speedy
Affiliation:
Edinburgh School of Agriculture, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
J. FitzSimons
Affiliation:
Edinburgh School of Agriculture, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
Get access

Summary

The reproductive performance of 51 Finnish Landrace × Dorset Horn (FD) ewes was compared with that of 50 Border Leicester × Scottish Blackface or Greyface (GF) ewes. Ewes were mated without hormone synchronization in November 1973 and with hormone synchronization in August 1974 and again in February 1975. Conception rates at the three matings were 88, 82 and 73% respectively in FD ewes and 96, 56 and 26% respectively in GF ewes. Mean litter size over three lambings was 2·34 in FD ewes and 2·15 in GF ewes. Stillbirths accounted for 12·0 and 10·2% of all lambs respectively and further lamb deaths during and after birth were 15·2 and 4·3% respectively; 11·6% of live FD lambs and 7·7% of GF lambs were fostered or reared artificially. The losses resulted in mean numbers of lambs weaned per ewe lambing of 1·75 from FD ewes and 1·85 from GF ewes (including lambs from those ewes that were artificially reared). Annual productivity was 2·13 and 1·67 lambs respectively.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , April 1977 , pp. 189 - 196
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1977

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

Gadsby, J. E., Heap, R. B., Powell, D. G. and Walters, D. E. 1972. Diagnosis of pregnancy and of the number of foetuses in sheep from plasma progesterone concentrations. Vet. Rec. 90: 339–342.Google Scholar
Gordon, I. 1971. Induction of early breeding in sheep by standard and modified progestagen—PMS treatments. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 76: 337–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, I. 1975. Hormonal control of reproduction in sheep. Proc. Br. Soc. Anim. Prod. (New Series) 4: 79–93.Google Scholar
Large, R. V. 1970. The biological efficiency of meat production in sheep. Anim. Prod. 12:393–401.Google Scholar
Owen, J. B. 1969. Sheep production—view of the future. Devon Agric. Assoc. Lectures. Seale-Hayne Agric. Coll., Newton Abbot, Devon.Google Scholar
Richardson, Carol. 1972. Pregnancy diagnosis in the ewe: a review. Vet. Rec. 90: 264–275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, J. J. and ørskov, E. R. 1975. An integrated approach to improving the biological efficiency of sheep meat production. Wld Rev. Anim. Prod. 11 (3): 63–76.Google Scholar
Speedy, A. W., Black, W. J. M. and Fitzsimons, J. 1976. The performance of Finnish Landrace × Dorset Horn ewes mated every six months. Anim. Prod. 22: 138 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Thimonier, J. and Cognié, Y. 1971. [Increasing lambing frequency and flock manage ment.] Bull. tech. Inf. Ingrs Servs agric. 257: 187–196.Google Scholar
Walton, P. and Robertson, H. A. 1974. Reproductive performance of Finnish Landrace ewes mated twice yearly. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 54: 35–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar