Ir al menú de navegación principal Ir al contenido principal Ir al pie de página del sitio

Evaluación reproductiva y costos en programas de empadre estacional con Bos indicus en trópico mexicano

Reproductive and cost assessment of a seasonal breeding program with Bos indicus in tropical Mexico



Cómo citar
José Francisco, Carlos Salvador, Ivette, Wendy Leticia, & Manuel D. (2021). Evaluación reproductiva y costos en programas de empadre estacional con Bos indicus en trópico mexicano. Revista MVZ Córdoba, 26(2), e2130. https://doi.org/10.21897/rmvz.2130

Dimensions
PlumX






,

Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Departamento de Reproducción, Ciudad Universitaria, Ciudad de México, México


,

Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Departamento de Reproducción, Ciudad Universitaria, Ciudad de México, México


,

Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Centro de Enseñanza, Investigación y Extensión en Ganadería Tropical, Tlapacoyan, Veracruz, México


,

Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Centro de Enseñanza, Investigación y Extensión en Ganadería Tropical, Tlapacoyan, Veracruz, México


,

Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Centro de Enseñanza, Investigación y Extensión en Ganadería Tropical, Tlapacoyan, Veracruz, México


Objetivo. Comparar el desempeño reproductivo de vacas Bos indicus posparto y abiertas, así como evaluar el costo de retener vacas vacías al final de una temporada de empadre en el trópico mexicano. Material y métodos. Se incluyeron 128 vacas Bos indicus, 87 vacas posparto (PP) con ≤90 días posparto y 41 vacas abiertas (OC) con >90 días abiertos. El estudio se dividió en tres fases: 1) Sincronización de celos (día 0-10) e inseminación a tiempo fijo (FTAI), 2) Detección de celos e IA (día 11-45) y 3) Monta natural (día 46-90). Para la primera fase, todos los animales fueron sincronizados inseminados FTAI (día 10). Las vacas que mostraban signos de estro (día 11-45) fueron inseminadas (IA). Las vacas abiertas durante las dos fases anteriores fueron expuestas al toro. Resultados. La tasa de gestación en la fase 1 fue 58.6 y 34.1% (p<0.01), para PP y OC, respectivamente. Durante la fase 2, el porcentaje de gestación fue 42.5% (p>0.05), mientras que en la fase 3, la tasa de preñez fue 44.2% (p>0.05). El costo de una vaca OC fue tres veces más que las vacas PP. Conclusiones. La tasa de preñez durante la primera etapa, de la estación reproductiva, fue mayor para vacas PP que vacas OC. Al final de la estación reproductiva la tasa de gestación fue 80 %. El costo beneficio de retener animales no preñados después de una corta temporada de empadre no es económicamente factible para una unidad de producción vaca-becerro.


Visitas del artículo 852 | Visitas PDF


Descargas

Los datos de descarga todavía no están disponibles.
  1. Orihuela A. Some factors affecting the behavioural manifestation of oestrus in cattle: a review. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2000; 70(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00139-8
  2. Galina CS, Orihuela A. The detection of estrus in cattle raised under tropical conditions: What we know and what we need to know. Horm Behav. 2007; 52(1):32–38. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0018506X07000724
  3. Sá Filho MF, Penteado L, Reis EL, Reis TANPS, Galvão KN, Baruselli PS. Timed artificial insemination early in the breeding season improves the reproductive performance of suckled beef cows. Theriogenology. 2013; 79(4):625–632. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2012.11.016
  4. Baruselli PS, Ferreira RM, Sá Filho MF, Bó GA. Review: Using artificial insemination v. natural service in beef herds. animal. 2018; 12(1):45–52. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S175173111800054X/type/journal_article
  5. Diskin MG, Kenny DA. Managing the reproductive performance of beef cows. Theriogenology. 2016; 86(1):379–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2016.04.052
  6. Pérez-Torres L, Rubio I, Corro M, Cohen A, Orihuela A, Galina CS, et al. A pre-synchronization program at early postpartum might increase the chances of Bos indicus cows cycling prior to 50 days regardless of the length of calf separation. J Reprod Dev. 2015; 61(3):199–203. https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jrd/61/3/61_2014-114/_article
  7. Díaz BR, Galina CS, Rubio I, Corro M, Pablos JL, Orihuela A. Monitoring changes in back fat thickness and its effect on the restoration of ovarian activity and fertility in Bos indicus cows. Reprod Domest Anim. 2018; 53(2):495–501. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/rda.13136
  8. Stagg K, Spicer LJ, Sreenan JM, Roche JF, Diskin MG. Effect of Calf Isolation on Follicular Wave Dynamics, Gonadotropin and Metabolic Hormone Changes, and Interval to First Ovulation in Beef Cows Fed Either of Two Energy Levels Postpartum. Biol Reprod. 1998; 59(4):777–783. https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod59.4.777
  9. Sinclair KD, Molle G, Revilla R, Roche JF, Quintans G, Marongiu L, et al. Ovulation of the first dominant follicle arising after day 21 post partum in suckling beef cows. Anim Sci. 2002; 75(1):115–126. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1357729800052899/type/journal_article
  10. Chacón J. Assessment of Sperm Morphology in Zebu Bulls, under Field Conditions in the Tropics. Reprod Domest Anim. 2001; 36(2):91–99. http://doi.wiley.com/10.1046/j.1439-0531.2001.00253.x
  11. Chenoweth PJ, McPherson FJ. Bull breeding soundness, semen evaluation and cattle productivity. Anim Reprod Sci. 2016; 169:32–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2016.03.001
  12. Barth AD. Review: The use of bull breeding soundness evaluation to identify subfertile and infertile bulls. Animal. 2018; 12(s1):s158–s164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1751731118000538
  13. Orihuela A, Galina C, Escobar J, Riquelme E. Estrous behavior following prostaglandin F2α injection in Zebu cattle under continuous observation. Theriogenology. 1983; 19(6):795–809. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/0093691X9390323W
  14. Bisinotto RS, Chebel RC, Santos JEP. Follicular wave of the ovulatory follicle and not cyclic status influences fertility of dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 2010; 93(8):3578–3587. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2010-3047
  15. Nicholson MJ, Butterworth MH. A guide to condition scoring of Zebu Cattle. Addis Ababa: International Livestock Centre for Africa; 1986.
  16. Schröder UJ, Staufenbiel R. Invited review: Methods to determine body fat reserves in the dairy cow with special regard to ultrasonographic measurement of backfat thickness. J Dairy Sci. 2006; 89(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(06)72064-1
  17. Torres-Aburto VF, Domínguez-Mancera B, Vázquez-Luna D, Espinosa Ortiz VE. Cost of the calving interval in tropical bovine production in southeastern Mexico. Agro Product. 2020; 13(7):45–51 https://doi.org/10.32854/agrop.vi.1651
  18. Ayres H, Martins CM, Ferreira RM, Mello JE, Dominguez JH, Souza AH, et al. Effect of timing of estradiol benzoate administration upon synchronization of ovulation in suckling Nelore cows (Bos indicus) treated with a progesterone-releasing intravaginal device. Anim Reprod Sci. 2008; 109(1–4):77–87. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378432007003971
  19. Sales JNS, Carvalho JBP, Crepaldi GA, Cipriano RS, Jacomini JO, Maio JRG, et al. Effects of two estradiol esters (benzoate and cypionate) on the induction of synchronized ovulations in Bos indicus cows submitted to a timed artificial insemination protocol. Theriogenology. 2012; 78(3):510–516. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2012.02.031
  20. Baruselli P., Reis E., Marques M., Nasser L., Bó G. The use of hormonal treatments to improve reproductive performance of anestrous beef cattle in tropical climates. Anim Reprod Sci. 2004; 82–83:479–486. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S037843200400079X
  21. Ibendahl GA, Anderson JD, Anderson LH. Deciding when to replace an open beef cow. Agr Finance Rev. 2004; 64(1):61-74. https://doi.org/10.1108/00214660480001154
  22. Stevenson JS, Johnson SK, Milliken GA. Incidence of Postpartum Anestrus in Suckled Beef Cattle: Treatments to Induce Estrus, Ovulation, and Conception. Prof Anim Sci. 2003; 19(2):124–134. http://dx.doi.org/10.15232/S1080-7446(15)31391-7
  23. Larson D, Musgrave JA, Funston RN. Effect of Estrus Synchronization with a Single Injection of Prostaglandin During Natural Service Mating Effect of Estrus Synchronization with a Single Injection of Prostaglandin During Natural Service Mating. Nebraska Beef Cattle Reports. 2009; 527:9-10. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/animalscinbcr/527
  24. Rodrigues WB, Jara JDP, Borges JC, Fialho de Oliveira LO, Gomes de Abreu UP, Anache NA, et al. Efficiency of mating, artificial insemination or resynchronisation at different times after first timed artificial insemination in postpartum Nellore cows to produce crossbred calves. Anim Prod Sci. 2018; 59(2):225-231. http://www.publish.csiro.au/?paper=AN17466
  25. Palmer MA, Olmos G, Boyle LA, Mee JF. Estrus detection and estrus characteristics in housed and pastured Holstein-Friesian cows. Theriogenology. 2010; 74(2):255–264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.02.009
  26. Voh AA, Otchere EO. Reproductive performance of Zebu cattle under traditional agropastoral management in northern Nigeria. Anim Reprod Sci. 1989; 19(3–4):191–203. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/0378432089900924
  27. Silva-Mena C, Aké-López R, Delgado-León R. Sexual behavior and pregnancy rate of Bos indicus bulls. Theriogenology. 2000; 53(4):991–1002. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0093691X00002454
  28. Molina R, Bolaños I, Galina C., Pérez E, Paniagua G, Estrada S. Sexual behaviour of Zebu bulls in the humid tropics of Costa Rica: single versus multiple-sire groups. Anim Reprod Sci. 2000; 64(3–4):139–148. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378432000002062
  29. Molina R, Galina CS, Camacho J, Maquivar M, Diaz GS, Estrada S, et al. Effect of alternating bulls as a management tool to improve the reproductive performance of suckled Zebu cows in the humid tropics of Costa Rica. Anim Reprod Sci. 2002; 69(3–4):159–173. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378432001001798
  30. Molina R, Galina CS, Diaz MS, Galicia L, Estrada S. Evaluation of a bull rotating system using natural mating: Effect on the reproductive performance of zebu cows. Agrociencia. 2003; 37(1):1–10. http://www.colpos.mx/agrocien/Bimestral/2003/ene-feb/art-1.pdf
  31. Washaya S, Tavirimirwa B, Dube S, Sisito G, Tambo G, Ncube S, et al. Reproductive efficiency in naturally serviced and artificially inseminated beef cows. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2019; 51(7):1963–1968. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11250-019-01889-z
  32. Petherick JC. A review of some factors affecting the expression of libido in beef cattle, and individual bull and herd fertility. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2005; 90(3–4):185–205. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0168159104001959
  33. Pessoa GA, Martini AP, Sá Filho MF, Batistella Rubin MI. Resynchronization improves reproductive efficiency of suckled Bos taurus beef cows subjected to spring-summer or autumn-winter breeding season in South Brazil. Theriogenology. 2018; 122:14–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2018.08.021
  34. Ferreira RM, Conti TL, Gonçalves RL, Souto LA, Sales JNS, Sá Filho MF, et al. Synchronization treatments previous to natural breeding anticipate and improve the pregnancy rate of postpartum primiparous beef cows. Theriogenology. 2018; 114:206–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2017.11.022
  35. Ibendahl G, John Anderson. Open Cow Replacement Decisions: an Application of Asset Replacement Theory. Western Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meetings. 2001. https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/36184

Sistema OJS 3.4.0.3 - Metabiblioteca |