Reproductive performance in high producing dairy cows: practical implications

Summary

Several studies have clearly demonstrated that the fertility of high yielding dairy cows has declined over the past 25 years. The resumption of ovarian activity post partum has been retarded and conception rates have dropped significantly from 55 to 40%. Accordingly, the calving interval has increased from about 385 days to 417 days. The percentage of cows culled because of infertility has risen from 5 to 8% per year. The “subfertility syndrome” is a multifactorial problem. As the negative energy balance and general health status after calving are known to be paramount factors hampering fertility, it is apparent that avoiding both is among the most important preventive measures to be taken. Improvement of the energy status by achieving a high dry matter intake and the provision of optimal and well balanced nutrition during the transition period as well as during early lactation are key goals in this effort. To achieve these goals, we should not only calculate the rations on paper, but should also check in the stable to determine whether the calculated amount is really being consumed by the cows. Furthermore, veterinarians should use their “clinical eyes” as well as other diagnostic tools to assess the general health status of the cows and to assess at which aspect of the process things are going wrong and need to be adjusted. Besides the control of the negative energy balance and health status, other management factors that need to be maximized include heat detection, cow comfort, insemination technique, time of insemination during estrus and sperm quality. Only if management is on a very high level high milk production and good fertility can be a feasible combination.

Zusammenfassung

Mehrere Studien haben eindeutig gezeigt, dass die Fruchtbarkeit von Hochleistungsmilchkühen in den vergangenen 25 Jahren zurückgegangen ist. Die Wiederaufnahme der Ovarfunktion post partum findet verzögert statt und die Konzeptionsraten sind signifikant von 55% auf 40% abgefallen. Entsprechend hat sich das durchschnittliche Kalbungsintervall von etwa 385 Tagen auf 417 Tage erhöht. Der Prozentsatz an Kühen, die aufgrund von Infertilität geschlachtet werden, ist von 5% auf 8% pro Jahr gestiegen. Das “Subfertilitätssyndrom” stellt ein multifaktorielles Problem dar. Bekanntermaßen sind eine negative Energiebilanz und ein schlechter Allgemeinzustand nach dem Kalben bedeutende Faktoren, die die Fruchtbarkeit negativ beeinflussen können. Konsequenterweise gilt es als wichtigste präventive Maßnahme, diese beiden Zustände zu verhindern. Schlüsselelemente dabei sind die Verbesserung des Energiestatus durch eine hohe Trockensubstanzaufnahme sowie die Sicherstellung einer optimalen und ausgewogenen Ernährung während der übergangs- und frühen Laktationsperiode. Um dies zu erreichen, reichen schriftliche Berechnungen allein nicht aus, sondern es muss die tatsächliche Futteraufnahme der Kühe im Stall kontrolliert werden. Ferner sollte der Tierarztseinen “klinischen Blick” und diagnostische Verfahren einsetzen, um den Allgemeinzustand der Kühe zu beurteilen und zu erkennen, wo Probleme auftreten, damit diese behoben werden können. Neben der Kontrolle der negativen Energiebalanz und des Gesundheitsstatus gilt es, weitere Managementfaktoren wie Brunstbeobachtung, Wohlbefinden der Kühe, Besamungstechnik, Besamungszeitpunkt im Östrus und Spermaqualität zu optimieren. Nur bei optimalem Management ist eine Kombination von hoher Milchleistung und guter Fruchtbarkeit möglich.

Keywords

Dairy cow - milk production - reproductive disorders - management

Schlüsselwörter

Milchkuh - Milchproduktion - Reproduktionsstörungen - Management

• Literatur

• 1 Cook N, Nordlund K. Behavioral needs of the transition cow and considerations for special needs facility design. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract 2004; 20: 495-520.
• 2 De Kruif A. Factors influencing the fertility of a cattle population. J Reprod Fert 1978; 54: 507-518.
• 3 De Kruif A, Opsomer G. Integrated dairy herd health management as the basis for prevention. In: “Recent developments and perspectives in bovine medicine”; Keynote lectures of the XXII World Buiatrics Congress, 18-23 August 2002, Hannover, Germany; 410-419.
• 4 Dobson H, Smith RF. What is stress, and how does it affect reproduction?. Anim Reprod Sci 2001; 60 (61) 743-752.
• 5 Gong JG, Lee WJ, Garnsworthy PC, Webb R. Effect of dietary-induced increases in circulating insulin concentrations during the early postpartum period on reproductive function in dairy cows. Reproduction 2002; 123: 419-427.
• 6 Huirne R, Saatkamp H, Bergevoet R. Economic analysis of common health problems in dairy cattle. In: ‘Recent Developments and Perspectives in Bovine Medicine.’ Keynote Lectures of the XXII World Buiatrics Congress, 18-23 August, 2002, Hannover, Germany; 420-431.
• 7 Kerbrat S, Disenhaus C. A proposition for an updated behavourial characterisation of the oestrus period in dairy cows. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2004; 87: 223-238.
• 8 Leroy J. Metabolic changes in high producing dairy cows and the consequences on oocyte and embryo quality. PhD Thesis, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University 2005: 252.
• 9 Lopez H, Satter L, Wiltbank M. Relationship between the level of milk production and estrous behavior of lactating dairy cows. Anim Reprod Sci 2004; 81: 209-223.
• 10 Mattos R, Staples CR, Thatcher WW. Effects of dietary fatty acids on reproduction in ruminants. Rev Reprod 2000; 5: 38-45.
• 11 Mee J. Managing the dairy cow at calving time. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract 2004; 20: 521-546.
• 12 Opsomer G, Coryn M, Deluyker H, de Kruif A. An analysis of ovarian dysfunction in high yielding dairy cows after calving based on progesterone profiles. Reprod Dom Anim 1998; 33: 193-204.
• 13 Opsomer G, Gröhn Y, Hertl J, Coryn M, Deluyker H, de Kruif A. Risk factors for postpartum ovarian dysfunction in high producing dairy cows in Belgium: a field study. Theriogenology 2000; 53: 841-857.
• 14 Opsomer G, Leroy J, Vanholder T, Bossaert P, de Kruif A. Subfertility in high yielding dairy cows: how to bring science into practice?. Vlaams Diergenees-kundigTijdschrift 2006; 75: 113-119.
• 15 Pemberton R, Hart J, Mottram T. An electrochemical immunosensor for milk progesterone using a continuous flow system. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2001; 16: 715-723.
• 16 Roelofs JB, Soede NM, Kemp B. Insemination strategy based on ovulation prediction in dairy cattle. Vlaams Diergeneeskundig Tijdschrift 2006; 75: 70-78.
• 17 Sanderson M, Gnad D. Biosecurity for reproductive diseases. Vet Clin North Am: Food Anim Pract 2002; 18: 79-98.
• 18 Thatcher W, Bilby T, Bartolome J, Silvestre F, Staples C, Santos J. Strategies for improving fertility in the modern dairy cow. Theriogenology 2006; 65: 30-44.
• 19 Thomas C, Leach KA, Logue DN, Ferries C, Phipps RH. Management options to reduce load. In: Metabolic stress in dairy cows. Occasional publication No. 24 - British Society of Animal Science. Oldham JD, Simm G Groen AF, Nielsen BL, Pryce JE. Lawrence TLJ, eds.; 1999: 129-139.
• 20 Vailes L, Britt J. Influence of footing surface on mounting and other sexual behaviors of estrual Holstein cows. J Anim Sci 1990; 68: 2333-2339.
• 21 VanViet J, Van Eerdenburg F. Sexual activities and oestrus detection in lactating Holstein cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 1996; 50: 57-69.