Comparison of Various Methods of Estrus Detection in Synchronized Virgin Beef Heifers

Methods of heat detection were compared in the Mid- Crest Area Cattle Evaluation Program (MACEP) heifer development program in the 1998-breeding season. A total of 189 heifers from thirteen consignors entered the program on November 10, 1997. These heifers were condition scored, hip height measured, weighed, disposition scored, booster vaccinated, and treated for parasites at the time of arrival. Determination of the heifer’s mature weight was made and a target of 65% of their mature weight at breeding was established. The ration was designed to meet this goal. The heifers were kept in a dry lot until all heifers were AI bred once. The heifers were periodically weighed and condition scored to monitor their gains and the ration was adjusted as needed. The estrus synchronization program consisted of an oral progesterone analog for 14 days; 17 days after completion of the progesterone analog treatment a single injection of prostaglandin was given and the heifers were then estrus detected. Two concurrent methods of estrus detection were utilized: 1) Ovatec â electronic breeding probe (probe), 2) HeatWatchâ estrus detection system (HW), and 3) a combination of probe and HW. Probe readings were obtained each 12 hours and the heifers were continuously monitored for estrus activity using the HW system. The probe was used as the primary estrus detection method and the HW system was used as a back-up system. Those heifers that did not demonstrate any estrus signs prior to 96 hours post prostaglandin treatment were mass inseminated at 96 hours. Post AI breeding, 151 of the heifers were placed on pasture and ran with clean-up bulls for 60 days. The remaining heifers left the program after the AI breeding was completed. Pregnancy to the AI breeding was determined by ultrasound on June 29, 1998. Results from using both probe and HW were 60% pregnant by AI, probe alone was 32% pregnant by AI, and HW alone was 27% pregnant by AI. The result of mass insemination was 20% pregnant by AI.

Evaluation of a Year-Round Grazing System: Summer Cow-Calf Progress Report

A comparison was made between two different summer grazing systems. One system was the summer component of a year-round grazing system, involving the rotational stocking of smooth bromegrass--orchardgrass--birdsfoot trefoil pastures and winter stockpiles pastures with cowcalf pairs co-grazing with stocker yearlings at .75 animal units per acre. That system was compared with a minimal land system involving the rotational stocking of smooth bromegrass--orchardgrass-- birdsfoot trefoil summer pastures with cow-calf pairs grazing at .64 animal units per acre and hay removal from 25% of the pasture. Stocker yearlings or hay removal were used as management tools to remove excess forage and optimize forage quality. Hay was removed once from three fourths of the winter stockpiled pastures and one fourth of the allocated summer pastures. Cow-calf pairs grazing in the year-round system utilized on fourth of the winter stockpile pastures due to lack of forage, whereas cow-calf pairs grazing with hay removal were supplemented with harvested hay for two weeks during the summer. Grazing system did not affect cow body weight, condition score, or daily calf weight gain. Growing animal production per acre was affected by grazing system, with the minimal land system having a higher production level.

Evaluation of a Year-Round Grazing System: Summer Cow-Calf Progress Report

A comparison was made between two different summer grazing systems at the McNay Research Farm. One system was the summer component of a year-round grazing system, involving the rotational stocking of smooth bromegrass-orchardgrass-birdsfoot trefoil pastures and winter stockpile pastures with cow-calf pairs co-grazing with stocker yearlings at .75 animal units per acre. That system was compared with a minimal land system involving the rotational stocking of smooth bromegrass-orchardgrass-birdsfoot trefoil summer pastures with cow-calf pairs grazing at .64 animal units per acre and hay removal from 25% of the pasture. Stocker yearlings or hay removal were used as management tools to remove excess forage and optimize forage quality. Hay was removed once from three fourths of the winter stockpiled pastures in 1996 (Yr. 1) and all the pasture in 1997 (Yr. 2). One hay removal occurred on one fourth of the allocated summer pastures in Year 1 and one half of the pastures in Year 2. In Year one, cow-calf pairs grazing in the year-round system utilized one fourth of the winter stockpile pastures due to a lack of forage on the summer pastures, whereas in Year 2 cowcalf pairs grazed winter stockpile pastures to remove forage as a second cutting of hay. Cow-calf pairs grazing with hay removal were supplemented with harvested hay for two weeks during the summer of Year 1 due to lack of grazable forage; in Year 2, no supplementation was needed. Grazing system did not affect cow body weight, condition score, or daily calf gain in either year. Growing animal production per acre was affected by grazing system, with the minimal land system having a higher production level in Year 1 and Year 2. The year-round system also produced more net winter forage than did the minimal land system in Year 1. Differences in forage yield and quality were only observed between winter stockpile forages of tall fescue-red clover and smooth bromegrass-red clover and summer pastures during the months of June, July, and August.