Estrus detection in dairy cattle: Changes after the introduction of an automated activity monitoring system?^[*]

Summary

Objective: In context of the study farmers using an automated activity monitoring (AAM) system called Heatime were surveyed on estrus detection practices. The aim of the study was to gain an overview of the usual estrus detection methods and especially to learn about the practical aspects of that system. Material and methods: Items addressing farm and animal environment, estrus detection before and after installation of Heatime, reproduction, Heatime management and the far mer’s perception of efficiency were asked. Results: A total of 232 survey forms were returned (58.3% response rate) and 219 surveys could be used for final analysis. Visual observation was the most common practice to detect estrus. After installation of the Heatime system the farmers assessed that the application of hormones for reproduction management decreased. The majority of the responding dairy farmers (93.1%) strongly agreed or agreed that heat detection was higher after the installation of Heatime. Most of them (92.3%) strongly agreed or agreed with the statement that the reproduction management became easier with Heatime. Conclusion: Overall, 94.1% of the responding farm managers were satisfied with the Heatime system and almost all of them (94.5%) would install the system again. Clinical relevance: The results show that the Heatime system is a well accepted estrus detection aid and has the potential to reduce the time needed for estrus detection and might potentially reduce the use of hormones.

Zusammenfassung

Gegenstand und Ziel: Es wurden Landwirte befragt, die zur Brunsterkennung ein automatisches System zur Aktivitätsüberwachung der Kühe (Heatime System) nutzen. Ziel der Studie war, einen Überblick über die üblichen Brunsterkennungsmethoden zu erlangen und insbesondere Informationen über die praktischen Aspekte des genannten Systems zu erfahren. Material und Methoden: Über einen Fragebogen wurden allgemeine Daten zum Betrieb, zur Umwelt der Tiere, Reproduktion, Brunsterkennung vor und nach Installation des Heatime Systems, zum Management des Heatime Systems und die Meinung der Landwirte über dessen Effizienz abgefragt. Ergebnisse: Von den 232 zurückgesendeten Fragebögen (Rücksendungsrate von 58,3%) konnten 219 für die Auswertungen genutzt werden. Die direkte Beobachtung war die meist genutzte Methode, um Kühe in Brunst zu erkennen. Nach der Installation des Heatime Systems reduzierte sich nach Einschätzung der Landwirte die Applikation von Hormonen zur Brunstinduktion. Die Mehrheit der Landwirte (93,1%) stimmte voll und ganz zu oder stimmte zu, dass die Brunsterkennungsrate nach der Installation des Heatime Systems höher war. Die meisten Befragten (92,3%) stimmten voll und ganz zu oder stimmten zu, dass das Reproduktionsmanagement einfacher wurde. Schlussfolgerung: Insgesamt waren 94,1% der befragten Landwirte zufrieden mit dem Heatime System und 94,5% würden ein solches System wieder installieren. Klinische Relevanz: Die Studie zeigt, dass Heatime ein akzeptiertes elektronisches Hilfsmittel zur Brunsterkennung ist. Dieses System hat das Potenzial, die für die Brunsterkennung erforderliche Zeit zu reduzieren und den Einsatz von Hormonen zu vermindern.

Key words

Activity monitoring - dairy cattle - accelerometer - estrus detection

Schlüsselwörter

Aktivitätsüberwachung - Milchvieh - Beschleunigungsmesser - Brunsterkennung

• References

• 1 At-Taras EE, Spahr SL. Detection and characterization of estrus in dairy cattle with an electronic heatmount detector and an electronic activity tag. J Dairy Sci 2001; 84 (04) 792-798.
• 2 Barr HL. Influence of estrus detection on days open in dairy herds. J Dairy Sci 1975; 58 (02) 246-247.
• 3 Caraviello DZ, Weigel KA, Fricke PM, Wiltbank MC, Florent MJ, Cook NB, Nordlund KV, Zwald NR, Rawson CL. Survey of management practices on reproductive performance of dairy cattle on large US commercial farms. J Dairy Sci 2006; 89 (12) 4723-4735.
• 4 Cavalieri J, Eagles V, Ryan M, Macmillan KL. Comparison of four methods for detection of oestrus in dairy cows with resynchronised oestrous cycles. Aust Vet J 2003; 81 (07) 422-425.
• 5 Cavalieri J, Flinker LR, Anderson GA, Macmillan KL. Characteristics of oestrus measured using visual observation and radiotelemetry. Anim Reprod Sci 2003; 76 (1-2) 1-12.
• 6 Cuthbert S. DairyNZ milking practices and technology use survey. Page 40 in reprot prepared for DairyNZ. LIC, Hamilton, New Zealand: 2008
• 7 Dobson H, Smith R, Royal M, Knight C, Sheldon I. The high-producing dairy cow and its reproductive performance. Reprod Domest Anim 2007; 42 (Suppl. 02) 17-23.
• 8 Ferguson JD, Galligan DT. Prostaglandin Synchronization Programs in Dairy Herds; Part 2. Comp Contin Educ Pract Vet 1993; 15 (08) 1127-1130.
• 9 Fetrow J, Blanchard T. Economic impact of the use of prostaglandin to induce estrus in dairy cows. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1987; 190 (02) 163-169.
• 10 Ginther OJ, Nuti LC, Garcia MC, Wentworth BC, Tyler WJ. Factors affecting progesterone concentration in cow's milk and dairy products. J Anim Sci 1976; 42 (01) 155-159.
• 11 Harris BL, Hempstalk K, de le Rue BT, Jago JG, McGowan JE. Improving the power of activity-based heat detection using additional automatically captured data. In: Proceeding New Zealand Society Animal Production. Hamilton, New Zealand: 2010: 299-302.
• 12 Heuwieser W, Iwersen M, Gossellin J, Drillich M. Short communication: survey of fresh cow management practices of dairy cattle on small and large commercial farms. J Dairy Sci 2010; 93 (03) 1065-1068.
• 13 Hoffmann B, Hamburger R. [Progesterone in milk: determination by radioimmunoassay, relations to corpus luteum function and milk fat concentrations (author’s transl)]. Zuchthygiene 1973; 8 (04) 154-162.
• 14 Holman A, Thompson J, Routly JE, Cameron J, Jones DN, Grove-White D, Smith RF, Dobson H. Comparison of oestrus detection methods in dairy cattle. Vet Rec 2011; 169 (02) 47.
• 15 Kamphuis C, DelaRue B, Burke CR, Jago J. Field evaluation of 2 collar-mounted activity meters for detecting cows in estrus on a large pasturegrazed dairy farm. J Dairy Sci 2012; 95 (06) 3045-3056.
• 16 Kiddy CA. Variation in physical activity as an indication of estrus in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 1977; 60 (02) 235-243.
• 17 Lucy MC. Reproductive loss in high-producing dairy cattle: where will it end?. J Dairy Sci 2001; 84 (06) 1277-1293.
• 18 Mayne CS, McCoy MA, Lennox SD, Mackey DR, Verner M, Catney DC, McCaughey WJ, Wylie AR, Kennedy BW, Gordon FJ. Fertility of dairy cows in Northern Ireland. Vet Rec 2002; 150 (23) 707-713.
• 19 Nebel RL. On-farm milk progesterone tests. J Dairy Sci 1988; 71 (06) 1682-1690.
• 20 Neves RC, Leslie KE, Walton JS, Leblanc SJ. Reproductive performance with an automated activity monitoring system versus a synchronized breeding program. J Dairy Sci 2012; 95 (10) 5683-5693.
• 21 Refsdal AO. To treat or not to treat: a proper use of hormones and antibiotics. Anim Reprod Sci 2000; 60-61: 109-119.
• 22 Roelofs J, Lopez-Gatius F, Hunter RH, van Eerdenburg FJ, Hanzen C. When is a cow in estrus? Clinical and practical aspects. Theriogenology 2010; 74 (03) 327-344.
• 23 Roelofs JB, Van Eerdenburg FJ, Hazeleger W, Soede NM, Kemp B. Relationship between progesterone concentrations in milk and blood and time of ovulation in dairy cattle. Anim Reprod Sci 2006; 91 (3-4) 337-343.
• 24 Roelofs JB, Van Eerdenburg FJ, Soede NM, Kemp B. Pedometer readings for estrous detection and as predictor for time of ovulation in dairy cattle. Theriogenology 2005; 64 (08) 1690-1703.
• 25 Saumande J. Electronic detection of oestrus in postpartum dairy cows: efficiency and accuracy of the DEC (R) (showheat) system. Livestock Production Science 2002; 77 (2-3) 265-271.
• 26 Schefers JM, Weigel KA, Rawson CL, Zwald NR, Cook NB. Management practices associated with conception rate and service rate of lactating Holstein cows in large, commercial dairy herds. J Dairy Sci 2010; 93 (04) 1459-1467.
• 27 Schirmann K, von Keyserlingk MA, Weary DM, Veira DM, Heuwieser W. Technical note: Validation of a system for monitoring rumination in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2009; 92 (12) 6052-6055.
• 28 Schofield SA, Phillips CJC, Owens AR. Variation in the milk production, activity rate and electrical impedance of cervical mucus over the oestrous period in dairy cows. Anim Reprod Sci 1991; 24 (3-4) 231-248.
• 29 Senger PL. The estrus detection problem: new concepts, technologies, and possibilities. J Dairy Sci 1994; 77 (09) 2745-2753.
• 30 Smith BI, Risco CA. Management of periparturient disorders in dairy cattle. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract 2005; 21 (02) 503-521.
• 31 Walker WL, Nebel RL, McGilliard ML. Time of ovulation relative to mounting activity in dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 1996; 79 (09) 1555-1561.
• 32 Wangler A, Meyer A, Rehbock F, Sanftleben P. Pedometry – an aid in estrus detection?. Zuchtungsk 2005; 77 (2-3) 110-127.
• 33 Weigel KA, Barlass KA. Results of a producer survey regarding crossbreeding on US dairy farms. J Dairy Sci 2003; 86 (12) 4148-4154.
• 34 Wendl G, Klindtworth K, Wagner M. Einsatz von Aktivitätssensoren und injizierbarenTranspondern mit integriertem Temperatursensor in der Milchviehhaltung. 46th Annual Meeting of the European Association of Animal Production. Prague, Czech Republic: 1995: C4-6.