JDS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 81 No. 7 1848-1854
© 1998 by American Dairy Science Association ®
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Plaizier, J.C.B.
Right arrow Articles by King, G. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Plaizier, J.C.B.
Right arrow Articles by King, G. J.

Evaluation of Overall Reproductive Performance of Dairy Herds

J.C.B. Plaizier 1, K. D. Lissemore 2, D. Kelton 1, and G. J. King 1

1 Department of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada N1G 2W1
2 Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, Guelph, ON, Canada N1G 2W1

Reproductive efficiency was assessed in 106 commercial dairy herds in Ontario. Herds that were similar in historical calving interval or projected calving interval varied widely in reproductive culling rate. The correlation between the reproductive culling rate and the historic calving interval and between the reproductive culling rate and the projected calving interval were –0.23 and were not significant. The coefficient of variation associated with the reproductive culling rate (75.7%) was much higher than that of the historical calving interval (3.8%) or the projected calving interval (4.5%). The repeatability of the reproductive culling rate (0.26) was much lower than that of the historical calving interval (0.81) or the projected calving interval (0.60) because culling rate was not only influenced by the overall herd reproductive performance, but also by the differences in the maximal allowable days open for rebreeding and the estimation of which cows were culled for reproductive failure. Additionally, a high coefficient of variation for the reproductive culling rate is unavoidable because this variable has a binomial distribution and a low mean value (7.5%). These disadvantages are not sufficient to exclude this measure from a comprehensive assessment of overall herd reproductive performance. The projected calving interval and the reproductive culling rate can be combined into the adjusted calving interval and thus interpreted jointly. On 40.5% of the farms providing data for this study, fertility assessment based on the projected calving interval indicated better reproductive performance than that based on adjusted calving interval. Hence, the assessment of herd fertility on the basis of projected calving interval can lead to a different and erroneous conclusion regarding the level of herd fertility than that obtained with the evaluation based on adjusted calving interval.

Key Words: herd reproductive performance • calving interval • culling • evaluation

Submitted on May 30, 1997
Accepted on March 3, 1998






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1998 by the American Dairy Science Association ®.