Effect of CIDR^® on 4-day-service-rate, pregnancy rate and vaginal irritation in dairy heifers

Zusammenfassung

Ziel dieser Studie war der Vergleich von Reproduktionsparametern zwischen zwei Synchronisationsprogrammen bei Färsen in Deutschland. Material und Methoden: Insgesamt 191 Färsen der Rasse Holstein Frisian wurden zufällig in zwei Studiengruppen eingeteilt (Tag 0). Den Färsen der Versuchsgruppe CIDR (n = 93) wurde am Tag 0 ein intravaginales Progesteronfreisetzungssystem (Eazi-Breed^TM CIDR^®, Pfizer Pharma GmbH; enthält 1,38 g Progesteron) für 7 Tage eingesetzt. Am Tag 7 erhielten die Tiere PGF_2α-Analogon Cloprostenol (Estrumate^®, Intervet Deutschland GmbH, 0,5 mg pro Tier i. m.). Nach Entfernen des CIDR^® am Tag 7 erfolgte eine Dokumentation des vaginalen Ausflusses eingeteilt in folgende Grade: 0 = kein Ausfluss, 1 = klar, 2 = blutig, 3 = gelblich/trüb. In der Kontrollgruppe PG (n = 98) wurde allen Tieren am Tag 7 das PGF_2α-Analogon Cloprostenol verabreicht. Zwischen Tag 8 und 11 fand in beiden Studiengruppen eine intensivierte Brunstbeobachtung statt. Alle brünstigen Färsen wurden künstlich besamt und am 40. Tag nach der Besamung mittels rektaler Untersuchung auf eine Trächtigkeit untersucht. Ergebnisse: In der CIDR-Gruppe lag die Brunstnutzungsrate höher als in der PG-Gruppe (91,4% vs. 70,4%, p < 0,05). Mehr Tiere in der CIDR-Gruppe wurden tragend als in der PG-Gruppe (76,3% vs. 56,1%, p < 0,05). Als Anzeichen einer vaginalen Irritation wurde bei 91,9% der Färsen der CIDR-Gruppe Ausfluss der Grade 2 und 3 feststellt, der jedoch keinen Einfluss auf die Trächtigkeitsergebnisse zeigte (OR = 0,652; CI₉₅ = 0,235–1,810; p = 0,411). Schlussfolgerung: Zusammengefasst ließen sich in der CIDR-Gruppe bessere Fruchtbarkeitsparameter erreichen als in der PG-Gruppe. Der vaginale Ausfluss nach Entfernen des CIDR^® hatte keinen negativen Effekt auf die Konzeptionsraten.

Summary

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare reproductive performance parameters for two protocols for estrus synchronization in dairy heifers in Germany. Material and methods: In the CIDR group (n = 93) all heifers received a controlled intravaginal progesterone releasing insert (Eazi-Breed^TM CIDR^®, Pfizer Pharma GmbH; containing 1,38 g of progesterone) on day 0. On day 7 these cows were given prostaglandin F_2α (PGF_2α) analogue cloprostenol (Estrumate^®, Intervet Deutschland GmbH, 0.5 mg per animal i. m.), and the CIDR^® insert was removed. Any mucus attached to the insert was scored on a 4-point scale: 0 = no mucus; 1 = clear; 2 = bloody; 3 = yellow/cloudy mucus. In the PG group (n = 98) all heifers were given PGF_2α analogue cloprostenol on day 7. Between day 8 and 11 heat detection was conducted twice daily for 30 minutes. All heifers in estrus were bred by artificial insemination (AI) and pregnancy was diagnosed 40 days after AI by transrectal palpation. Results: In the CIDR group the 4-day-service rate was 91.4%, in the PG group 70.4% (p < 0.05). More heifers in the CIDR group were pregnant than in the PGF_2α protocol (76.3 vs. 56.1%, p < 0.05). Mucus scores of 2 and 3 indicative of vaginal irritation were observed in 91.9% of the CIDR group but did not affect the pregnancy outcome (OR = 0.652, CI₉₅ = 0.235–1.810; p = 0.411). Conclusion: In conclusion, the CIDR protocol improved reproductive parameters of dairy heifers compared with a PGF_2α protocol. Mucus after removal of the CIDR^® insert did not affect pregnancy rates.

Schlüsselwörter

Rind - Färse - Brunstsynchronisation - Progesteron - CIDR - Vaginalausfluss

Key words

Cattle - heifer - estrus synchronization - progesterone - CIDR - vaginal discharge

• References

• 1 Ahmadi MR, Nazifi S, Sajedianfard J, Moattari G. Impact of estrous synchronization methods on cellular proportions in cervical mucus and serum hormone concentrations. Theriogenology 2007; 67 (03) 598-604.
• 2 Chenault JR, Boucher JF, Dame KJ, Meyer JA, Wood-Follis SL. Intravaginal progesterone insert to synchronize return to estrus of previously inseminated dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2003; 86 (06) 2039-2049.
• 3 Dobeli M, Risi J, Zerobin K. [Luteolytic effect of Estrumate in cattle as a function of the estrus phase and its suitability for estrus regulation]. Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd 1981; 123 (11) 587-595.
• 4 Heuwieser W, Oltenacu PA, Lednor AJ, Foote RH. Evaluation of different protocols for prostaglandin synchronization to improve reproductive performance in dairy herds with low estrus detection efficiency. J Dairy Sci 1997; 80 (11) 2766-2774.
• 5 Hittinger MA, Ambrose JD, Kastelic JP. Luteolysis, onset of estrus, and ovulation in Holstein heifers given prostaglandin F2alpha concurrent with, or 24 hours prior to, removal of an intravaginal, progesterone-releasing device. Can J Vet Res 2004; 68 (04) 283-287.
• 6 Karimi A, Karami H, Moini MM, Ahmadi Sefat AA, Haghvirdilu E. Comparison between different protocols of synchronization and their efficiency on pregnancy rate of dairy cattle. Pak J Biol Sci 2007; 10 (20) 3557-3563.
• 7 Lamb GC, Dahlen CR, Vonnahme KA, Hansen GR, Arseneau JD, Perry GA, Walker RS, Clement J, Arthington JD. Influence of a CIDR prior to bull breeding on pregnancy rates and subsequent calving distribution. Anim Reprod Sci 2008; 108 (3–4): 269-278.
• 8 Lauderdale JW, Seguin BE, Stellflug JN, Chenault JR, Thatcher WW, Vincent CK, Loyancano AF. Fertility of cattle following PGF2 alpha injection. J Anim Sci 1974; 38 (05) 964-967.
• 9 Lucy MC, Billings HJ, Butler WR, Ehnis LR, Fields MJ, Kesler DJ, Kinder JE, Mattos RC, Short RE, Thatcher WW, Wettemann RP, Yelich JV, Hafs HD. Efficacy of an intravaginal progesterone insert and an injection of PGF2alpha for synchronizing estrus and shortening the interval to pregnancy in postpartum beef cows, peripubertal beef heifers, and dairy heifers. J Anim Sci 2001; 79 (04) 982-995.
• 10 Roche JF, Austin EJ, Ryan M, O’Rourke M, Mihm M, Diskin MG. Regulation of follicle waves to maximize fertility in cattle. J Reprod Fertil Suppl 1999; 54: 61-71.
• 11 Seguin BE, Tate DJ, Otterby DE. Use of cloprostenol in a reproductive management system for dairy cattle. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1983; 183 (05) 533-537.
• 12 Stevenson JS. Progesterone, follicular, and estrual responses to progesterone-based estrus and ovulation synchronization protocols at five stages of the estrous cycle. J Dairy Sci 2008; 91 (12) 4640-4650.
• 13 Walsh RB, LeBlanc SJ, Duffield TD, Kelton DF, Walton JS, Leslie KE. Synchronization of estrus and pregnancy risk in anestrous dairy cows after treatment with a progesterone-releasing intravaginal device. J Dairy Sci 2007; 90 (03) 1139-1148.
• 14 Walsh RB, Leblanc SJ, Duffield TF, Kelton DF, Walton JS, Leslie KE. The effect of a progesterone releasing intravaginal device (PRID) on pregnancy risk to fixed-time insemination following diagnosis of non-pregnancy in dairy cows. Theriogenology 2007; 67 (05) 948-956.
• 15 Walsh RB, LeBlanc SJ, Vernooy E, Leslie KE. Safety of a progesterone-releasing intravaginal device as assessed from vaginal mucosal integrity and indicators of systemic inflammation in postpartum dairy cows. Can J Vet Res 2008; 72 (01) 43-49.