Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:02:32.543Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Factors affecting culling and survival during rearing and first lactation in purebred and crossbred dairy cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

P. M. Hocking
Affiliation:
Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Canada
A. J. McAllister
Affiliation:
Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Canada
M. S. Wolynetz
Affiliation:
Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Canada
T. R. Batra
Affiliation:
Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Canada
A. J. Lee
Affiliation:
Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Canada
C. Y. Lin
Affiliation:
Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Canada
G. L. Roy
Affiliation:
Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Canada
J. A. Vesely
Affiliation:
Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Canada
J. M. Wauthy
Affiliation:
Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Canada
K. W. Winter
Affiliation:
Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Canada
Get access

Abstract

Factors affecting survival to first and second calving and successful completion of a > 168-day first lactation were assessed in 3075 purebred and crossbred dairy heifer calves. Growth, disease, frequency, reproduction, calving, udder and lactation traits were examined in females of a breeding project conducted jointly at five research stations (herds) of Agriculture Canada. Losses included mortalities and non-discretionary culling. About 0·23 of potential heifers were culled or died before first calving, and 0·25 of those calving once did not calve a second time. Results from retrospective selection index and stepwise linear logistic analyses showed that predictability of culling prior to 308 days post partum was poor. With few exceptions, survival rates from birth to 82 weeks varied among herds (P < 0·001) and among lines (P < 0·05). Heterosis for the probability of completing a lactation and of survival to second calving was significant (P < 0·05) and positive (0·05 to 0·09). Heavier heifers were more likely to survive to first calving. Sire's estimated breeding values (SEBV) for milk yield and fat, protein and lactose concentration were not important in predicting survival to first calving. SEBV lactose was negatively associated with survival after first calving as predicted from data available at most preceding stages of life. An age greater than 82 weeks at last insemination was associated with a lower probability of survival to first and second calving (P < 0·001). Cows which conceived for a second gestation and subsequently aborted had a lower probability of survival to second calving than cows which did not abort (0·57 v. 0·76, P < 0·01). The only continuous traits with large effects on survival or the probability of completing a first lactation were days to last insemination (a measure of fertility) and milk yield. It was concluded that (1) there is considerable scope for improved management to increase survival in early life by prevention of calfhood diseases; (2) losses in early life do not bias sire evaluation on first lactation records; (3) improved reproductive success would greatly enhance overall survival rates; and (4) crossbreeding could have a large impact on overall herd profitability through increased survival.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1988

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

REFERENCES

Batra, T. R., McAllister, A. J., Chesnais, J. P., Darisse, J. P. F., Emsley, J. A. B., Lee, A. J., Roy, G. L., Vesely, J. A. and Winter, K. A. 1983. Comparison of the heifer reproduction traits of the daughters of several sire groups. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 63: 269278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, D. R. 1970. The Analysis of Binary Data. Methuen, London.Google Scholar
Dickerson, G. E., Blunn, C. T., Chapman, A. B., Kottman, R. M., Krider, J. L., Warwick, E. J. and Whatley, J. A. 1954. Evaluation of selection in developing inbred lines of swine. Research Bulletin, Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station, No. 551.Google Scholar
Engelman, L. 1981. Stepwise logistic regression. BMDP Statistical Software, pp. 330343. University of California Press, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Henderson, C. R. 1984. Applications of Linear Models in Animal Breeding. University of Guelph, Guelph.Google Scholar
Hickman, C. G. 1971. Responses to selection of breeding stock for milk solids production. Journal of Dairy Science 54: 191198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hocking, P. M., McAllister, A. J., Wolynetz, M. S., Batra, T. R., Lee, A. J., Lin, C. Y., Roy, G. L., Vesely, J. A., Waiithy, J. M. and Winter, K. A. 1988. Factors affecting length of herdlife in purebred and crossbred dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science. In press.Google Scholar
Jennrich, R. and Sampson, P. 1981. Stepwise discriminant analysis. BMDP Statistical Software, pp. 519537. University of California Press, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Kendall, M. G. and Stuart, A. 1963. The Advanced Theory of Statistics. Vol. 2. Inference and Relationships, pp. 309310. Griffin, London.Google Scholar
Lee, A. J., McAllister, A. J., Batra, T. R., Darisse, J. P. F., Emsley, J. A. B., Roy, G. L., Winter, K. A. and Vesely, J. A. 1982. Heifer growth in several strains of Holsteins and Ayrshires and in progeny of Ayrshire cows mated to Brown Swiss and Norwegian Red bulls. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 62: 10631078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAllister, A. J. 1977. Multiple trait selection in egg stocks. III. Retrospective evaluation of individual and family selection. Proceedings of the 26th Poultry Breeders Roundtable, Kansas, pp. 92107.Google Scholar
McAllister, A. J., Batra, T. R., Chesnais, J. P., Darisse, J. P. F., Emsley, J. A. B., Lee, A. J., Nagai, J., Roy, G. L., Vesely, J. A. and Winter, K. A. 1980. The National Co-operative Dairy Cattle Breeding Project. Technical Bulletin, Agricultural Research Branch, Agriculture Canada, No. 1.Google Scholar
McDowell, R. E. 1982. Crossbreeding as a system of mating for dairy production. Southern Cooperative Series Bulletin, Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station, No. 259.Google Scholar
Robertson, A., Waite, R. and White, J. C. D. 1956. Variations in the chemical composition of milk with particular reference to the solids-not-fat. II. The effect of heredity. Journal of Dairy Research 23: 8291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rook, J. A. F., Storry, J. E. and Wheelock, J. V. 1965. Plasma glucose and acetate and milk secretion in the ruminant. Journal of Dairy Science 48: 745747.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Touchberry, R. W. 1970. A comparison of the general merits of purebred and crossbred dairy cattle resulting from twenty years (four generations) of crossbreeding. Proceedings of the 19th Poultry Breeders Roundtable, pp. 1863.Google Scholar
Vesely, J. A., McAllister, A. J., Lee, A. J., Batra, T. R., Lin, C. Y., Roy, G. L., Wauthy, J. M. and Winter, K. A. 1986. Reproductive performance of crossbred and purebred dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 69: 518526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheelock, J. V., Rook, J. A. F., Neave, F. K. and Dodd, F. H. 1966. The effect of bacterial infections of the udder on the yield and composition of cow's milk. Journal of Dairy Research 33: 199215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar