Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T12:56:47.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Annual energy intake and the metabolic and reproductive performance of beef cows differing in body size and milk potential

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

K. D. Sinclair ,
S. Yildiz ,
G. Quintans ,
F. E. Gebbie  and
P. J. Broadbent
K. D. Sinclair
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Ferguson Building, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB21 9YA
S. Yildiz
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Ferguson Building, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB21 9YA
G. Quintans
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Ferguson Building, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB21 9YA
F. E. Gebbie
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Ferguson Building, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB21 9YA
P. J. Broadbent
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Ferguson Building, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB21 9YA
Get access

Abstract

The metabolic status and reproductive performance of four pure breeds of beef cow (small size and low milk potential, Aberdeen Angus; small size and high milk potential, Welsh Black; large size and low milk potential, Charolais; and large size and high milk potential, Simmental) were monitored during their first two parities. Heifers from each breed were allocated to one of two levels of annual energy intake relative to metabolic body weight (M075) (mean daily intakes equivalent to 705 and 820 kj/kg M0·75) in a factorial design. In the 1st year 64 heifers (eight per treatment) which had calved as a consequence of first or second service were selected for the experiment. In the 2nd year 40 of these animals (five per treatment) which held to first or second service remained on experiment. Animals were housed all year round and given diets designed to represent energy intakes while grazing during the summer and conserved feeding during the winter. Pregnancy was established in late July of each year using a combination of oestrous synchronization and artificial insemination. Blood samples were collected at monthly intervals from weaning in November until calving in May; three times weekly from calving until oestrous synchronization (11 weeks later); and fortnightly thereafter until weaning.

For the annual levels of dietary energy intake offered, two breeds (Welsh Black and Charolais) exhibited relatively high growth rates and had the longest post-partum anovulatory periods; and Charolais cows also had the poorest conception rates of all breeds. Relatively lean cows at calving (body condition score < 2·5 units) were sensitive, in terms of the duration of the anovulatory period, to live-weight loss during the early post-partum period, particularly when blood glucose levels were low, whereas relatively fat cows at calving (body condition score > 2·5 units) were not. The data suggest: (i) that mechanisms controlling the anabolic processes governing maternal growth are antagonistic towards those that control reproduction; and (ii) the catabolism of lean tissue rather than fat tissue during the early post-partum period is also antagonistic towards the mechanisms that govern reproductive function in cows.

Keywords

beef cowsenergy intakegenotypesmetabolitesreproduction
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 66 , Issue 3 , June 1998 , pp. 657 - 666
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bronson, F. H. and Manning, J. M. 1991. The energetic regulation of ovulation: a realistic role for body fat. Biology of Reproduction 44: 945–950.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruce, J. M., Broadbent, P. J. and Topps, J. H. 1984. A model of the energy system of lactating and pregnant cows. Animal Production 38: 351–362.Google Scholar
Chigaru, P. R. N. and Topps, J. H. 1981. The composition of body-weight changes in underfed lactating beef cows. Animal Production 32: 95–103.Google Scholar
Eley, R. M., Thatcher, W. W., Bazer, F. W., Wilcox, C. J., Becker, R. B., Head, H. H. and Atkinson, R. W. 1978. Development of the conceptus in the bovine. Journal of Dairy Science 61: 467–473.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferrell, C. L., Garrett, W. N. and Hinman, N. 1976. Growth, development and composition of the udder and gravid uterus of beef heifers during pregnancy. Journal of Animal Science 42: 1477–1489.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferrell, C. L. and Jenkins, T. C. 1985. Cow type and the nutritional environment: nutritional aspects. Journal of Animal Science 61: 725–741.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grimard, B., Humblot, P., Ponter, A. A., Mialot, J. P., Sauvant, D. and 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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grimard, B., Saives, H. and Humblot, P. 1997. Relationships between energy status and reproductive performances in primiparous Limousine cows treated with progestagen and PMSG. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility, Abstract Series 19: 26 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust. 1990. GENSTAT 5, version 2.2 reference manual. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lowman, B. G. 1985. Feeding in relation to suckler cow management and fertility. Veterinary Record 117: 80–85.Google Scholar
Lowman, B. G., Scott, N. A. and Somerville, S. H. 1976. Condition scoring of cattle, revised edition. Bulletin no. 6, East of Scotland College of Agriculture.Google Scholar
McMillan, W. H., Hall, D. R. H. and Oakley, A. P. 1995. Induction of early post-calving ovulation and oestrus in suckled beef cows. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 55: 261–264.Google Scholar
McNeilly, A. S. and Fraser, H. M. 1987. Effect of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist-induced suppression of LH and FSH on follicle growth and corpus luteum function in the ewe. Journal of Endocrinology 115: 273–282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morris, C. A., Baker, R. L., Hickey, S. M., Johnson, D. L., Cullen, N. G. and Wilson, J. A. 1993. Evidence of genotype by environment interaction for reproductive and maternal traits in beef cattle. Animal Production 56: 69–83.Google Scholar
Morris, C. A. and Wilton, J. W. 1976. Influence of body size on the biological efficiency of cows: a review. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 56: 613–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nebel, R. L. and McGilliard, M. L. 1993. Interactions of high milk yield and reproductive performance in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 76: 3257–3268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nugent, R. A., Jenkins, T. G., Roberts, A. J. and Klindt, J. 1993. Relationship of post-partum interval in mature beef cows with nutritional environment, biological type and serum IGF-1 concentrations. Animal Production 56: 193–200.Google Scholar
Oldham, J. D. 1984. Protein-energy interrelationships in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 67: 1090–1114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petit, M. and Agabriel, J. 1994. Etat corporel des vaches allaitantes: signification, utilisation pratique et relations avec la reproduction. In The role of specialized beef breeds in extensive husbandry systems of suckling cows. Proceedings of the scientific day of the 28th world Charolais congress. European Association of Animal Production, publication no. 72, pp. 7–18.Google Scholar
Pinto Andrade, L., Rhind, S. M., Wright, I. A., McMillen, S. R., Goddard, P. J. and Bramley, T. A. 1996. Effects of bovine somatotrophin (bST) on ovarian function in postpartum beef cows. Reproduction, Fertility and Development 8: 951–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pleasants, A. B. and McCall, D. G. 1993. Relationships among post-calving anoestrous interval, oestrous cycles, conception rates and calving date in Angus and Hereford × Friesian cows calving in six successive years. Animal Production 56: 187–192.Google Scholar
Randel, R. D. 1990. Nutrition and postpartum rebreeding in cattle. Journal of Animal Science 68: 853–862.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, J. J. 1996. Nutrition and reproduction. Animal Reproduction Science 42: 25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, J. J. and Symonds, M. E. 1995. Whole-body fuel selection: ‘reproduction’. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 54: 283–289.Google Scholar
Roche, J. F. and Diskin, M. G. 1995. Hormonal regulation of reproduction and interactions with nutrition in female ruminants. In Ruminant physiology: digestion, metabolism, growth and reproduction. Proceedings of the eighth international symposium on ruminant physiology, pp. 409–428. Ferdinand Enke Verlag, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Rowlands, G. J. 1980. A review of variations in the concentrations of metabolites in the blood of beef and dairy cattle associated with physiology, nutrition and disease, with particular reference to the interpretation of metabolic profiles. World Review of Nutrition and Dietetics 35: 172–235.Google Scholar
Russel, A. J. F., Peart, J. N., Eadie, J., Macdonald, A. J. and White, I. R. 1979. The effect of energy intake during late pregnancy on the production from two genotypes of suckler cow. Animal Production 28: 309–327.Google Scholar
Russel, A. J. F. and Wright, I. A. 1983. The use of blood metabolites in the determination of energy status in beef cows. Animal Production 37: 335–343.Google Scholar
Schillo, K. K. 1992. Effects of dietary energy on control of luteinizing hormone secretion in cattle and sheep, journal of Animal Science 70: 1271–1282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Senatore, E. M., Butler, W. R. and Oltenacu, P. A. 1996. Relationships between energy balance and post-partum ovarian activity and fertility in first lactation dairy cows. Animal Science 62: 17–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Short, R. E., Bellows, R. A., Staigmiller, R. B., Berardinelli, J. G. and Custer, E. E. 1990. Physiological mechanisms controlling anestrus and infertility in postpartum beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 68: 799–816.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sinclair, K. D. and Broadbent, P. J. 1995. Twinning by embryo transfer to increase the biological efficiency of suckled calf production. In Scottish Agricultural College animal sciences annual report no. 5.Google Scholar
Sinclair, K. D., Broadbent, P. J. and Hutchinson, J. S. M. 1994. The effect of pre and post-partum energy and protein supply on the blood metabolites and reproductive performance of single- and twin-suckling beef cows. Animal Production 59: 391–400.Google Scholar
Sinclair, K. D., Broadbent, P. J. and Hutchinson, J. S. M. 1995. Naloxone evokes a nutritionally dependent LH response in post-partum beef cows but not in mid-luteal phase maiden heifers. Animal Science 61: 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, K. D., Yildiz, S., Quintans, G. and Broadbent, P. J. 1998. Annual energy intake and the performance of beef cows differing in body size and milk potential. Animal Science 66: 643–655.Google Scholar
Taylor, St C. S. and Murray, J. I. 1991. Effect of feeding level, breed and milking potential on body tissues and organs of mature, non-lactating cows. Animal Production 53: 27–38.Google Scholar
Taylor, St C. S., Thiessen, R. B. and Murray, J. 1986. Inter-breed relationship of maintenance efficiency to milk yield in cattle. Animal Production 43: 37–61.Google Scholar
Vera, R. R., Ramirez, C. A. and Ayala, H. 1993. Reproduction in continuously underfed Brahman cows. Animal Production 57: 193–198.Google Scholar
Whitelaw, F. G., Milne, J. S., Orskov, E. R. and Smith, J. S. 1986. The nitrogen and energy metabolism of lactating cows given abomasal infusions of casein. British Journal of Nutrition 55: 537–556.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, G. L. 1990. Suckling as an inhibitor of postpartum rebreeding in cattle: a review. Journal of Animal Science 68: 831–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, G. L., Gazal, O. S., Guzman Vega, G. A. and Stanko, R. L. 1996. Mechanisms regulating suckling-mediated anovulation in the cow. Animal Reproduction Science 42: 289–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, I. A., Rhind, S. M., Whyte, T. K. and Smith, A. J. 1992. Effects of body condition at calving and feeding level after calving on LH profiles and the duration of the postpartum anoestrous period in beef cows. Animal Production 55: 41–46.Google Scholar
Wright, I. A. and Russel, A. J. F. 1984. The composition and energy content of empty body-weight change in mature cattle. Animal Production 39; 365–369.Google Scholar