Progress 12/01/07 to 11/30/12
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Cow productivity was monitored for four years and compared between a Spring calving and Fall calving herd. Records included body weight and condition score at breeding, calving and weaning and calf weaning weights. PARTICIPANTS: Animal Science Program staff along with CES staff and students. TARGET AUDIENCES: Cattle producers in the Caribbean, Southeast U.S. and Central and South America. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Shifting to a single herd with one calving season was done after the spring 2012 calving season to take advantage of seasonal rainfall, forage availability and management inputs.
Impacts
This study was conducted to evaluate production traits of Senepol cows calving in the spring or fall on St. Croix. Cows were bred by natural service for a 60-d period each year starting in June or December and calved in the spring of 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 (n = 332 data points) or the fall of 2009 , 2010 and 2011 (n = 93 data points). Data collected at breeding, calving and weaning was cow BW, hip height (HHT) and condition score (CS; 1 = thin, 9 = fat). Calf data (n = 190 data points) included birth (BRWT), weaning weight (WWT) and 205-d adjusted weaning weight (AWWT). At breeding, fall calving cows were heavier than spring calving cows (624 vs. 562 kg, respectively) and had higher CS (7.3 vs. 6.8, respectively). At calving, fall calving cows were heavier than spring calving cows (628 vs. 586 kg, respectively). Calving rate was similar between fall and spring (49.5 and 50.8 percent, respectively). At weaning fall calving cows were heavier and had greater HHT than spring calving cows (616 vs. 561 kg, 138.1 vs. 134.5 cm, respectively) but there was no difference in CS (6.2 vs. 6.3, respectively). There was no difference in BRWT or AWWT between spring and fall herds (40 vs. 40 kg, and 223 vs. 230 kg, respectively). Cow efficiency, measured as the ratio of WWT to cow BW at weaning, was greater in spring than in fall calving cows (42.7 vs. 38.4 percent respectively). The percentage of calves born that survived to weaning was higher in the spring herd than in the fall herd (89.5 vs. 78.9, respectively). Calving interval was similar between fall and spring herds (408 vs. 445 d, respectively). The larger cows were not as efficient as smaller cows and Senepol cattle managed to calve in the spring had better productivity than fall calving cows under the conditions on St. Croix. Based on this data the management plan of the herd has been shifted to a single spring calving season.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
Progress 01/01/11 to 12/31/11
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Cow productivity was monitored for four years and compared between a Spring calving and Fall calving herd. Records included body weight and condition score at breeding, calving and weaning and calf weaning weights. PARTICIPANTS: Animal Science Program staff along with CES staff and students. TARGET AUDIENCES: Cattle producers n the Caribbean, southeast U.S. and Central and South America. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Shifting to a single herd with one calving season is being considered to take advantage of seasonal rainfall, forage availability and management inputs.
Impacts
Cows that calved in the Fall (n = 101) were heavier, taller and had higher body condition scores than Spring calving cows (n = 245) at weaning. At calving the Fall calving cows were heavier than Spring calving cows. At breeding cows that calved in the Fall were heavier and had higher body condition scores than cows that calved in the spring. Calf weaning weight was higher for Spring born calves than it was for Fall born claves. This resulted in cows that calved in the Spring having a higher efficiency, measured as the ratio of calf weaning weight to cow body weight at weaning, than cows calving in the Fall. Even though the Fall calving cows were larger they did not wean as heavy calves as the Spring calving cows did.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
Progress 01/01/10 to 12/31/10
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Cow productivity was monitored for three years and compared between a Spring calving and Fall calving herd. Records included pregnancy rate, body weight and condition score at breeding, calving and weaning and calf weights at birth, weaning and yearling. PARTICIPANTS: Animal Science Program staff along with CES staff and students. TARGET AUDIENCES: Cattle producers in the Caribbean, southeast U.S. and Central and South America. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Shifting to a single herd with one calving season is being considered to take advantage of seasonal rainfall and forage availability.
Impacts
Cows that calved in the Fall were larger (frame score), heavier and had higher body condition scores than Spring calving cows. The calves born during the Fall had higher birth weights, lower weaning weights and higher yearling weights than Spring born calves. Fall born calves had higher temperament scores at weaning but not as yearlings compared to Spring born calves. Growth differences of cows and calves may be due to seasonal forage availability, rainy season or sire effect.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
Progress 01/01/09 to 12/31/09
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Cow productivity was monitored for two years and compared between a Spring calving and Fall calving herd. Records included pregnancy rate, body weight and condition score at breeding, calving and weaning and calf weights at birth, weaning and yearling. Some of this data was presented at the meeting of the Senepol Cattle Association in Colombia, SA. PARTICIPANTS: Animal Science Program staff along with CES staff and students. TARGET AUDIENCES: Cattle producers in the Caribbean, southeast U.S. and Central and South America. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
Cows that calved in the fall were larger (frame score), heavier and had higher body condition scores than Spring calving cows. The calves born during the Fall had higher birth weights, lower weaning weights and higher yearling weights than Spring born calves. Fall born calves had higher temperament scores at weaning but not as yearlings compared to Spring born calves. Growth differences of cows and calves may be due to seasonal forage availability, rainy season or sire effect.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
Progress 01/01/08 to 12/31/08
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Calving data was collected for a Spring and a Fall calving. There were 54 calves born during the spring and 30 calves born during the fall. Calving was monitored daily and any incidence of calving difficulty was recorded. Spring calving cows were rebred during the summer 2008 and their calves were weaned in the fall. PARTICIPANTS: Animal Science Program staff along with CES staff and students. TARGET AUDIENCES: Cattle producers in the Caribbean, southeast U.S. and Central and South America. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
There was no difference in the proportion of females exposed to the bulls that calved between the spring and fall calving herds (72 vs 66%, respectively). Across seasons 70% of cows and 69% of heifers calved and 94% of calves were born alive. The incidence of calving difficulty was below 2% overall. More data is being collected as the herds continue their production cycles.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
|