Effect of biostimulation on the expression of estrus in postpartum Angus cows

Biostimulation and pheromones in livestock: A review

This review examines aspects of the phenomenon of biostimulation in swine, goats, sheep, cattle and deer, to improve the collective knowledge and exploitation of its relevant mechanisms and effects in animal production. The long-term goal is to implement biostimulation strategies that benefit livestock reproduction and production while being both cost-effective and socially acceptable.

Effect of bull biostimulation on the oestrous behaviour of pubertal Sahiwal (Bos indicus) heifers

The study was conducted to determine effects of biostimulation of Sahiwal heifers through fenceline bull contact and fenceline combined with direct bull contact on oestrous behaviour when there was ovulation occurring in the absence of behavioural oestrus ("silent oestrus - SE) and overt behavioural oestrus (OBE). Prepubertal Sahiwal heifers were allotted to three treatments (T₀, T₁, T₂, n = 8 heifers/treatment). In the T₀ group, there was no bull exposure; in T₁, exposure to a bull through fenceline contact for 24 h and in T₂, exposure to a bull as in T₁ along with direct bull contact with another bull for a 6 -h period daily. The oestrous behaviours were recorded on day (d) -3, -2 and -1 (prior to oestrus), d 0 (day of oestrus) and d +3, +2 and +1 (post-estrus). With both SE and OBE, the mean frequency of sniffing, micturition, chin resting and standing to be mounted differed (P <  0.05) from d -2 to d +1 among treatment groups. The mean times devoted to eating, ruminating and lying during SE and OBE were less (P <  0.05) on d-1 and d 0 in heifers of all three groups than the respective values on reference days in both T₁ and T₂ groups. Biostimulation of Sahiwal heifers with bull exposure, therefore, resulted in greater expression of oestrous behaviour than in non-exposed heifers during the periods around when there was SE and OBE.

Biostimulation in primiparous postpartum acyclic early weaned beef cows: introducing the bulls at weaning advances cyclic rebreeding

Weaning and biostimulation promote an early cyclic postpartum rebreeding. Although the signals and mechanisms by which weaning and biostimulation differ, both end stimulating LH secretion. The aim of the experiment was to determine if weaning and biostimulation have additive effects advancing the postpartum rebreeding in primiparous postpartum anoestrous cows. The experiment was performed during late spring – early summer with 51 primiparous Hereford cows. Six weeks after parturition calves were weaned, and cows were managed in two experimental groups: WB (n = 22) and WDB (n = 29). Bulls were joined with WB cows at weaning, but joining was delayed one week in WDB cows. The presence of corpora lutea in the ovaries was recorded weekly with ultrasound, and 28 and 50 days after the end of the exposure period, pregnancy was determined by ultrasound. The percentage of cyclic cows was greater in WB than in WDB on Weeks 8 (36.4 vs 0%), 9 68.2 vs 13.8%), 10 (86.4 vs 27.6%) and 11 (100.0 vs 37.9%) (P < 0.001 in all). Cows that were weaned and biostimulated simultaneously rebred earlier than WDB cows (Week 9.1 ± 0.2 vs Week 11.0 ± 0.2; P < 0.0001). At the end of the experiment 46/51 (90.2%) of the animals were cycling. Pregnancy rate tended to be greater in WB than WDB cows 28 days after the end of the breeding period 18/22 vs 17/29, P = 0.077), but there was no difference at the end of the study (20/22 vs 24/29, ns). In conclusion, the application of weaning and biostimulation simultaneously advances postpartum rebreeding more than weaning alone in beef cows.

When is a cow in estrus? Clinical and practical aspects

Good detection of estrus is critically important in dairy husbandry. Incorrect detection of estrus is related to loss of profit due to extended calving intervals, milk loss, veterinary costs, etc. Detection of estrus remains a major problem despites enormous progress in the knowledge of reproductive physiology of the cow and in development of estrus detection aids. To achieve good estrus detection, many factors have to be taken into account. On one hand a cow has to express estrus and on the other hand the farmer has to detect it. Combined action of several hormones causes physiological changes that lead to ovulation and an environment in the uterus that allows sperm to fertilize the egg. Besides these internal actions, a number of external changes can be observed. When using visual observations, time of the day and time spend on observation have a great impact on detection rates. Many devices are available to aid in estrus detection, such as pedometers, mount devices, temperature, and hormone measurements. Expression of estrus can be influenced by many factors. Heritability, number of days postpartum, lactation number, milk production, and health are known to influence estrus expression. Environmental factors like nutrition, season, housing, herd size, etc. also play a role in estrus expression. To evaluate estrus detection, record keeping is very important; a number of formulas can be used to assess detection efficiency. Besides the farmer, the veterinarian and inseminator can play an important role in estrus confirmation and good insemination strategy. In the end, the time of ovulation and the age of the egg at sperm penetration is critical for conception. Therefore, emphasis in research needs to be on the timing of insemination relative to ovulation, and thus on the detection of ovulation.

The effect of fenceline bull exposure on expression of oestrus in dairy cows

The objective of this study was to investigate whether dairy cows visit and interact with a fenceline-housed bull more during oestrus than outside oestrus and whether fenceline bull contact affects expression of oestrus. At one end of a free stall a fence with vertical open bars was placed behind which a bull could be housed, allowing interactions with the cows. A closed fence with two blinded entrances was placed before the fence, creating a contact area. The experiment consisted of three treatments; it started with the control treatment (no bull on the farm) and was followed by bull treatment (a bull housed behind the fence) and no bull treatment (a bull present on the farm but not housed behind the fence). Signs of oestrus were observed every 4h for 30min and cows were equipped with pedometers. On the day of oestrus, cows were more frequent in the contact area during the bull treatment (12.0+/-9.8 times) and the no bull treatment (13.9+/-10.2 times) than during the control treatment (2.6+/-2.5 times). The frequency of visits to the contact area was low and not different between treatments on the other days (2.2+/-1.9 times). More cows had direct contact with the bull on the day of oestrus (71.4%) compared to the days outside oestrus (21.4-30%). The duration of direct contact with the bull was highly variable between cows and did not differ between oestrus and non-oestrus days. Behaviour and duration of oestrus were not affected by treatment but the relative increase in number of steps during oestrus tended to be higher in the bull (5.5+/-0.2) and no bull treatment (5.3+/-0.3) than in the control treatment (4.6+/-0.3). In conclusion, dairy cows in oestrus seem to be attracted by a bull or by the expectation of the presence of a bull, but fenceline bull exposure does not affect behavioural expression of oestrus.

Putative urinary pheromone of bulls involved with breeding performance of primiparous beef cows in a progestin-based estrous synchronization protocol1

The objective of this study was to determine if factors associated with the biostimulatory effect of bulls alter breeding performance of primiparous, suckled beef cows using a progestin-based estrous synchronization protocol. We tested the hypotheses that the estrous synchronization response and AI pregnancy rates differ among cows exposed to bulls, continuously exposed to bull urine, and exposed to fence-line contact with bulls or cows not exposed to bulls or bull urine. Data were collected from 3 experiments performed over consecutive years. Cows were assigned to the following treatments: bull exposure (BE; n = 26) or no bull exposure (NB; n = 25) in Exp. 1, bull urine exposure (BUE; n = 19) or steer urine exposure (SUE; n = 19) in Exp. 2, and fence-line contact with bulls (BFL; n = 26) or no bull exposure (NB; n = 26) in Exp. 3. Synchronization protocols in each experiment included the use of a controlled internal drug release device (d -10), PGF(2alpha) (d -3), and GnRH and fixed-time AI (TAI; d 0). Cows that were observed in estrus by 60 h after PGF(2alpha) were inseminated 12 h later. Cows not observed in estrus by 60 h after PGF(2alpha) were TAI at 72 h and given GnRH (100 mug). Pregnancy was determined by ultrasonography 35 d after TAI. In Exp. 1, 2, and 3, cows were exposed directly to bulls, bull urine, or bull fence-line contact for 35, 64, and 42 d, respectively. Data were analyzed between treatments within each experiment. The proportion of estrous cycling cows did not differ between treatments at the beginning of each experiment; however, more (P < 0.05) BE and BFL cows were estrous cycling at the beginning of the estrous synchronization protocol than NB cows in Exp. 1 and 3. The proportion of cows that showed estrus and interval to estrus after PGF(2alpha) did not differ between treatments in Exp. 1 and 3. However, in Exp. 2, more BUE cows tended (P = 0.09) to have shorter intervals to estrus and to exhibit estrus after PGF(2alpha) than SUE cows. Overall, AI pregnancy rates were greater (P < 0.05) for BE and BUE cows than for NB and SUE cows in Exp. 1 and 2, respectively. There was no difference in AI pregnancy rates between BFL and NB cows in Exp. 3. The presence of bulls and exposure to bull urine appeared to improve breeding performance of primiparous beef cows using a progestin-based estrous synchronization protocol, whereas fence-line bull exposure was insufficient to cause this biostimulatory effect. We propose that a novel urinary pheromone of bulls may be responsible for the enhancement of fertility in the primiparous, postpartum cow.