Abstract #131
Section: Physiology and Endocrinology
Session: Physiology and Endocrinology: Reproduction and estrous synchronization
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Monday 11:15 AM–11:30 AM
Location: Panzacola H-4
Session: Physiology and Endocrinology: Reproduction and estrous synchronization
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Monday 11:15 AM–11:30 AM
Location: Panzacola H-4
# 131
Timing of GnRH administration based on estrous response in beef heifers following administration of the 14-d CIDR-PG protocol with split-time AI.
Brianne E. Bishop*1, Jordan M. Thomas1, Jillian M. Abel1, Mark R. Ellersieck1, Scott E. Poock1, Michael F. Smith1, David J. Patterson1, 1University of Missouri, Columbia, MO.
Key Words: estrous synchronization, split-time artificial insemination, beef heifer
Timing of GnRH administration based on estrous response in beef heifers following administration of the 14-d CIDR-PG protocol with split-time AI.
Brianne E. Bishop*1, Jordan M. Thomas1, Jillian M. Abel1, Mark R. Ellersieck1, Scott E. Poock1, Michael F. Smith1, David J. Patterson1, 1University of Missouri, Columbia, MO.
The experiment was designed to evaluate timing of GnRH administration in beef heifers based on estrous status with split-time AI. Estrus was synchronized in 816 heifers across 4 locations by using the 14-d CIDR-PG protocol (CIDR insert [1.38 g progesterone] on d 0 with removal on d 14; 25 mg PGF2α [PG] 16 d after CIDR removal on d 30; and 100 μg GnRH depending on treatment). Estrous detection aids (Estrotect) were applied at PG on d 30, with estrus recorded at 66 and 90 h after PG on d 33 and 34, respectively. Treatments were balanced across locations using tract score and weight. Timing of insemination was based on expression of estrus 66 h after PG. Heifers in each treatment that exhibited estrus by 66 h were inseminated; whereas, AI was delayed 24 h until 90 h after PG for heifers failing to exhibit estrus by 66 h. Heifers in treatment 1 were administered GnRH 66 h after PG irrespective of estrus expression; whereas, in treatment 2, heifers were administered GnRH coincident with delayed insemination only if not detected in estrus at 66 h after PG. Data were analyzed using PROC FREQ in SAS. There was no effect of treatment on overall estrous response (1 = 85%; 2 = 87%; P = 0.49) or AI pregnancy rate (1 = 55%; 2 = 58%; P = 0.54). There were no differences between treatments in estrous response at 66 h (1 = 70%; 2 = 69%; P = 0.64); and pregnancy rate resulting from AI for heifers inseminated at 66 h was not influenced by GnRH (1 = 62%; 2 = 64%; P = 0.65). Furthermore, there were no differences between treatments in estrous response during the 24 h delay period (1 = 50%; 2 = 58% P = 0.22), or pregnancy rate resulting from AI (1 = 40%; 2 = 44%; P = 0.55). In summary, when split-time AI is used in conjunction with the 14 d CIDR-PG protocol, administration of GnRH at AI to heifers that exhibit estrus by 66 h after PG is not warranted. These data suggest, however, that among heifers for which AI is delayed based on failure to exhibit estrus by 66 h after PG, timing of GnRH administration (66 vs. 90 h after PG) may be more flexible.
Key Words: estrous synchronization, split-time artificial insemination, beef heifer