Associations between liveweight, body condition score and previous reproductive outcomes, and the risk of ewes bred at 18-months of age being dry at docking

AIMS Firstly, to investigate associations between liveweight and body condition score (BCS) of two-tooth ewes (18-months-old at breeding) at breeding, pregnancy diagnosis (PD) and pre-lambing and the risk of being dry at docking, on commercial New Zealand sheep farms. Secondly, to investigate the association between previous reproductive outcomes as ewe lambs, and risk of being dry at docking as two-tooth ewes. METHODS Two-tooth ewes (n=9,006) were enrolled in four cohorts from three commercial sheep farms between 2010-14. Ewes were weighed and BCS assessed immediately pre-breeding, at PD (mid-pregnancy) and pre-lambing. At PD, ewes were identified as either non-pregnant, or having single or multiple fetuses. Palpation and examination of udders at docking was used to classify each ewe as either lactating or dry at docking. RESULTS Overall, 437/8,025 (5.4%) of ewes that were diagnosed pregnant at PD were dry at docking. The risk of being dry at docking decreased with increasing pre-lambing conceptus adjusted liveweight (CALW) on all farms (p≤0.002); for 2010-born ewes from Farm A the OR=0.87 (95% CI=0.81-0.92); for Farm B the OR=0.88 (95% CI=0.83-0.92) and for Farm C the OR=0.86 (95% CI=0.79-0.95). The risk of being dry at docking also decreased with increasing CALW gain from PD to pre-lambing for all farms (p≤0.003); for 2010-born ewes from Farm A the OR=0.89 (95% CI=0.84-0.94); for Farm B the OR=0.85 (95% CI=0.81-0.89) and for Farm C the OR=0.88 (95% CI=0.80-0.96). There was no association between BCS at breeding, PD or pre-lambing and the risk of being dry at docking for 2010-born ewes from Farm A, Farm B or Farm C (p>0.05). For 2010-born ewes on Farm A, the risk of being dry at docking was greater for two-tooth ewes that were previously dry at docking as ewe lambs than those that were lactating at docking as ewe lambs (OR=1.7 (95% CI=1.1-2.8); p=0.018), but this difference was not observed for ewes on Farm B or Farm C (p>0.5). CONCLUSIONS There were negative associations between ewe CALW pre-lambing, and CALW gain between PD and pre-lambing, and risk of being dry at docking. For all cohorts, heavier ewes and those that gained CALW were less likely to be dry at docking than lighter ewes or those that lost CALW, however these relationships varied between cohorts.

Monitoring liveweight in sheep is a valuable management strategy: a review of available technologies

Liveweight is a widely accepted proxy for the energy status of sheep at a particular point in time. Fleece- and conceptus-free ewe liveweight and liveweight change influence the productivity of the ewe and optimisation may increase whole-farm profitability. Despite this, it is uncommon for producers to monitor ewe liveweight regularly and objectively. The current review discusses why ewe liveweight is important, identifies and assesses available technologies for monitoring sheep liveweight, and highlights future research priorities. The common theme in the literature is that while there are options that could possibly be used to monitor the liveweight of sheep in extensive grazing systems, few of them offer realistic solutions, especially in regard to timeliness of data collection. Thermal and stereo imaging, body measurements and plasma hormonal assays are unlikely to be commercially viable, while visual assessment, although widely practised, offers a surprisingly poor indication of sheep liveweight. Alternatively, assessment of body condition (condition scoring) or fat (fat scoring) offers viable methods of assessing sheep energy status; however, like conventional static weighing, they are performed infrequently and therefore contribute little to the day-to-day tactical management of sheep flocks. Walk-over weighing systems offer a feasible alternative for regular monitoring of sheep liveweight. Such systems are fully automated, and may be operated remotely. Currently, there are challenges associated with monitoring the liveweight of individual animals using such systems and hence there is little commercial opportunity for individual animal management. Mob-based walk-over weighing, which generates flock average liveweight estimates, offers greater potential in the short term, although the technology would benefit from further research and development, primarily to increase the frequency and repeatability of liveweight capture.

Increasing weight gain during pregnancy results in similar increases in lamb birthweights and weaning weights in Merino and non-Merino ewes regardless of sire type

Birthweight is the single largest determinant of survival in lambs and can be predicted from ewe liveweight at conception and liveweight changes during pregnancy. These prediction equations are known for Merino ewes, but it is unknown if they are applicable to non-Merino breeds. We tested the hypothesis that increasing conception weights of ewes will increase the birthweights, survival to weaning and weaning weights of their lambs, irrespective of ewe or sire breed, but that non-Merino lamb birthweights would be less responsive than Merino lamb birthweights, to changes in ewe liveweights during pregnancy. Ewe liveweight, lamb birth and weaning weight records from Merino sires mated to Merino ewes (MM), Border Leicester Merino (Maternal) sires mated to Merino ewes, Poll Dorset or Suffolk (Terminal) sires mated to Merino ewes (TM), and Terminal sires mated to Border Leicester Merino ewes (TMAT) were analysed from the 2007 to 2011 lambings of eight information nucleus flocks. Lamb birthweights increased by 0.032 ± 0.0012 kg from MM ewes and 0.024 ± 0.0026 kg from TMAT ewes with every 1-kg increase in conception weight (P < 0.001). Irrespective of breed, for every 1-kg increase in liveweight change during early and late pregnancy, lamb birthweights increased by 0.021 ± 0.0019 kg and 0.034 ± 0.0019 kg and weaning weights by 0.26 ± 0.013 kg and 0.09 ± 0.011 kg, respectively (P < 0.001). Survival to weaning of single, twin and triplet lambs was highest for lambs from TMAT ewes (89.3% ± 1.25, 84.6% ± 1.49 and 73.4% ± 2.35) and lowest for TM ewes (80.2% ± 1.89, 72.8% ± 2.09 and 57.4% ± 2.98; P < 0.001). Coefficients relating ewe liveweight change during pregnancy to lamb birthweights are similar for Merino and Maternal ewes, however conception weights of Maternal ewes are significantly heavier than Merino ewes when run together, and lamb birthweights from Maternal ewes are less responsive to ewe conception weights. The coefficients reported in this paper will enable development of optimum management guidelines for single-, twin- and triple-bearing Maternal ewes.