Influence of a short-term prepartum supplementation on beef cows and calves’ performance in pastoral conditions
G. Quintans A C , A. Scarsi A , G. Roig A , M. Carriquiry B and G. Banchero A
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A National Institute for Agricultural Research, Ruta 8 km 281, 33000, Uruguay.
B School of Agronomy, UDELAR, Avenue Garzón 780, Uruguay.
C Corresponding author. Email: gquintans@tyt.inia.org.uy
Animal Production Science 56(11) 1913-1919 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN15082
Submitted: 11 February 2015 Accepted: 11 June 2015 Published: 15 September 2015
Abstract
Multiparous Aberdeen Angus × Hereford crossbred cows were used to evaluate the effect of supplementation during the last month of gestation on milk production and composition and cow and calf performance. Cows were assigned randomly to supplement (SUP; n = 18) or Control (CON; n = 17) treatments. Supplemented cows were offered (1 kg/100 kg bodyweight) a mix of sorghum grain and protein concentrated (67 : 33 as-fed basis; 16% crude protein, 11% acid detergent fibre) from (mean ± s.e.m.) 33 ± 1.4 days prepartum until calving. Before, during, and after the supplementation period, cows grazed together a native pasture paddock with average forage mass available of 1345 kg/ha of dry matter (10.4% crude protein, 45.2% acid detergent fibre). Cows were blood sampled weekly from –42 to 112 days postpartum (DPP) for serum progesterone and non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA) concentrations. Maximum follicle diameter was measured by ovarian ultrasound examination at 60 DPP. The breeding period lasted 60 days and started at 60 ± 1.4 DPP. There was an interaction between treatment and time on BCS (P < 0.0005). Before calving there were no differences in BCS between cows in SUP and in CON, but at calving SUP cows tended (P = 0.10) to present greater BCS and from calving to 84 DPP BCS was greater (P < 0.05) in SUP with respect to CON cows. There was an interaction between treatment and time on plasma NEFA concentrations (P < 0.0005). During the last month of gestation NEFA concentrations were reduced in SUP cows but there were no differences between treatments during the postpartum period. Milk production decreased linearly from 30 to 150 DPP but there was no effect of treatment on it. Calf bodyweight at birth and at weaning did not differ between treatments (37.5 ± 2.4 and 175.6 ± 2.4 kg, respectively). The probability of cows presenting follicles with diameter ≥10 mm was greater (P < 0.05) in SUP than CON cows. The length of the postpartum period did not differ between treatments. The probability of cows cycling during the first 90 DPP and pregnancy rate tended (P = 0.08) to be greater in SUP than in CON cows. Supplementation in winter and for only 30 days in the last month of gestation of beef cows under grazing conditions, increased cows’ BCS without increasing BW of calves, and tended to improve reproductive performance.
Additional keywords: milk, NEFA, nutrition, reproduction.
References
AFRC (1993) ‘Technical Committee on Responses to Nutrients. Energy and protein requirements of ruminants.’ An Advisory Manual Prepared by the Arc Technical Committee on Response to Nutrients. (CAB International: Wallingford)Alexander BM, Hess BW, Hixon DL, Garrett BL, Rule DC, Mcfarland M, Bottger JD, Simms DD, Moss GE (2002) Influence of pre-partum fat supplementation on subsequent beef cow reproduction and calf performance. The Professional Animal Scientist 18, 351–357.
Banta JP, Lalman DL, Owens FN, Krehbiel CR, Wettemann RP (2006) Effects of interval-feeding whole sunflower seeds during mid to late gestation on performance of beef cows and their progeny. Journal of Animal Science 84, 2410–2417.
| Effects of interval-feeding whole sunflower seeds during mid to late gestation on performance of beef cows and their progeny.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD28XovFGktbg%3D&md5=a685dfb92d5b8affd313f80027c036aaCAS | 16908645PubMed |
Bellows RA, Grings EE, Simms DD, Geary TW, Bergman JW (2001) Effects of feeding supplemental fat during gestation to first-calf beef heifers. The Professional Animal Scientist 17, 81–89.
Bermúdez R, Ayala W (2005) Producción de Forraje de un campo natural de la zona de lomadas del Este. In ‘Seminario de Actualización Técnica en Manejo de Campo Natural (2005, Treinta y Tres) Resultados experimentales’. Serie Técnica no. 151. pp. 41−50. (National Institute for Agricultural Research: Montevideo)
Britt JH (2008) Oocyte development in cattle: physiological and genetic aspects. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 37, 110–115.
| Oocyte development in cattle: physiological and genetic aspects.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cavestany D, Kulcsár M, Crespi D, Chilliard Y, La Manna A, Balogh O, Keresztes M, Delavaud C, Huszenicza G (2009a) Effect of prepartum energetic supplementation on productive and reproductive characteristics, and metabolic and hormonal profiles in dairy cows under grazing conditions. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 44, 663–671.
| Effect of prepartum energetic supplementation on productive and reproductive characteristics, and metabolic and hormonal profiles in dairy cows under grazing conditions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXhtVaiurnF&md5=58057c6eef624348cd95b7a033fae616CAS | 18694427PubMed |
Cavestany D, Viñoles C, Crowe MA, La Manna A, Mendoza A (2009b) Effect of prepartum diet on postpartum ovarian activity in Holstein cows in a pasture-base dairy system. Animal Reproduction Science 114, 1–13.
| Effect of prepartum diet on postpartum ovarian activity in Holstein cows in a pasture-base dairy system.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXms1yqu7s%3D&md5=981d9524f6c82242ba1bbd7e94ce04e3CAS | 18790580PubMed |
Chagas LM, Rhodes FM, Blache D, Gore PJS, Macdonald KA, Verkerk GA (2006) Precalving effects on metabolic responses and postpartum anestrus in grazing primiparous dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 1981–1989.
| Precalving effects on metabolic responses and postpartum anestrus in grazing primiparous dairy cows.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD28Xlt1eru7Y%3D&md5=a767ffe92225284c4ef23cfecc593434CAS | 16702261PubMed |
DeRouen SM, Franke DE, Morrison DG, Wyatt WE, Coombs DF, White TW, Humes E, Greene BB (1994) Prepartum body condition and weight influences on reproductive performance of first-calf beef cows. Journal of Animal Science 72, 1119–1125.
Grimard B, Humblot P, Ponter AA, Mialot JP, Sauvant D, Thibier M (1995) Influence of postpartum energy restriction on energy status, plasma LH and oestradiol secretion and follicular development in suckled beef cows. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 104, 173–179.
| Influence of postpartum energy restriction on energy status, plasma LH and oestradiol secretion and follicular development in suckled beef cows.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DyaK2MXmslaktLY%3D&md5=2ee44b2a8b2ed81365677168fb569693CAS | 7636800PubMed |
Grings EE, Short RE, Blummel M, MacNeil MD, Bellows RA (2001) Prepartum supplementation with protein or fat and protein for grazing cows in three seasons of calving. Proc. West. Sec. Am. Soc. Anim. Sci. 52, 501–504.
Hess BW, Lake SL, Scholljegerdes EJ, Weston TR, Nayigihugu V, Molle JDC, Moss GE (2005) Nutritional controls of beef cows reproduction. Journal of Animal Science 83, E90–E106.
Houghton PL, Lemenager RP, Horstman A, Hendrix KS, Moss GE (1990) Effects of body composition, pre- and postpartum energy level and early weaning on reproductive performance of beef cows and preweaning calf gain. Journal of Animal Science 68, 1438–1446.
Hunter MG (1991) Characteristics and causes of the inadequate corpus luteum. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility. Supplement 43, 91–99.
Lalman DL, Williams JE, Hess BW, Thomas MG, Keisler DH (2000) Effect of dietary energy on milk production and metabolic hormones in thin, primiparous beef heifers. Journal of Animal Science 78, 530–538.
Lowman BG (1985) Feeding in relation to suckler cow management and fertility. The Veterinary Record 117, 80–85.
| Feeding in relation to suckler cow management and fertility.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaL28%2FitVGgsA%3D%3D&md5=dd5b7037b26465ac630da6d735ab838cCAS | 4049689PubMed |
NRC (1996) ‘Nutrient requirements of beef cattle.’ 7th edn. (National Academy Press: Washington, DC)
Perry RC, Corah LR, Cochran RC, Beal WE, Stevenson JS, Minton JE, Simms DD, Brethour R (1991) Influence of dietary energy on follicular development, serum gonadotropins, and first postpartum ovulation in suckled beef cows. Journal of Animal Science 69, 3762–3773.
Quintans G, Banchero G, Carriquiry M, López C, Baldi F (2010) Effect of body condition and suckling restriction with and without presence of the calf on cow and calf performance. Animal Production Science 50, 931–938.
| Effect of body condition and suckling restriction with and without presence of the calf on cow and calf performance.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3cXhtlWmtLfO&md5=f06b94e802091b316a5ab7d5227cac73CAS |
Quintans G, Velazco JI, Scarsi A, López-Mazz C, Banchero G (2012) Effect of nutritional management during the postpartum period of primiparous autumn-calving cows on dam and calf performance under range conditions. Livestock Science 144, 103–109.
| Effect of nutritional management during the postpartum period of primiparous autumn-calving cows on dam and calf performance under range conditions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Radunz AE, Fluharty FL, Day ML, Zerby HN, Loerch SC (2010) Prepartum dietary energy source fed to beef cows: I. Effects on pre- and postpartum cow performance. Journal of Animal Science 88, 2717–2728.
| Prepartum dietary energy source fed to beef cows: I. Effects on pre- and postpartum cow performance.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3cnmsVKruw%3D%3D&md5=863c8f821846db6a7c9166442404ad18CAS | 20453084PubMed |
Randel RD (1990) Nutrition and postpartum rebreeding in cattle. Journal of Animal Science 68, 853–862.
Richards MW, Spitzer JC, Warner MB (1986) Effect of varying levels of postpartum nutrition and body condition at calving on subsequent reproductive performance in beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 62, 300–306.
Scarsi A, Astessiano AL, Banchero G, Carriquiry M, Quintans G (2010a) Short-prepartum supplementation effect on productive and reproductive parameters in multiparous beef cows under grazing conditions I. In ‘Reproduction in domestic ruminant, 7: proceedings of the eighth international symposium on reproduction in domestic ruminants’. (Eds CM Lucy, JL Pate, MF Smith, TE Spencer) p. 576. (Nottingham University Press: Nottingham)
Scarsi A, Astessiano AL, Banchero G, Carriquiry M, Quintans G (2010b) Short-prepartum supplementation effect on productive and reproductive parameters in multiparous beef cows under grazing conditions II. In ‘Reproduction in domestic ruminant, 7: proceedings of the eighth international symposium on reproduction in domestic ruminants’. (Eds CM Lucy, JL Pate, MF Smith, TE Spencer) p. 577. (Nottingham University Press: Nottingham)
Schillo KK (1992) Effects of dietary energy on control of luteinizing hormone secretion in cattle and sheep. Journal of Animal Science 70, 1271–1282.
Short RE, Bellows RA, Staigmiller R, Berardinelli JG, Custer EE (1990) Physiological mechanisms controlling anestrus and infertility in postpartum beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 68, 799–816.
Soca P, Carriquiry M, Keisler DH, Claramunt M, Do Carmo M, Olivera-Muzante J, Rodríguez M, Meikle A (2013) Reproductive and productive response to suckling restriction and dietary flushing in primiparous grazing beef cows. Animal Production Science 53, 283–291.
| Reproductive and productive response to suckling restriction and dietary flushing in primiparous grazing beef cows.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3sXjsVymurY%3D&md5=fdb8d15ec178bc1eaf6e7e4603dae6e4CAS |
Soca P, Carriquiry M, Claramunt M, Gestido V, Meikle A (2014a) Metabolic and endocrine profiles of primiparous beef cows grazing native grassland. 1. Relationships between body condition score at calving and metabolic profiles during the transition period. Animal Production Science 54, 856–861.
Soca P, Carriquiry M, Claramunt M, Ruprechter G, Meikle A (2014b) Metabolic and endocrine profiles of primiparous beef cows grazing native grassland. 1. Effect of body condition score at calving, type of suckling restriction and flushing on plasmatic and productive parameters. Animal Production Science 54, 862–868.
van Knegsel ATM, Van den Brand H, Graat EAM, Dijkstra J, Jorritsma R, Decuypere E, Tamminga S, Kemp B (2007) Dietary energy source in dairy cows in early lactation: metabolites and metabolic hormones. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 1477–1485.
| Dietary energy source in dairy cows in early lactation: metabolites and metabolic hormones.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXitlWnu7k%3D&md5=ba4c429b9ddc41d5c19a3e4b4e0a48c2CAS |
Vizcarra JA, Ibañez W, Orcasberro R (1986) Repetibilidad y reproductibilidad de dos escalas para estimar la condición corporal de vacas Hereford. Invest. Agron. 7, 45–47.
Wiley JS, Petersen MK, Ansotegui RP, Bellows RA (1991) Production from first-calf beef heifers fed a maintenance or low level of prepartum nutrition and ruminally undegradable or degradable protein postpartum. Journal of Animal Science 69, 4279–4293.
Wright LA, Rhind AM, Whyte TK (1992) A note on the body condition on the duration of the post-partum anoestrous period and LH profiles in beef cows. Animal Production 54, 143–146.
| A note on the body condition on the duration of the post-partum anoestrous period and LH profiles in beef cows.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
