The ability to program the time of birth for our livestock species offers several advantages to the producer. By concentrating lambing into a short defined period or periods it allows better utilization of labor and facilities. In addition, it should increase lamb survival since better supervision can be maintained for these specific periods. Furthermore, lambs are grouped more closely by age and can be more uniformly managed in such groups. Two trials (1983-84 and 1984-85) were conducted to study the effectiveness to prostaglandin F2α to synchronize estrus and flumethasone to induce parturition in a planned lambing program

Hoppe, K. F.

Slyter, A. L.

English

Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange

South Dakota State UniversityOpen PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access InstitutionalRepository and Information ExchangeSouth Dakota Sheep Field Day Proceedings andResearch Reports, 1985 Animal Science Reports1985Control of Lambing Through Synchronization ofEstrus and Induction of ParturitionA. L. SlyterSouth Dakota State UniversityK. F. HoppeFollow this and additional works at: http://openprairie.sdstate.edu/sd_sheepday_1985This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Animal Science Reports at Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access InstitutionalRepository and Information Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in South Dakota Sheep Field Day Proceedings and Research Reports, 1985 byan authorized administrator of Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. For moreinformation, please contact michael.biondo@sdstate.edu.Recommended CitationSlyter, A. L. and Hoppe, K. F., "Control of Lambing Through Synchronization of Estrus and Induction of Parturition" (1985). SouthDakota Sheep Field Day Proceedings and Research Reports, 1985. Paper 15.http://openprairie.sdstate.edu/sd_sheepday_1985/151�1 -t I .. CONTROL O F  LAMB I N G T H RO U G H  SYN C H RON I ZAT I ON O F  EST R U S  AND I ND UCT I ON OF PA RTU R I T I ON A .  L .  S LY T E R  AND K .  F .  HOP P E  Dep artment  o f  An ima l and Range Sc ienc es  Agr icultural  Exper iment  S t at ion Summary SHEEP 8 5-1 5 Two t r ia l s  we re condu c t ed to eva luate the effec t ivene s s  of  s ynchron iza­t ion o f  e s t ru s  with 1 or  2 inj e c t ions o f  pro s t ag l and in F2a ( PGF ) p lu s  induc­t ion o f  partur i t ion with f lume thas one (FLU ) on g roup ing of  lamb ing . Synchron iz at ion o f  e s t ru s  invo lved e ither contro l ( no inj ec t ion ) , 1 -1 0  mg inj e c t ion o f  PGF or 2-1 0  mg inj ec t ions of  PGF . Lamb ing induc t ion tre atment wa s e ither c ontro l ( no inj e c t ion ) or 2 mg of  FLU . One in j e c t ion of  PGF ap­peared as e f fe c t ive as  2 in j e c t ions . No e s t rou s synchron izat ion p lu s  FLU re su l t ed in 83% lamb ing in a 9 d period compared to 6 2% for the doub le con­tro l . The c omb inat ion of one inj e c t ion of PGF p lu s  FLU re su l t ed in 5 9% lamb ing in 9 d in t r ial  1 and 7 5% in t r ial  2 .  With this  comb inat ion in t r i­al  1 ,  23%  lambed on one day . None of  the tre atments  appe ared to affec t the perc ent ag e  l amb ing or  the number of  lamb s born per ewe . The s e  re sul t s  ind ic a t e  that group ing of lamb ing is pos s ib le through u s e  of  int ens ive manag ement prac t ic e s . Key Word s : Ewe , Synchronizat ion , Induc t ion o f  Lamb ing , F lume thas one , Pro s  tag land in F 2  a. Introduc t ion The ab i l i ty to prog ram the t ime of  b irth for our l ive s tock spec ies  o f­fers s everal advantages  to  the produce r .  By conc entrat ing lamb ing in to a short def ined period or pe r iod s it  al lows b e t t er u t i l izat ion o f  labor and fac i l i t ie s . In add it ion , it shou ld inc reas e lamb surv ival  s inc e b e t t e r  su­pervis ion can b e  ma intained for the s e  spec i f ic period s . Furthermore , lamb s are grouped mo re c lo s e ly by ag e and c an b e  mo re uni formly manag ed in such group s . Two t r ials  ( 1 9 83 -84 fnd 1 9 84-85 ) we re condu c t ed to s tudy the2e f fec­t ivene s s  of  pro s t ag land in F2a t o  s ynchron ize  e s t ru s  and f lume thas one to induc e partur it ion in a p l anned lamb ing program .  Prepared for Sheep Day , June 6 ,  1 9 85 . 1 Lut a lyse  ® supp l ied court e s y  of  the Up j ohn Co . ,  Kalamazoo , MI 4900 1 . 2F lucort ® , D iamond Laborator ies  Inc . , Des  Mo ine s , Iowa 50304 . 7 4  Exper imen t al Proc edure Tr ial  1 ( 1 983 -84 ) Purebred Hamp s h ire and Co lumb ia ewe s ( n=1 45 ) we re exp o s ed to t eas e r  rams for  2 week s preced ing t h e  s t art of  the breed ing s e as on ( e arly Sep t embe r ) . F lushing was in it iated when the  teas e r  rams were introduced and cont inued for approx imat e ly 5 weeks . Teas e r  rams were rep laced with in tac t  s emen t e s t ed rams (day 1 ,  1 6 00 hr ) and rema ined with the ewe s for 3 5  days . Bre ed ing ut i l ized s ing le s ire group s with a max imum o f  1 6  synchronized ewe s per ram for the f irs t we ek . Ewe s were then regrouped in to larger s ire group s (max imum 2 5-3 0 ewe s ) .  Hamp s h ire s we re exp o s ed one we ek pr ior  to Co lumb ias . Bre ed ing marks were recorded daily and a l l  ewe s no t marked ( n=l ll ) by 0800 hrs of  day 5 we re in j ec t ed with 1 0  mg of  pro s t ag land in F2 a (PGF ) . Onc e  per  we ek at l amb ing t ime , ewe s c alcu lated to  be  on day 1 40 through 1 46 of  g e s t at ion we re in j e c t ed with 2mg of  f lume thas one ( n=94) . Tr ial  I I  ( 1 984-85 ) Purebred Hamp sh ire and Co lumb ia ewe s ( n=1 47 ) we re ag a in ut i l ized in this trial . Time of  the breed ing s e ason , t e as er ram u s age and f lushing we re s imilar to t r ia l  1 .  Ewe s we re randomly al lo t t ed within breed to  one of thre e b reed ing treatment s :  ( 1 )  contro l ; ( 2 )  1 0  mg of PGF ; or ( 3 ) two 10 mg in j e c t ions of  PGF . Tre atment 2 was s imilar to the PGF pro toco l u s ed in t r i­al 1 ,  i . e . , al l ewe s no t mat ed by day 5 were inj e c t ed . In treatment 3 al l ewe s rec e ived 2 in j e c t ions of  PGF t en days ap art . Timing among tre atment s  was coord ina t ed so  t hat ewe s in treatment 2 rec e ived the ir in j ec t ion o n  the s ame morn ing as ewe s in t re atment 3 rece ived the ir s ec ond inj ec t ion . Intac t rams were there fore introduced in t re atment s one and two 4 c a l endar days pr ior to the t ime they were int roduced with t re atment 3 ewe s . A l l  t re at­ment s  we re a l lowed a 35 day breed ing period . Onc e  per  week at l amb ing t ime , al l ewe s calculated to  be  on days 1 40 through 1 46 of  g e s t a t ion we re randomly sp l it within breed in to one of two induc t ion tre atment g roup s : ( 1 )  contro l - no t re atment and ( 2 )  induced - 2 mg f lume thas one in tramu s cu l arly . Th is arrangement a l lows eva luat ion o f  s ix ou tcome group s b a s ed on thre e synchronizat ion t re atments and two induc t ion treatmen t s . Re su l t s  Tr ial  1 .  One hundred n ineteen of  the 1 45 ewe s exposed lamb ed ; four d ied p r ior  to l amb ing for unre lated reas ons , two aborted and 20 we re open . E ighty-one percen t  of  the ewe s rece iv ing f lume thas one lambed on d ay 2 to 4 fo l lowing inj e c t ion . Ad j u s t ing for the week d i f fe renc e in the s tart of the breed ing s e as on , 43 ( 3 0% )  lambed in a 4-day period and 7 0  ( 5 9% ) lambed within a 9-day per iod . The larg e s t  number on any one day was 27 ( 23% ) . Treatment resu l t ed in a cyc l ic l amb ing pattern at approx ima t e l y  a 7 or 1 4  day interval  ( f igure 1 ) . Although the total lamb ing p e r iod ( 3 6  days ) was not marked ly s horter  than wou ld b e  expec t ed with a 3 5  day b reed ing exposure , this  approach d id re sult  in we ek ly g roup ing of  parturit ions . 7 5  30 25  00 c 2 0  :;; E co ...J f/J C1) l 1:-1 1 5  .... 0 lo; C1) .D E ::;) z 1 0  5 1 1 0 27 3 3 4 1 4 7 1 1  2 3 4 2 5 6 1 2  4 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 I O  I I  1 2  I 3  1 4  I 9 2 0  2 1  2 2  2 3  2 4  2 6  2 7  2 9  3 1  36  Day  o f  Lambing F igure 1 .  Numb er of ewes l amb ing per day of the lamb ing s eason . Days when no ewes l amb ed are omit t ed f rom the l eg end . ( Tr ia l  1 . )  7 6  Tr ial 2 .  Tr ial 2 resu l t s  are shown in f igure 2 .  The b e s t  group ing o f  lamb ing was i n  the Contro l-F lume thas one t re atment w i t h  8 3 %  of  t h e  ewe s lamb­ing in a 9 day period . Th is  was fo l lowed by 7 5% o f  the lPGF-F lume thas one group l amb ing in 9 days . Th is  is 1 6 %  more than for ewe s treated s imilarly in t r ial  1 .  S ixty-two perc ent of  the Contro l-Contro l ewe s lambed in 9 days . Thu s it  appe ars the ewe s we re in good breed ing cond it ion and conc e ived e arly  in  the  exposure period in  a s omewhat natural ly s ynchroni zed fas h ion . F lushing and t eas ing may have been the reason for the pos it ive respons e . Two inj e c t ions of  PGF d id not appe ar to improve group ing o f  lamb ing in this  trial  compared to  a s ing le  inj ec t ion o f  PGF . Treatment d id not affect the number o f  lamb s born per  ewe exposed or per  ewe lamb ing or the percentage of ewe s  l amb ing ( t ab le 1 ) .  The me an Ju l ian lamb ing date  for tre atment s  rang ed f rom d 3 4 . S  to  d 41 . S ince ewe s rece iv ing 2 PGF in j ec t ions we re p l ac ed with in tac t rams four days later  than tho s e  in the o ther group s by experimental des ign the ir me an l amb­ing date wou ld be  exp e c t ed to  be  4 d later . Conc lus ions Group ing of lamb ing was ach ieved with a c omb ina t ion of  t re atment of s ynchronizat ion of e s t rus  u s ing PGF and induc t ion of partur it ion us ing f lume thas one in both trial s .  Contro l groups  in t r ial 2 a l s o  l ambed in a rather s ynchron ized fashion as a result  of  chanc e  or use  of  the teas e r  rams and f lushing manag ement .  Thu s the d i f ference in resu l t s  b e twe en contro l and t re at ed group s we re no t as  large as expec t ed in tr ial 2 .  7 7  6 N 5 0 E w 3 E s 2 T R T • l PGF - F L UME T No . Lamb i ng i n  b e s t  9 day s / to t a l  1 5 / 2 0  0-t::::::::::!::==:::::::::::::;::::::���;::::;:::;:=:;::::;:::;::�=!=�::;:::;:::;::::;:::;::::;::::;:::�;::::;::�2 7 J AN 8 5  6 N 5 0 E w J E s 2 OJFEB85 1 0F EB 8 5  1 7 F EB 8 5  2 4 F E B 8 5  0Jt1AR8 5  DAT E T R T • CON T R OL - CO N T R O L  1 3 / 2 1  o-e:::;::::;:=;::::;::::!;::::::::;::::!;::::::���;::::;:::;:=:;::::!::::;::!=:;::::;:::;::::::;:::!=:;::::;:=;:::;::::;=::;:::�;::::;:�2 7 JAN 8 5  O J F E B B S  1 0F EB 8 5  1 7 F E B 8 5  2 4 F E B 8 5  0 Jt1AR 8 5  D A T E  T R T c C QN T R OL - F L UME T 6 N 5 0 4 E w J E 2 0 / 2 4  s 2 0 2 7 JAN 8 5  0 3 F E B 8 5  1 0F E B 8 5  1 7 F E B 8 5  2 4 F E B 8 5  OJMAR 8 5  DAT E F igure 2 . Numb er of  ewes lamb ing p er day by t r eatment group . ( T r ial  2 . )  7 8  6 N 5 0 ., E w J E s 2 0 2 7 J AN 8 5  6 N 5 0 4 E w J E s 2 0 2 7 JAN 8 5  6 N 5 0 E w J E s 2 T R T  c 2 P G F - F L UME T 0 3 F E B 8 5  1 0F E B 8 5  1 7 F E B 8 5  D A T E T R T = 2P G F - C O N T ROL 0 3 F E B 8 5  1 0F E B 8 5  1 7 F E B 8 5  D A T E  T R T = l P G F - CON T R O L  No . Lamb i ng i n  be s t  9 d a y s / to t a l  1 1 / 2 2  2 4 F E B 8 5  1 6 / 2 3  2 4 F E B 8 5  1 4 /  2 5  O � MAR B S  O JMAR 8 5  o --........_..__.__.__��..........__.__  ___._� _......_! ----2 7 J AN B S  OJF E B 8 5  1 0F E B 8 5  1 7 F E B 8 5  2 4 F E 8 8 5  OJMAR 8 5  D A T E F igure 2 ( cont ) . Numb er o f  ewes l amb ing p e r  day by t r ea tment g roup . ( Tr ia l  2 . )  7 9  TABLE 1 .  EFFECT OF TREATMENT ON LAMBING PERFORMANCE (TRIAL 2 )  T r t . N (N)1 No . Lambs /EE No . Lamb s / EL Lamb ing Dat e  2 % Lamb ing C-F3 2 5 ( 24)  1 . 80 ± . 14 1  1 . 88 ± . 12 5  34 . 5  ± 1 . 1 5 9 6 .0 C- C 2 4 (2 1 )  1 .  58 ± . 1 58 1 .  8 1  ± . 1 12 3 7 . 7  ± 1 .  7 6 8 7 . 5  l P GF-F 2 3 (20) 1 .  65 ± . 1 8 5  1 .  90 ± . 14 3  37 . 3  ± 1 .  50 8 7 . 0  lPGF-C 2 5 ( 2 5) 1 .  68 ± . 09 5  1 .  68 ± .09 5  40 .0 ± 1 .  58 100 . 0  2PGF-F 2 6 ( 22 )  1 .  65 ± . 1 7 5 1 .  9 5  ± . 12 3  40 . 6  ± 1 .  65 84 . 6  2PGF-C 24 ( 2 3) 1 .  63  ± . 1 5 7  1 .  70 ± . 14 7 4 1 .0 ± 1 .4 6  9 5 . 8  To t al 14 7 ( 1 3 5 )  9 1 . 8% 1 N = number o f  ewe s exp o sed , ( N) number o f  ewe s lamb ing . 2Jul ian date w it h  J an 1 = 1 .  3 C = Co ntr o l , F Flumet hasone , lPGE = 1 - 10 mg inj ect io n o f  pro s t ag l and in F2a ,  2PGF = 2 - 10 mg inj e ct ion s  o f  p r o st agland in F2a ten days ap ar t . 80 

Control of Lambing Through Synchronization of Estrus and Induction of Parturition

https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014&context=sd_sheepday_1985

Control of Lambing Through Synchronization of Estrus and Induction of Parturition

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange