University of FloridaSolutions for Your Life

Download PDF
Publication #VM195

Should You Breed Cows during the Summer in the Southeastern United States? An Economic Analysis of a Dairy Herd in Florida1

Klibs N. Galvão and Albert De Vries2

The economic importance of voluntary waiting period

Reproductive performance and milk production are important factors that affect the profitability of a dairy farm (De Vries 2006; Galvão et al. 2013). Reproductive success in a dairy is typically measured by reproductive indices such as days open (DO), calving interval (CI), service rate, pregnancies per AI (PAI), and pregnancy rate. The voluntary waiting period (VWP), which is the time from calving to the start of the breeding period, is an important component of reproductive management because the VMP affects pregnancy rate, DO, and CI (Van Amburgh et al. 1997; Tenhagen et al. 2003).

Most dairy farms use a VWP of approximately 60 days in milk (DIM) (range from 30 to 90 DIM [DeJarnette et al. 2007]). In their survey of 673 herds in the United States, season was the second most frequently cited reason for altering the VWP (postpartum health [50%], season [18%], milk yield [18%], parity [14%], and other reasons [14%]). Among the herds that altered the VWP by season (n = 120), 63% (75/120) did so to avoid inseminating cows during the summer months, 22% (26/120) tried to avoid calving during the winter months, and 16% (19/120) tried to avoid calving during the summer (DeJarnette et al. 2007). The summers in the southeast United States are hot and humid, and cows experience decreased reproductive performance; therefore, some dairy farmers delay breeding until the cooler fall (Du 2013). However, there is no economic data to support this practice. Therefore, the objective of this article is to present the results of a recent paper (Gobikrushanth et al. 2014) that evaluated the effects that delaying breeding during the summer has on cow performance and profitability in Florida.

Evaluating the effect of delayed breeding during the summer on cow performance and profitability

Data from Holstein cows (n = 1416) that calved between June and September of 2007 and between June and September of 2008 were used. Cows that calved between June 1 and July 21 (regular group [REG]; n = 719) were artificially inseminated (AI) for the first time upon estrus detection (ED) after the second PGF of the Presynch administered between 57 and 63 DIM, or were timed AI (TAI) using the Ovsynch protocol if not detected in estrus. Cows that calved between July 22 and September 18 (extended group [EXT]; n = 697) were AI for the first time after the first or second PGF starting November 14 or November 21 or were TAI if not detected in estrus. For second and subsequent AI, all cows were AI upon ED or enrolled on TAI after non-pregnancy diagnosis. Following these schemes, average VWP in the REG group and EXT group were 60 and 83 DIM, respectively. Overall profitability for both experimental and subsequent parities were calculated by subtracting the costs existing for feeding costs ($0.30/kg lactating cow diet; $0.25/kg dry cow diet), breeding costs ($2.65/dose PGF; $2.40/dose GnRH; $0.25/injection administration; $10/semen straw; $5/AI; $3/pregnancy diagnosis), and other costs ($3/d) from the daily revenues with milk sales ($0.44/kg milk), cow sales ($1.76/kg live weight), and calf sales ($140/calf). A herd budget simulation was used to predict future cash flow after culling or end of subsequent parity until six years after start of study to account for all cash flow consequences of extended VWP. Cows in the EXT group had greater first service pregnancy per AI (37.7 vs. 32.1; P = 0.02), but still had greater mean days open (156 vs. 139 d; P < 0.001), median days open (139 vs. 113 d; P < 0.001; Figure 1) and calving interval (428 vs. 408 d; P < 0.001). Delaying breeding did not affect total cash flow, because the EXT group had greater (P = 0.05) combined profitability for the experimental parity and subsequent parity but lesser (P < 0.001) future cash flow (Table 1).

Figure 1. 

Kaplan-Meier survival curve for time to pregnancy up to 500 DIM for EXT and REG groups. Cows in the EXT group (n = 697) had VWP between 64 and 121 DIM (avg. 83 DIM); cows in the REG group (n = 719) had voluntary waiting period (VWP) between 57 and 63 DIM. The EXT group had increased median days open compared to REG group (139 vs. 113 d; P < 0.001).


Credit:

Adapted from Gobikrushanth et al. (2014)


[Click thumbnail to enlarge.]

Table 1. 

Effect of delaying breeding on cash flows in the experimental parity and subsequent parity (study cash flow), future cash flow, and total cash flow.

Variable

EXT1

REG1

P-value

Study cash flow2

2,996

2,840

0.05

Future cash flow3

5,237

5,575

<0.001

Total cash flow4

8,318

8,353

0.57

1Cows in the REG group (n = 719) had a voluntary waiting period (VWP) between 57 and 63 DIM; cows in the EXT group (n = 697) had VWP between 64 and 121 DIM (avg. 83 DIM).

2Sum of cash flows from the experimental and subsequent lactation.

3Cash flow from the time the cow left the herd or the end of the subsequent lactation until six years after enrollment.

4Total cash flow from study enrollment until six years of enrollment.

Source: Adapted from Gobikrushanth et al. (2014)

Conclusion

Delayed breeding during the summer increased pregnancy per AI to first service but did not improve overall reproductive efficiency. Delaying breeding did not affect total cash flow for the six-year period evaluated. The decision to delay breeding during the summer in herds similar to the one used for this study may be based on other management considerations, because it did not affect overall profitability.

References

DeJarnette, J. M., C. G. Sattler, C. E. Marshall, and R. L. Nebel. 2007. Voluntary waiting period management practices in dairy herds participating in a progeny test program. J Dairy Sci 90: 1073–1079.

De Vries, A. 2006. Economic value of pregnancy in dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 89: 3876–3885.

Du, F. 2013. Characterization of pasture-based dairy farms in Florida and Georgia. MS Thesis. Univ. Florida, Gainesville.

Galvão, K. N., P. Federico, A. De Vries, and G. M. Schuenemann. 2013. Economic comparison of reproductive programs for dairy herds using estrus detection, timed artificial insemination, or a combination. J Dairy Sci 96: 2681–2693.

Gobikrushanth M., A. De Vries, J. E. Santos JE, C. A. Risco, and K. N. Galvão. 2014. Effect of delayed breeding during the summer on profitability of dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 97: 4236–46.

Tenhagen, B. A., C. Vogel, M. Drillich, G. Thiele, and W. Heuwieser. 2003. Influence of stage of lactation and milk production on conception rates after timed artificial insemination following Ovsynch. Theriogenology 60: 1527–1537.

Van Amburgh, M. E., D. M. Galton, D. E. Bauman, and R. W. Everett. 1997. Management and economics of extended calving intervals with use of bovine somatotropin. Livest Prod Sci 50: 15–28.

Footnotes

1.

This document is VM195, one of a series of the Veterinary Medicine-Large Animal Clinical Sciences Department, UF/IFAS Extension. Original publication date July 2014. Reviewed October 2017. Visit the EDIS website at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.

2.

Klibs N. Galvão, DVM, MPVM, PhD, Dipl. ACT, Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences; and Albert De Vries, Department of Animal Sciences; UF/IFAS Extension, Gainesville, FL 32611.


The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. For more information on obtaining other UF/IFAS Extension publications, contact your county's UF/IFAS Extension office.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, UF/IFAS Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A & M University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Nick T. Place, dean for UF/IFAS Extension.