Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T19:43:46.435Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of winter and summer nutritional levels on the reproductive performance of beef heifers bred at 2 years of age

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

A. van Niekerk ,
R. Kernick  and
A. W. Lishman
A. van Niekerk
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Water Supply, P/Bag X9059, Pietermaritzburg, 3200 Republic of South Africa
R. Kernick
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Water Supply, P/Bag X9059, Pietermaritzburg, 3200 Republic of South Africa
A. W. Lishman
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Natal, PO Box 375, Pietermaritzburg, 3200 Republic of South Africa
Get access

Abstract

Reproductive data of 139 Simmentaler heifers, previously subjected to different levels of winter and summer nutrition, over a 3-year period, were analysed. Pregnancy rates of 77% and 96% were achieved during the first and second seasons for the two groups of heifers, respectively. Winter and summer nutritional levels affected the number of heifers culled, but had little effect on conception. There were no significant differences in the weight at mating between the heifers that conceived and those that failed to conceive. Mean date of conception was within 30 days and 20 days of the commencement of the breeding season for the first and second season, respectively. Post-weaning nutrition played a relatively minor role in affecting the time of conception. Birth weights of the progeny were not affected by treatment. Calf birth weight was however, significantly (P < 0·05) correlated with the weight of the dam at mating. Sixty-three % of the heifers produced three calves in 3 years, 35% produced two calves in 3 years and only two heifers produced one calf in 3 years. The data supported the original hypothesis that the emphasis, when heifers are bred at 2 years of age, should be shifted away from a physiological base to one where management and grazing strategy are more important in rendering the enterprise economically viable.

Keywords

beef cattleheifersnutritionreproductive performance
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 51 , Issue 2 , October 1990 , pp. 255 - 262
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1990

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

Allden, W. G. 1970. The effects of nutritional deprivation on the subsequent productivity of sheep and cattle. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews 40: 1167–1184.Google ScholarPubMed
Arnett, D. W., Holland, G. L. and Totusek, R. 1971. Some effects of obesity in beef females. Journal of Animal Science 33: 1129–1136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bellows, R. A. 1968. Reproduction and growth in beef heifers. Al Digest 16: 2.Google Scholar
Bellows, R. A., Short, R. E., Anderson, D. C., Knapp, B. W. and Pahnish, O. F. 1971. Cause and effect of relationships associated with calving difficulty and calf birth weight. Journal of Animal Science 33: 407–415.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bond, J. and Weinland, B. T. 1978. Effect of level of feeding on growth, reproductive performance and milk production of beef females. Livestock Production Science 5: 159–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, J. and Wiltbank, J. N. 1970. Effect on energy and protein on estrus, conception rate, growth and milk production of beef females. Journal of Animal Science 30: 438–444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowden, D. M. 1977. Growth, reproductive performance and feed utilization of F, crossbred beef heifers calving as 2-year-olds. Journal of Animal Science 44: 872–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinks, J. S., Olson, J. E. and Carroll, E. J. 1973. Calving difficulty and its association with subsequent productivity in Herefords. Journal of Animal Science 36: 11–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burfening, P. J. 1974. Dairy-beef crossbreeding. II. Age and weight at puberty. Journal of Animal Science 38: 1320 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Burfening, P. J., Kress, D. D., Friedrich, R. L. and Vaniman, D. 1978. Calving ease and growth rate of Simmental-sired calves. I. Factors affecting calving ease and growth rate. Journal of Animal Science 46: 922–929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clanton, D. C., Jones, L. E. and England, M. E. 1983. Effect of rate and time of gain after weaning on the development of replacement beef heifers. Journal of Animal Science 56: 280–285.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickerson, G. E., Kunzi, N., Cundiff, L. V., Koch, R. V., Arthaud, V. H. and Gregory, K. E. 1974. Selection criteria for efficient beef production. Journal of Animal Science 39: 659–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, K. E., Laster, D. B., Cundiff, L. V., Smith, G. M. and Koch, R. M. 1979. Characterization of biological types of cattle — Cycle III: II. Growth rate and puberty in females. Journal of Animal Science 49: 461–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, J. R., Lamond, D. R., Hendricks, D. M., Dickey, J. F. and Niswender, G. D. 1970. The effects of undernutrition on ovarian function and fertility in beef heifers. Biology of Reproduction 2: 78–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnsson, I. D. and Obst, J. M. 1984. The effects of level of nutrition before and after 8 months of age on subsequent milk and calf production of beef heifers over three lacations. Animal Production 38: 57–68.Google Scholar
Laster, D. B., Glimp, H. A., Cundiff, L. V. and Gregory, K. E. 1973. Factors affecting dystocia and the effects of dystocia on subsequent reproduction in beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 36: 695–705.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lesmeister, J. L., Burfening, P. J. and Blackwell, R. L. 1973. Date of first calving in beef cows and subsequent calf production. Journal of Animal Science 36: 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelsen, T. C., Long, C. R. and Cartwright, T. C. 1982. Postinflection growth in straightbred and crossbred cattle. II. Relationships among weight, height and pubertal characters. Journal of Animal Science 55: 293–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, J. F. V. 1973. The agricultural and related development of the Tugela Basin and its influent surrounds. Pietermaritzburg: Natal Town and Regional Planning Report No. 19.Google Scholar
Roberts, S., Lefever, D. G. and Wiltbank, J. N. 1970. Increasing reproductive efficiency in a cow herd. Journal of Animal Science 30: 1032 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Short, R. E. and Bellows, R. A. 1971. Relationships among weight gains, age at puberty and reproductive performance in heifers. Journal of Animal Science 32: 127–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiltbank, J. N. 1977. Managing beef cows to get them pregnant. Proceedings of the Range Beef Cow Symposium, Chadron, Nebraska.Google Scholar
Wiltbank, J. N., Gregory, K. E., Swiger, L. A., Ingalls, J. E., Rothlisberger, J. A. and Koch, R. M. 1966. Effects of heterosis on age and weight at puberty in beef heifers. Journal of Animal Science 25: 744–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiltbank, J. N., Kasson, C. W. and Ingalls, J. E. 1969. Puberty in crossbred and straightbred beef heifers on two levels of feed. Journal of Animal Science 29: 602–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar