Lactating dairy cows managed for second and greater artificial insemination services with the Short-Resynch or Day 25 Resynch program had similar reproductive performance

Abstract

The objective of this randomized controlled experiment was to evaluate reproductive performance and reproductive physiological outcomes of lactating Holstein cows managed for second and greater artificial insemination (AI) services with the Short-Resynch or Day 25 Resynch program. Cows from 2 commercial farms were randomly assigned after first service to the Short-Resynch (SR; n = 870) or Day 25 Resynch (D25R; n = 917) program in which they remained until 210 d after first service or left the herd. Cows in D25R received GnRH 25 ± 3 d after AI, whereas cows in SR did not. Cows not reinseminated at detected estrus (AIE) by 32 ± 3 d after AI underwent nonpregnancy diagnosis (NPD) through transrectal ultrasonography (TUS). Nonpregnant cows from both treatments with a corpus luteum (CL) ≥15 mm and an ovarian follicle ≥10 mm (hereafter, CL cows) received 2 PGF2α treatments 24 h apart, GnRH 32 h after the second PGF2α, and timed AI 16 to 18 h later. Cows that did not meet the criteria to be included in the CL group (NoCL cows) received a modified Ovsynch protocol with progesterone (P4) supplementation [P4-Ovsynch; GnRH and controlled internal drug-release device (CIDR) in, 7 d later CIDR removal and PGF2α, 24 h later PGF2α, 32 h later GnRH, and 16 to 18 h later timed AI]. In a subgroup of cows, blood samples were collected and TUS conducted at each treatment to evaluate ovarian responses to resynchronization. Binary data were analyzed with logistic regression, continuous data by ANOVA, and time-to-event data by Cox's proportional hazard regression. A greater proportion (mean; 95% CI) of cows were AIE before NPD in the SR (60.5%; 57.0-63.8; n = 3,416) than the D25R (50.1%; 46.5-53.7; n = 3,177) treatment, whereas pregnancy per AI (P/AI) at 32 d for AIE services before NPD was greater for the D25R (41.3%; 38.8-43.8; n = 1,560) than the SR (37.6%; 35.5-39.8; n = 1,961) treatment. At NPD, a greater proportion of cows in the D25R (84.3%; 82.2-86.2) than the SR (77.0%; 74.4-79.4) treatment were considered CL cows. Pregnancy per AI at 32 d was greater for the D25R than the SR treatment for all timed AI services (D25R = 43.0%; 40.2-45.9 vs. SR = 36.8%; 33.8-39.8) and for CL cows (D25R = 42.8%; 39.7-45.9 vs. SR = 33.8%; 30.6-37.2) but did not differ for NoCL cows (D25R = 39.4%; 32.1-47.3 vs. SR = 44.0%; 36.8-51.4). The hazard ratio for time to pregnancy (1.03; 0.93-1.14) and the proportion of cows not pregnant at the end of the observation period (D25R = 5.9%; 4.4-7.8 vs. SR = 6.7%; 5.0-8.7) did not differ between SR and D25R treatments. The GnRH treatment 25 d after AI resulted in more cows with P4 >1 ng/mL (D25R = 80.5%; 75.3-84.9 vs. SR = 63.6%; 57.3-69.4) and smaller follicle diameter at NPD 32 ± 3 d after AI for D25R (16.2 ± 0.4 mm) than for SR (17.5 ± 0.4 mm); however, it did not affect follicle diameter and luteal regression risk (CL cows only) before TAI. We concluded that the use of reproductive management programs including SR and D25R for CL cows and the P4-Ovsynch protocol for NoCL cows resulted in similar hazard of pregnancy and proportion of nonpregnant cows for up to 210 d after first service.