Araştırma Makalesi

Efficiency of Two Different Synchronization Protocols in Conception in Simmental Heifers

Cilt: 13 Sayı: 2 30 Haziran 2020
PDF İndir
TR EN

Efficiency of Two Different Synchronization Protocols in Conception in Simmental Heifers

Öz

This study aimed to reveal the effects of timed artificial insemination applied after the synchronization protocol known as day5 (D5) and the prostaglandin F2α (PGF2α) protocol applied in 11-day intervals (D11) on pregnancy rates in Simmental heifers. A total of 88 heifers were divided into two treatment groups. In the D5 group (n: 56), after gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) application, PGF2α injection was made on the 5th day and the second PGF2α injection was given one day later. The second GnRH was applied at the time of TAI and at the 44th hour of the second PGF2α application. In the D11 group (n: 32), double-dose PGF2α was given in 11-day intervals. GnRH was applied at the time of TAI and at the 81st hour following the second PGF2α injection. Pregnancy-associated glycoprotein visual test was carried out for determining to pregnancy on the 28th day. Additionally, for the purpose of determining embryonic deaths, the pregnancies were checked again by ultrasonography on the 63rd day following TAI. The 28th-day pregnancy rates in the synchronized heifers were 51.8% (29/56) in the D5 group and 43.8% (14/32) in the D11 group P>0.05. The 63rd-day pregnancy rates were 48.21% (27/56) in the D5 group and 40.62% (13/32) in the D11 group P>0.05. Consequently, although there was no statistically significant difference in terms of pregnancy rates between the D5 and D11 protocols, there was a numerical increase in the D5 protocol. Considering its short application time, D5 may be used for TAI in Simmental heifers.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Teşekkür

The authors thank THS Livestock (Gölbaşı, Ankara, TURKEY) for the use of their facilities and herd

Kaynakça

  1. Ahmadzadeh A, Gunn D, Hall JB, Glaze JB. Evaluation of treatment with a 5-day versus 7-day controlled internal drug-release insert on reproductive outcomes of beef heifers using a modified timed-artificial insemination protocol. Prof. Anim. Sci. 2015; 31(3): 270–277.
  2. Archbald LF, Tran T, Massey R, Klapstein E. Conception rates in dairy cows after timed-insemination and simultaneous treatment with gonadotrophin releasing hormone and/or prostaglandin F2 alpha. Theriogenology. 1992; 37(3): 723–731.
  3. Atkins JA, Busch DC, Bader JF, Keisler DH, Patterson DJ, Lucy MC, Smith MF. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone-induced ovulation and luteinizing hormone release in beef heifers: Effect of day of the cycle. J. Anim. Sci. 2008; 86(1): 83–93.
  4. Bishop BE, Thomas JM, Abel JM, Poock SE, Ellersieck MR, Smith MF, Patterson DJ. Split-time artificial insemination in beef cattle: III. Comparing fixed-time artificial insemination to split-time artificial insemination with delayed administration of GnRH in postpartum cows. Theriogenology. 2017; 99: 48–52.
  5. Bó GA, Baruselli PS. Synchronization of ovulation and fixed-time artificial insemination in beef cattle. Animal. 2014; 8(1): 144–150.
  6. Bó GA, de la Mata JJ, Baruselli PS, Menchaca A. Alternative programs for synchronizing and resynchronizing ovulation in beef cattle. Theriogenology. 2016; 86(1): 388–396.
  7. Bulut G, Taşdemir U, Yıldırım AÇ. The efficiency pregnancy associated lycoproteins in pregnancy diagnosis. III International Congress on Advances in Veterinary Sciences and Technics. 2018. pp. 89.
  8. Dahlen CR, Lamb GC, Zehnder CM, Miller LR, DiCostanzo A. Fixed-time insemination in peripuberal, lightweight replacement beef heifers after estrus synchronization with PGF2alpha and GnRH. Theriogenology. 2003; 59(8): 1827–1837.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

İngilizce

Konular

Veteriner Bilimleri

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yayımlanma Tarihi

30 Haziran 2020

Gönderilme Tarihi

14 Ocak 2020

Kabul Tarihi

30 Nisan 2020

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2020 Cilt: 13 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA
Taşdemir, U., & Bulut, G. (2020). Efficiency of Two Different Synchronization Protocols in Conception in Simmental Heifers. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal, 13(2), 140-144. https://doi.org/10.30607/kvj.674641
AMA
1.Taşdemir U, Bulut G. Efficiency of Two Different Synchronization Protocols in Conception in Simmental Heifers. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal. 2020;13(2):140-144. doi:10.30607/kvj.674641
Chicago
Taşdemir, Umut, ve Gaye Bulut. 2020. “Efficiency of Two Different Synchronization Protocols in Conception in Simmental Heifers”. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal 13 (2): 140-44. https://doi.org/10.30607/kvj.674641.
EndNote
Taşdemir U, Bulut G (01 Haziran 2020) Efficiency of Two Different Synchronization Protocols in Conception in Simmental Heifers. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal 13 2 140–144.
IEEE
[1]U. Taşdemir ve G. Bulut, “Efficiency of Two Different Synchronization Protocols in Conception in Simmental Heifers”, Kocatepe Veterinary Journal, c. 13, sy 2, ss. 140–144, Haz. 2020, doi: 10.30607/kvj.674641.
ISNAD
Taşdemir, Umut - Bulut, Gaye. “Efficiency of Two Different Synchronization Protocols in Conception in Simmental Heifers”. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal 13/2 (01 Haziran 2020): 140-144. https://doi.org/10.30607/kvj.674641.
JAMA
1.Taşdemir U, Bulut G. Efficiency of Two Different Synchronization Protocols in Conception in Simmental Heifers. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal. 2020;13:140–144.
MLA
Taşdemir, Umut, ve Gaye Bulut. “Efficiency of Two Different Synchronization Protocols in Conception in Simmental Heifers”. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal, c. 13, sy 2, Haziran 2020, ss. 140-4, doi:10.30607/kvj.674641.
Vancouver
1.Umut Taşdemir, Gaye Bulut. Efficiency of Two Different Synchronization Protocols in Conception in Simmental Heifers. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal. 01 Haziran 2020;13(2):140-4. doi:10.30607/kvj.674641