Comparação de métodos auxiliares na identificação de estros em vacas e novilhas mestiças leiteiras

• Ano de defesa: 2012
• Autor(a) principal: Bonato, Gabriela Lucia
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal de Uberlândia; BR; Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciências Veterinárias; Ciências Agrárias; UFU
• Palavras-chave em Português: Detecção de cio; Inseminação artificial; Reprodução; Bovino - Inseminação artificial; Bovino - Reprodução; Vaca - Inseminação artificial; Vaca - Reprodução; Novilho - Inseminação artificial; Novilho - Reprodução; Estrus detection; Artificial insemination; Reproduction; CNPQ::CIENCIAS AGRARIAS::MEDICINA VETERINARIA
• Link de acesso: https://repositorio.ufu.br/handle/123456789/13026; https://doi.org/10.14393/ufu.di.2012.268

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of auxiliary tools for the detection of estrus in cows. In experiment 1, we evaluated the efficiency of Estrotect ® in comparison with visual observation in 58 crossbred cows. The animals were divided into two groups: the TAI (n = 21) was subjected to a protocol of a fixed timed insemination (TAI) and 10 days after insemination device was fixed to the animals. In the group PG (n = 37) was administered prostaglandin (Dinoprost Tromethamine, Lutalyse ®, Pfizer) and immediately 25mg/animal/IM pasted adhesive. In the experiment 2, aimed to compare the Estrotect ® with chalk marker in crossbred heifers. After synchronization of estrus with P4 (CIDR) + GnRH - 7 days - PGF2a, heifers were randomly divided into two groups: Group 1 (n = 56) received the Estrotect ® and Group 2 (n = 56) received in the insertion of the marking tail with the chalk marker. The visual detection of estrus was performed daily in the same way in first experiment, from 07:00 to 08:00 and from 17:00 until 18:00. In experiment 2, the devices were only reached two times a day. After detection were artificially inseminated and diagnosed by ultrasound after 30 days in both estudies. In experiment 1, there was no effect of group (P> 0.05) on the efficiency of visual detection of estrus or auxiliary tool. There was no detectable difference between the efficiency of estrus and the visual detection device (P> 0.05) 92.5%. In experiment 2, not detected a group effect (P> 0.05) in the detection of estrus or the range of CIDR removal to the manifestation of estrus. The heat detection and conception rate was 92.86% (52/56), and 46,15% (24/52) for Estrotect® and 85,71% (48/56), and 58.33% (28/48) to chalk marker. It is concluded that the methods of estrus detection aids are effective and help in improving the efficiency of artificial insemination programs.