{"title":"小母牛发育系统对2个繁殖季节后续生长繁殖的影响","authors":"S.A. Springman, H.R. Nielson, R.N. Funston","doi":"10.15232/pas.2017-01697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>A 4-yr study evaluated the effects of heifer development system on growth and reproductive performance in 2 breeding seasons. March- and May-born, crossbred heifers were stratified by BW and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatments from mid-January to mid-April: (1) ad libitum meadow hay (7.3% CP; 54.3% TDN) and 1.64 kg/d of a 32% CP supplement (HY) or (2) meadow grazing (10.3% CP; 61.7% TDN) and 0.41 kg/d supplement (MDW). In the March-born heifers, ADG during treatment was greater (</span><em>P</em> < 0.01) for HY than MDW heifers (0.78 vs. 0.51<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->0.03 kg; HY, MDW), with similar pregnancy rates (<em>P</em><span> = 0.92). Calving rate and the proportion of heifers that calved in the first 21 d was also similar (</span><em>P</em> ≥ 0.33). Similarly, May-born heifers on HY treatment had greater ADG (<em>P</em> < 0.01; 0.59 vs. 0.35<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->0.05 kg; HY, MDW) during the treatment period, with similar (<em>P</em> = 0.69) pregnancy rates. Calving rate did not differ (<em>P</em> = 0.88) between treatments, although the proportion of heifers that calved in the first 21 d was greater (<em>P</em> = 0.02) for MDW compared with HY. Overall, heifer development system did not affect pregnancy rate in March or May replacement heifers; however, pregnancy rate of March-born heifers was greater (<em>P</em><span> < 0.01) than May-born (87 vs. 70 ± 3%). The reduced pregnancy rate in May heifers may be due to declining forage quality during the late-summer breeding season and may require additional inputs to equal pregnancy rates of the March-born heifers.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":22841,"journal":{"name":"The Professional Animal Scientist","volume":"34 2","pages":"Pages 177-182"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.15232/pas.2017-01697","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of heifer development system on subsequent growth and reproduction in 2 breeding seasons\",\"authors\":\"S.A. Springman, H.R. Nielson, R.N. Funston\",\"doi\":\"10.15232/pas.2017-01697\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span>A 4-yr study evaluated the effects of heifer development system on growth and reproductive performance in 2 breeding seasons. March- and May-born, crossbred heifers were stratified by BW and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatments from mid-January to mid-April: (1) ad libitum meadow hay (7.3% CP; 54.3% TDN) and 1.64 kg/d of a 32% CP supplement (HY) or (2) meadow grazing (10.3% CP; 61.7% TDN) and 0.41 kg/d supplement (MDW). In the March-born heifers, ADG during treatment was greater (</span><em>P</em> < 0.01) for HY than MDW heifers (0.78 vs. 0.51<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->0.03 kg; HY, MDW), with similar pregnancy rates (<em>P</em><span> = 0.92). Calving rate and the proportion of heifers that calved in the first 21 d was also similar (</span><em>P</em> ≥ 0.33). Similarly, May-born heifers on HY treatment had greater ADG (<em>P</em> < 0.01; 0.59 vs. 0.35<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->0.05 kg; HY, MDW) during the treatment period, with similar (<em>P</em> = 0.69) pregnancy rates. Calving rate did not differ (<em>P</em> = 0.88) between treatments, although the proportion of heifers that calved in the first 21 d was greater (<em>P</em> = 0.02) for MDW compared with HY. Overall, heifer development system did not affect pregnancy rate in March or May replacement heifers; however, pregnancy rate of March-born heifers was greater (<em>P</em><span> < 0.01) than May-born (87 vs. 70 ± 3%). The reduced pregnancy rate in May heifers may be due to declining forage quality during the late-summer breeding season and may require additional inputs to equal pregnancy rates of the March-born heifers.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22841,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Professional Animal Scientist\",\"volume\":\"34 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 177-182\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.15232/pas.2017-01697\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Professional Animal Scientist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1080744618300305\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Professional Animal Scientist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1080744618300305","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Effect of heifer development system on subsequent growth and reproduction in 2 breeding seasons
A 4-yr study evaluated the effects of heifer development system on growth and reproductive performance in 2 breeding seasons. March- and May-born, crossbred heifers were stratified by BW and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatments from mid-January to mid-April: (1) ad libitum meadow hay (7.3% CP; 54.3% TDN) and 1.64 kg/d of a 32% CP supplement (HY) or (2) meadow grazing (10.3% CP; 61.7% TDN) and 0.41 kg/d supplement (MDW). In the March-born heifers, ADG during treatment was greater (P < 0.01) for HY than MDW heifers (0.78 vs. 0.51 ± 0.03 kg; HY, MDW), with similar pregnancy rates (P = 0.92). Calving rate and the proportion of heifers that calved in the first 21 d was also similar (P ≥ 0.33). Similarly, May-born heifers on HY treatment had greater ADG (P < 0.01; 0.59 vs. 0.35 ± 0.05 kg; HY, MDW) during the treatment period, with similar (P = 0.69) pregnancy rates. Calving rate did not differ (P = 0.88) between treatments, although the proportion of heifers that calved in the first 21 d was greater (P = 0.02) for MDW compared with HY. Overall, heifer development system did not affect pregnancy rate in March or May replacement heifers; however, pregnancy rate of March-born heifers was greater (P < 0.01) than May-born (87 vs. 70 ± 3%). The reduced pregnancy rate in May heifers may be due to declining forage quality during the late-summer breeding season and may require additional inputs to equal pregnancy rates of the March-born heifers.