Abstract AIM: To compare the sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and accuracy of detection of oestrus using a novel oestrus detection-strip (ODS) and a camera-software device (CSD) with typical farm management practices of visual observation and use of tail paint in dairy cattle at pasture. METHODS: Dairy cows (n=480) in a seasonal-calving herd managed at pasture under typical commercial conditions in New Zealand were stratified by age, body condition score and days in milk, then randomly allocated to one of two groups prior to the planned start of mating (PSM). Tail paint was applied to all cows and oestrus detected by visual observation of oestrous behaviour and removal of paint, by farm staff. One group (n=240) was fitted with ODS and also monitored for signs of oestrus using a CSD, while the Control group (n=240) was monitored using tail paint and visual observations only. Cows detected in oestrus were artificially inseminated (AI), and pregnancy status determined using rectal palpation and ultrasonography, 51–52 days after the end of a 55-day AI period. Results of pregnancy diagnosis were used to confirm the occurrence of oestrus, and the sensitivity, specificity, predictive value and accuracy of detection of oestrus compared between oestrus detection methods. RESULTS: The sensitivity and accuracy of oestrus detection in the Control group, using visual observation and tail paint, were low. Compared with the Control group, detection of oestrus using the ODS and CSD resulted in greater sensitivity (85% vs 78%; p=0.006), specificity (99.6% vs 98.0%; p<0.001), positive predictive value(PPV;88% vs 51%;p<0.001) and overall accuracy (99.0% vs 98.0%; p<0.001). Negative predictive value (NPV) did not differ significantly between groups (99.4% vs 99.3%; p=0.28). Pregnancy rate to first service was higher in the CSD group than in the Control group (72% vs 39%; p<0.05). Use of the CSD significantly increased the cumulative proportion of cows pregnant to AI over the breeding period (p=0.044). CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The ODS and CSD was satisfactory for detection of oestrus in seasonal-calving dairy herds grazing on pasture and could improve the sensitivity and accuracy of detection of oestrus in herds where these are low.
[1]
L. Guilbault,et al.
NOUVELLES TECHNIQUES POUR AMELIORER L'EFFICACITE REPRODUCTIVE DES BOVINS LAITIERS
,
1998
.
[2]
A. Tegegne,et al.
Short luteal phases and ovulations without oestrus in primiparous Borana (Bos indicus) cows in the central highlands of Ethiopia
,
1993
.
[3]
R Vishwanath,et al.
Estrus detection using radiotelemetry or visual observation and tail painting for dairy cows on pasture.
,
1998,
Journal of dairy science.
[4]
W. Mccaughey,et al.
Tail painting technique as an aid to oestrus detection in cattle
,
1984,
The Veterinary Record.
[5]
P. L. Senger,et al.
The estrus detection problem: new concepts, technologies, and possibilities.
,
1994,
Journal of dairy science.
[6]
Rony Geers,et al.
Electronic Identification, Monitoring and Tracking of Animals
,
1997
.
[7]
N. Williamson.
Tail painting as an aid to detection of oestrus in cattle.
,
1980,
Australian Veterinary Journal.
[8]
R. Sartori,et al.
Assessment of a commercially available early conception factor (ECF) test for determining pregnancy status of dairy cattle.
,
2001,
Journal of dairy science.
[9]
K. Macmillan,et al.
Tail painting — a simple form of oestrus detection in New Zealand dairy herds
,
1977
.
[10]
K. Macmillan,et al.
Some effects of prematurely elevated concentrations of progesterone on luteal and follicular characteristics during the oestrous cycle in heifers
,
1994
.
[11]
D. R. Barnes,et al.
Detecting estrus in synchronized heifers-using tailpaint and an aerosol raddle.
,
1988,
Theriogenology.
[12]
K. Macmillan,et al.
VIII. Effects of non-oestrous inseminations and return patterns after second inseminations
,
1977
.
[13]
Logistic Regression Using the SAS® System
,
2000
.
[14]
J. Bigby.
Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine
,
1988
.