
%0 Journal Article
%A Small, J. 
%A Dias, F. 
%A Pfeifer, L. 
%A Lightfoot, K. 
%A Colazo, M. 
%A Kastelic, J. 
%A Mapletoft, R. 
%T 20 ADMINISTRATION OF FOLLICLE-STIMULATING HORMONE AT CIDR REMOVAL DOES NOT AFFECT THE PREGNANCY RATE IN A CIDR-BASED, COSYNCH PROTOCOL IN LACTATING BEEF COWS
%J Reproduction, Fertility and Development
%D 2007/12/12
%V 20
%N 1
%P 90-90
%K 
%R https://doi.org/10.1071/RDV20N1AB20
%U https://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/RDV20N1AB20 
%X In previous studies, giving eCG at CIDR removal significantly increased the pregnancy rate after timed-AI in beef cows. However, eCG is not universally available. Therefore, we tested the hypothesis that giving pFSH at CIDR removal might improve the pregnancy rate in a CIDR-based, Cosynch protocol in postpartum, suckled Bos taurus beef cows; a secondary objective was to compare pregnancy rates when GnRH v. pLH was used to synchronize wave emergence and ovulation. This work was conducted as two experiments (separate locations). All cows were given a CIDR (containing 1.9 g progesterone; Pfizer Animal Health, Montreal, QC, Canada) on Day 0 (without regard to stage of estrous cycle or cyclicity). On Day 7, CIDRs were removed, all cows were concurrently given 25 mg PGF (Lutalyse; Pfizer Animal Health, Groton, CT, USA), half were given 20 mg pFSH (Folltropin-V; Bioniche Animal Health, Belleville, ON, Canada), and all cows were timed-AI 54 h later (Day 9). In Experiment 1, 240 cows [94 ± 10.8 days postpartum; body condition score (BCS: 1 = emaciated, 9 = obese; mean ± SD): 5.8 ± 0.4] were used; at CIDR insertion and AI, cows were allocated to receive either 100 &#181;g GnRH (n = 160; Cystorelin, Merial Canada Inc., Victoriaville, QC, Canada) or 12.5 mg pLH (n = 80; Lutropin-V, Bioniche Animal Health). In Experiment 2, 109 cows (59.2 ± 19.5 days postpartum; BCS: 5.6 ± 1.1) were used; all received 100 &#181;g GnRH (Cystorelin) at CIDR insertion and AI. In Experiment 1, three cows that lost their CIDR were excluded; pregnancy rates after timed-AI (logistic regression, backward selection: parity, pFSH, synchronizing treatment, and their interactions) were not different between cows given pFSH v. control cows (64.7 v. 65.2%; P > 0.80), nor between cows given GnRH v. pLH (62.7 v. 69.6%; P = 0.91). However, there was an interaction (P < 0.04) between parity and the synchronizing treatment; in primiparous cows, pregnancy rates were significantly lower in those given GnRH v. pLH (59.3 v. 83.3%). In Experiment 2, pregnancy rates after timed-AI (logistic regression, backward selection: parity, pFSH, and their interaction) were not different between cows given pFSH v. control cows (38.2 v. 42.6%; P > 0.6). In conclusion, our hypothesis was not supported; giving pFSH at CIDR removal did not significantly improve the pregnancy rate in a CIDR-based, Cosynch protocol in postpartum, suckled Bos taurus beef cows. 
