- Email: [email protected]
Reproductive performance of Brown Swiss, Holstein and their crosses under subtropical environmental conditions
Accepted Manuscript Reproductive performance of Brown Swiss, Holstein and their crosses under subtropical environmental conditions Mahmoud S. El-Tarabany, Mohammed A.F. Nasr PII:
S0093-691X(15)00194-6
DOI:
10.1016/j.theriogenology.2015.04.012
Reference:
THE 13163
To appear in:
Theriogenology
Received Date: 16 November 2014 Revised Date:
28 March 2015
Accepted Date: 7 April 2015
Please cite this article as: El-Tarabany MS, Nasr MAF, Reproductive performance of Brown Swiss, Holstein and their crosses under subtropical environmental conditions, Theriogenology (2015), doi: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2015.04.012. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Revised
1
Reproductive performance of Brown Swiss, Holstein and their crosses under subtropical
3
environmental conditions
RI PT
2
Mahmoud S. El-Tarabany *, Mohammed A.F. Nasr
5
Department of Animal Wealth Development, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Zagazig
6
University, Egypt.
7
*To whom correspondence should be addressed: Mahmoud S. El-Tarabany, Department of
8
Animal Wealth Development, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Zagazig University, El-Zeraa
9
str. 114; 44511-Zagazig; Egypt
M AN U
SC
4
Tel: 00201223668785, Fax: 020552283683
11
Email: [email protected]
EP
[email protected]
AC C
12
TE D
10
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Abstract
14
Selection has been emphasized for increasing production traits with ignoring the fertility traits,
15
which leads to a general loss of reproductive fitness. The aim of this study was to evaluate the
16
reproductive performance of the pure Brown Swiss (BS), Holstein (HO), their first generation
17
crossbred (F1) and backcross (BC) cows under subtropical Egyptian conditions. The reproductive
18
performance and health traits were measured in the pure BS, HO, their F1 and BC crossbred, in
19
addition to investigating the impact of temperature humidity index level (THI) on reproductive
20
traits. BS and her F1 had a better reproductive efficiency and health traits than in HO and BC.
21
They possess a higher conception (34.1 and 36.9%, respectively), pregnancy rate (32.8 and
22
31.1%, respectively), a shorter calving interval (401 and 420 days, respectively) and a lower
23
average insemination per parturition (3.18 and 3.45, respectively), with a lower incidence of
24
metritis (14.1 and14.6%, respectively). Moreover, no difference has been detected to the fertility
25
of BS with different THI levels, while F1 was slightly affected by increasing THI, especially for
26
conception rate which declined from 43.1% at low to 24.1% at high THI. But, the pregnancy rate
27
did not change with different levels of THI. Our results indicate that BS and her F1 have a better
28
reproductive performance and adaptability than pure HO and backcross under subtropical
29
Egyptian conditions. Furthermore, milk yield of the F1crossbred is comparable to that of the pure
30
HO cows.
31
Key words: Brown Swiss, Holstein, crossbred, fertility, THI.
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
13
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
32
1. Introduction Fertility of the dairy cows is a complex trait and comprises the ability of the female to
34
return in heat within a passable period after calving, to show heat in an appropriate manner, and
35
to become pregnant with a finite number of inseminations [1]. Holstein is the most important
36
dairy cattle breed in many places of the world, and the selection within the breed has been
37
emphasized to increase production for several decades [2], but the fertility of dairy cattle was
38
ignored in selection programs of the HO breed until recent years. A pertinent body of literature
39
related to selection for milk yield traits caused a general loss of reproductive fitness, health, and
40
longevity [3-5].The genetic antagonism between yield and fertility has often been indicated to be
41
the major factor leading to disturbed reproductive performance [6,7]. In dairy cattle, production
42
traits (milk, fat, and protein) had negative genetic correlations with fertility traits [8].
M AN U
SC
RI PT
33
Though casualties of reproductive efficiency have been evidenced in the major dairy
44
breeds [9], several authors reported that improving the genetic aspects of the fertility is viable
45
[10-12]. It is difficult to recommend using crossbreeding for a commercial dairy farmer is not an
46
easy and obvious choice. Firstly, competitive dairy breeds rather than HO have to be identified.
47
Secondly, the method of crossbreeding has to be chosen. Terminal crossbreeding will allow a
48
maximum use of heterosis, whereas rotational crossbreeding will allow the breeding of own
49
replacements. Due to the relatively high costs of the rearing period and the value of each
50
individual animal, a natural choice would be to practice rotational crossbreeding [13].
AC C
EP
TE D
43
51
Holstein has been involved in many recent crossbreeding studies with different temperate
52
breeds, to obtain crosses with higher fertility than the pure HO. Some of these trials involved
53
Brown Swiss [13-15], Scandinavian Red [15-17], Normande and Montbéliarde [16,17] and
54
Jersey [15,18,19]. Most of these trials have been managed under temperate climatic conditions.
55
However, subtropical or tropical environment greatly influenced the reproductive performance of
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
the temperate breeds [20-25]. To overcome such problem, native breeds have been crossed with
57
temperate breeds to produce animals with improved adaptability to tropical and subtropical
58
conditions [26-28]. Such crossbreds had a relatively lower productivity than the pure temperate
59
breeds, so alternative methods of crossbreeding had been performed, involving the HO and
60
another high producing temperate breed that has higher resistance to stressful environmental
61
conditions. As far as we know, this is one of the few studies recently applied to assess the effect
62
of subtropical managerial conditions on the reproductive performance of crosses originated from
63
two temperate breeds. The Brown Swiss has a similar body size and comparable production level
64
to the Holstein under intensive conditions, and tends to retain body condition better than
65
Holstein, even in the F1 and BC generations. The ability to retain higher body condition scores
66
has been shown to have a genetic relation with cow fertility [29].The objectives of this study
67
were to evaluate the reproductive performance of the pure Brown Swiss (BS), Holstein (HO),
68
their F1, and BC crossbred cows under subtropical Egyptian conditions and to compare the
69
adaptability of those crosses to such conditions in comparison with their pure parents.
70
2. Materials and methods
73
SC
M AN U
TE D
EP
72
This work was reviewed and approved by the Animal Care and Welfare Committee of Zagzaig University, Egypt (ANWD-206).
AC C
71
RI PT
56
2.1. Animals and management
74
This study was conducted at expanded herd, Ismailia road, Cairo. Recently, to overcome the
75
higher incidence of health problems and lower fertility of the Holstein (HO), the breeders tended
76
to crossbred the Brown Swiss (BS) with the HO. The herd was consisted mainly of 112 purebred
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
77
BS and 850 purebred HO cows. Crossing the two breeds resulted in 108 F1 crossbred cows (F1,
78
50 % BS and 50 % HO), as well as 103 backcross cows (BC, 25 % BS and 75 % HO). All cows were housed in a free yard, milked 3 times daily with milk yield recorded at each
80
milking and the cows were fitted with pedometers. The total mixed ration (TMR) was provided
81
twice daily for the all cows. The ration was mixed daily and modified according to the body
82
condition score of the cows and exact milk production. The TMR was formulated to meet the
83
predicted requirements of energy, protein, minerals and vitamins. The TMR was sampled
84
monthly and analyzed by wet chemistry methods. The primary analysis of TMR include crude
85
protein (16.91 %), neutral detergent fiber (24.83 %) and net energy for lactation (Mcal ̸ kg =
86
1.76). Alfalfa hay was the primary used forage. The reproductive data (insemination,
87
reproductive problems, and so forth) were recorded and tracked using a commercial on-farm
88
computer software program (AfiFarm version 4.1).
M AN U
SC
RI PT
79
Milk yield was recorded over a period of 4 years (2009-2013), contributing parity order
90
from the 2nd to the 6th. The 305-MY refers to the amount of milk given during the first 305 days
91
postpartum without any correction equation. The total-MY refers to the amount of milk given
92
from parturition till drying. The number of milk records for HO, BS, F1 and BC cows were 3210,
93
540, 680 and 650, respectively.
94
2.2 Reproductive performance
AC C
EP
TE D
89
95
Cows thought to be in heat from visual inspection or evidenced by high levels of activity
96
through pedometer records, were introduced to insemination 14h later and concomitantly
97
received a dose of GnRH (10 µg, Buserelin; Receptal; Intervet). The BS, HO, F1 and BC cows
98
received 524, 2630, 512 and 464 inseminations, respectively. All cows were inseminated by
99
three proven inseminators, approximately with the same efficiency. Thirty days post-
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
100
insemination, ultrasound examination was performed to determine the conceived cows and at 75
101
days post-insemination, a confirmatory pregnancy diagnosis was done. The reproductive performance including; conception rate, pregnancy rate, calving interval,
103
days open and number of insemination per parturition were estimated for all cows in the farms
104
over a period of 4 years, between June 2009 and September 2013. The conception and the
105
pregnancy rates were calculated as a number of cows confirmed pregnant at 30 days or 75 days
106
post insemination, respectively divided by the total number of cows inseminated during such
107
specified period. The embryonic losses were calculated as a number of cows diagnosed non-
108
pregnant at 75 days post-insemination divided by the number of cows diagnosed pregnant at 30
109
days post-insemination during the same period.
110
2.3. Metrological data
M AN U
SC
RI PT
102
Temperature-humidity index (THI) is a single value representing the combined effects of
112
air temperature and humidity associated with the level of thermal stress. This index has been
113
developed as a weather safety index to monitor and reduce heat-stress related losses. The daily
114
relative humidity and ambient temperature in the farm area were collected from the nearest
115
meteorological station, approximately 46 kilometers faraway. These raw data were used to
116
calculate the daily temperature-humidity index (THI) according to the previous reported equation
117
[30]. THI= (1.8 * AT + 32) – ((0.55 – 0.0055 * RH) x (1.8 * AT – 26)), where AT = Air
118
temperature (°C), RH = Relative humidity (%).The monthly average temperature and THI is
119
showed in Figure 1. To investigate the effect of the THI on reproductive performance, the cows
120
in all genetic groups were classified according to the THI at the day of insemination into; low
121
THI, includes the months with average less than 70, moderate THI, includes the months with
AC C
EP
TE D
111
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
average over 70 and less than 75 and high THI, includes the months with average over 80 and up
123
to 85.
124
2.4. Statistical analysis
125
All statistical procedures were performed using SAS statistical system Package V9.2 [31]. Chi-
126
square test was used to evaluate the association between genetic type and proportion
127
dichotomous variables (conception, pregnancy and embryonic losses rates). Significant results
128
were followed by multiple Z-tests to compare corresponding proportions. P-values for all
129
pairwise comparisons were adjusted using the Bonferroni correction. The MIXED procedure of
130
SAS was used to analyze the reproductive and production variables (calving interval, days open,
131
average insemination per parturition and milk production traits). The model for statistical
132
analyses included the fixed effects of THI, genetic type, parity and the random effect of cow
133
nested within genetic type. The comparison of means was carried out with Duncan’s multiple
134
range tests, after verifying normality using Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.
135
3. Results
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
122
The BS, HO, F1 and BC cows received 524, 2630, 512 and 464 inseminations,
137
respectively. BS had significantly higher conception (34.1%) and pregnancy rate (32.8%), with
138
significantly lower incidence of metritis (14.1%) than BC (27.2, 24.6 and 31.8, respectively), but
139
not with F1 (36.9, 31.1and 14.6, respectively). The pure HO had the highest significant
140
embryonic loss (16.9 %) in comparison with other genetic types. There was no statistically
141
difference between the four genetic types of cows showing clinical mastitis (Table 1).
AC C
136
142
BS cows had significantly shorter calving interval (401 days) and lower average
143
insemination per parturition (3.18) than BC (43.3 and 4.26, respectively), but not with F1 (420
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
and 3.45, respectively). There was a significant difference in the days open between the four
145
genetic groups. BS cows had the shortest days open (117 days) in comparison with HO, F1 and
146
BC (158, 143 and 147 days, respectively) (Table 1).
RI PT
144
Synopsis of some milk production indices in different genetic types were presented in Table
148
1. Pure HO cows noted for their superior ability for milk production, which represented in their
149
notable milk production parameters. Pure HO, F1 and BC crossbred cows had significantly
150
higher 305-MY (9175, 9022 and 8982 kg, respectively) and peak-MY (46.7, 43.9 and 44.1 kg,
151
respectively) than pure BS cows (7638 and 35.4 kg, respectively).
M AN U
SC
147
Brown Swiss was robust and could tolerate the heat stress, as there were no differences in the
153
conception, pregnancy and embryonic loss rates at the different levels of THI. While, HO, F1
154
and BC suffered from heat stress, as the THI has a significant effect on these traits. The
155
conception rate declined from 43.1% at low to 24.1% at high THI in F1, but the pregnancy rate
156
did not reveal any differences at the three levels of THI. In BC cows, conception and pregnancy
157
rate have been declined from 32.8 and 28.9 at low to 14.8 and 12.3 at high THI, respectively.
158
Embryonic losses, increased from 15.3, 2.8 and 2.7 (low THI) to 25.8, 15.2 and 18.2 (high THI)
159
in HO, F1 and BC, respectively (Table 2).
160
4. Discussion
161
The primary objectives of this study were to investigate the reproductive performance of the pure
162
BS, HO, their F1 and BC crossbred cows under stressful subtropical conditions in Egypt. BS and
163
F1 showed better results in the investigated traits when compared with the recent study
164
performed on pure Holstein and their backcross with BS [32]. Fertility in dairy cows has been
165
declined due to intensive selection for milk production [33,34], deterioration of body condition
AC C
EP
TE D
152
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
166
[35], high milk yields reduce estrus time [36]. Poor fertility resulted in an increase in involuntary
167
culling and replacement costs [37]. The conception and pregnancy rates in the BC cows were comparable to recent findings
169
reported by El-Tarabany and El-Bayoumi [32]. This may be due to increasing the Holstein blood
170
in the crossbred animals that decreased their reproductive efficiency and fertility. Holstein cows
171
are well recognized for their prodigious milk production ability with a lower fertility [38].
172
Veerkamp et al. [33] reported that, drop in the fertility had apparently due to an increase of
173
energy utilization by the mammary gland, infection of the post partum uterus and later disturb
174
hormonal and metabolic profile. This might have an impact on the reproductive organs, leading
175
to poor ovulation rates, expression and detection of estrus and reduced success in embryo
176
establishment. While, BS had body size similar to the HO and tended to maintain their body
177
condition better than Holsteins, even in the F1 and F2 generations. The ability to retain higher
178
body condition scores has been revealed to have a genetic relation with the higher cow fertility
179
[29]. Embryonic losses in this study were lower than that reported previously in pure HO [32].
180
This was comparable to Hollon and Branton [39] who detected a reduction in the stillbirth rate of
181
calves for Brown Swiss-sired crossbred calves compared with pure HO calves.
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
168
This study revealed that F1 and BC cows had longer days open than BS, but was shorter
183
than that reported in HO and their crosses [32]. We noticed a direct proportional between days
184
open and the HO blood. Brown Swiss × Holstein crossbred cows had fewer days open when
185
compared with pure HO cows [14,40]. Our findings were higher than others [41,42]. This may
186
be due to environmental effect, feeding, reproductive management (mainly estrus detection) and
187
existence of infections in the reproductive tract that can affect fertility [42]. Also, it may be due
188
to the fact that the researchers considered the days open up to 250 days [13,14]. Generally, most
AC C
182
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
189
of studies stated that HO cows take longer period to become pregnant in comparison with BS
190
cows, which could be due to more susceptibility of the HO cows to heat stress [43]. Recent trials reported that the HO cows had higher calving interval and number of
192
services per conception compared to their backcross with BS [32]. However, in the current study,
193
BS and F1 cows had lower calving interval and number of services per conception and this was
194
in agreement with previous reports [44]. They found that BS×HO cows had higher non return
195
rate, conception rate and lower insemination number when compared with purebred HO cows.
196
Therefore, they concluded that the studied crossbred cows had a higher reproductive potential
197
than Holsteins. The number of services per conception recorded in this study for the BS and F1
198
were relatively high when compared with the other studies in humid subtropical conditions
199
[13,42,45]. This difference might be due to the environmental condition, artificial insemination
200
technician, calving number, feeding, milk yield [45] or due to concept that the services per
201
parturition recorded in the current study had been calculated without modification.
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
191
Our results showed better reproductive health traits for BS and F1 but not for HO and BC
203
which were comparable to the recent study on HO cows [32]. These findings obviously
204
interrelated with the shorter calving interval and days open in the BS and BF1. Many researchers
205
concluded that diseases related to the reproductive tract (metritis and dystocia) might be
206
influence the length of calving interval, days open and generally the reproductive efficiency [46].
207
Brown Swiss and F1 were robust and could tolerate the heat stress, when compared with
AC C
EP
202
208
HO and BC. In the current study, the stressful effect of heat on the reproductive performance
209
occurs in BC which carried more Holstein blood; therefore it was similar to the recent results of
210
pure Holsteins [32]. BC cows had higher pregnancy rate for cows inseminated in temperate
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
211
climate conditions than in heat stress and this was in agreement with Alnimer et al. [47], who
212
found the same results with HO cows inseminated in winter than in summer. Heat stress can be defined as the aggregate of forces external to a homeothermic animal
214
that shifts body temperature from the resting condition [48], causing physiologic, cellular,
215
metabolic and molecular changes. Mammals are homeothermic animals that hold a constant
216
internal body temperature via the balance between the produced metabolic heat and dissipated
217
heat to the environment [49]. Genetic selection for high milk yield decreases the
218
thermoregulatory ability in dairy animals exposed to heat stress [50]. Lactating cows are more
219
susceptible to heat stress [51] because the association between the high metabolic heat
220
production and lactation may lead to hyperthermia. Therefore, the consequences of the harmful
221
effects of heat stress on fertility are more obvious in high-producing dairy cows [52], whereas
222
the fertility of heifers is usually not affected [53]. Heat stress disrupts reproduction in dairy cattle
223
[21], and is a common problem in areas with hot environment. Fertility traits are usually
224
characterized by a lower heritability which influenced by non-additive than additive genetic
225
effects [54]. These results suggested that the environment plays a crucial role in fertility, hence
226
the difference between genotype by environment interaction may exist when comparing data
227
from different rearing conditions.
SC
M AN U
TE D
EP
Brown Swiss showed evidence of heat-stress resistance and had shorter first calving
AC C
228
RI PT
213
229
interval when compared with HO in warm environment [42], and this supported our findings.
230
Our results are also in accordance with Ruvuna et al. [55], who reported a better reproductive
231
performance in the warm season for BS than for HO or their crosses. Conception rate of cattle
232
decreased 20-30 % in summer than in winter [48,56,57] and the ovulation can be reduced from
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
233
91 to 18% when comparing cows in a thermo neutral environment with cows undergoing heat
234
stress [58]. Warm season increases the days open in HO when compared with HO X BS [55]. Brown
236
Swiss cows were less sensitive to heat stress which might be attributed to their coat colour.
237
Brown Swiss had a light brown colour which reduces the inward flow of heat than the black one
238
[59], producing less metabolic heat [60], has a higher rate of cutaneous evaporation which
239
resulting in a lower skin temperature [61]. Earlier studies revealed that peripheral blood
240
mononuclear cells from the HO were more tolerant to chronic heat exposure than those from the
241
BS cows [62]. The ability of the cows to dissipate heat to the environment and to retard the heat
242
gain from surrounding stressful environment conditions control the capability of the cow to
243
maintain its body temperature in a physiological homeostasis and in a thermoneutral zone [63].
244
Food intake and the metabolic rate determined the heat gain, while the heat dissipating ability
245
was affected by the character of the hair coat, the number of sweat glands, the surface area and
246
the fat distribution [21]. Furthermore, presence of a distinct mechanism that involved some genes
247
controlling the resistance to cellular heat shock was suggested [64].
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
235
Extremely hot weather reduces reproductive performance and interrupts homeostasis in
249
cattle [57,65], as the major targets of the deleterious effects of heat stress are the bovine germinal
250
vesicle, maturing oocyte and the early embryo. This may be attributed to, oocyte cellular damage
251
occurred in both cytoplasmic and nuclear compartments, resulted in a reduction of oocyte
252
nuclear maturation [66], reduced cleavage capacity of oocytes [67], induced apoptosis,
253
compromised oocyte cytoskeleton and impaired mitochondria function, inactive ovaries,
254
increased ovarian cysts [58], compromised follicular growth [68,69], hormonal secretion [69,70],
255
uterine blood flow [71], and endometrial function [72], preimplantation embryonic development
AC C
EP
248
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
256
[73]. Also, Calderón-Robles [42], mentioned that in the dry season ovaries take longer to resume
257
ovarian activity due to the lower availability of forage in the pasture. The HO is the dominant dairy breed within many countries, reflecting a highly genetic
259
potential for milk production. In the current study, pure HO, F1 and BC crossbred cows had
260
significantly higher 305-MY and peak-MY than pure BS cows. Consistent with the findings of
261
the current study, Swalve et al. [40] reported no difference between milk yield in both BS × HO
262
cows and pure HO in the first and second lactations. Also, there were no significant differences
263
for mature-equivalent milk yields between BS × HO and HO cows [14]. The competitive
264
performance of milk production traits in both BS × HO and HO had also been shown in other
265
studies [41]. Contrastingly, in a large study based on national data from the United States, HO
266
cows recorded higher milk production level than BS× HO and Jersey × HO cows [74].
M AN U
SC
RI PT
258
In conclusion, this study revealed that the Brown Swiss and her F1 crossbred had better
268
fertility and reproductive efficiency (higher conception and pregnancy rate, shorter calving
269
interval and lower average insemination per parturition) with a good health (a lower incidence of
270
metritis). Moreover, they can tolerate the heat stress than pure HO and BC. Therefore, Brown
271
Swiss and her F1 crossbred adapted well under subtropical Egyptian conditions and we
272
recommend the crossbreeding of Brown Swiss with Holstein especially for F1 which possesses
273
better productive (from Holstein) and reproductive traits (from Brown Swiss).
274
Conflict of interest statement
275
None of the authors have any conflict of interest to declare.
AC C
EP
TE D
267
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Acknowledgements
277
The authors wish to thank the owner of the expanded herd, Ismailia road, Cairo for allowing us
278
to collect the data. We greatly appreciated the great help of the head mangers of the farms in
279
collecting and managing the data by the AfiFarm.
280
References
281
[1] Groen AF, Steine T, Colleau JJ, Pedersen J, Pribyl J, Reinsch N. Economic values in dairy
282
cattle breeding, with special reference to functional traits. Report of an EAAP-working group.
283
Livestock Prod Sci 1997; 49: 1-21.
288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297
SC
M AN U
287
[3] Dematawewa CMB, Berger P J. Genetic and phenotypic parameters for 305-day yield, fertility, and survival in Holsteins. J Dairy Sci 1998; 81: 2700-2709.
TE D
286
144-150.
[4] Lucy M C. Reproductive loss in high-producing dairy cattle: Where will it end? J Dairy Sci 2001; 84: 1277-1293.
[5] Wall E, Brotherstone S, Woolliams JA, Banos G, Coffey MP. Genetic evaluation of fertility
EP
285
[2] Cassell BG. Optimal genetic improvement for high producing cows. J Dairy Sci 2001; 84:
using direct and correlated traits. J Dairy Sci 2003; 86: 4093-4102. [6] Hansen LB, Freeman AE, Berger PJ. Yield and fertility relationships in dairy cattle. J Dairy
AC C
284
RI PT
276
Sci 1983; 66: 293–305.
[7] Oltenacu PA, Frick A, Lindhé B. Relationship of fertility to milk yield in Swedish cattle. J Dairy Sci 1991; 74: 264-268. [8] Faust MA, McDaniel B. T, Robison OW. Genetics of reproduction in primiparous Holsteins. J Dairy Sci 1989; 72: 194-201.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
298 299
[9] Hare E, Norman HD, Wright JR. Trends in calving ages and calving intervals for dairy cattle breeds in the United States. J Dairy Sci 2006; 89: 365-370. [10] Andersen-Ranberg IM, Klemetsdal G, Heringstad B, Steine T. Heritabilities, genetic
301
correlations, and genetic change for female fertility and protein yield in Norwegian dairy
302
cattle. J Dairy Sci 2005; 88: 348-355.
RI PT
300
[11] Holtsmark M, Heringstad B, Madsen P, Ødegård J. Genetic relationship between culling,
304
milk production, fertility, and health traits in Norwegian Red cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2008; 91:
305
4006-4012.
SC
303
[12] Heringstad B, Larsgard AG. Correlated selection responses for female fertility after
307
selection for high protein yield or low mastitis frequency in Norwegian Red cows. J Dairy
308
Sci 2010; 93: 5970-5976.
M AN U
306
[13] Blöttner S, Heins BJ, Wensch-Dorendorf M, Hansen LB, Swalve HH. Brown Swiss ×
310
Holstein crossbreds compared with pure Holsteins for calving traits, body weight, back fat
311
thickness, fertility, and body measurements. J Dairy Sci 2011; 94: 1058-1068.
TE D
309
[14] Dechow CD, Rogers GW, Cooper JB, Phelps MI, Mosholder AL. Milk, fat, protein, somatic
313
cell score, and days open among Holstein, Brown Swiss, and Their Crosses. J Dairy Sci
314
2007; 90: 3542-3549.
AC C
EP
312
315
[15] Schaeffer LR, Burnside EB, Glover P, Fatehi J. Crossbreeding results in canadian dairy
316
cattle for production, reproduction and conformation. The Open Agriculture Journal 2011; 5:
317
63-72.
318
[16] Heins B.J, Hansen LB, Seykora AJ. Fertility and survival of pure Holsteins versus
319
crossbreds of Holstein with Normande, Montbeliarde, and Scandinavian Red. J Dairy Sci
320
2006; 89: 4944-4951.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
[17] Heins BJ, Hansen LB. Short communication: Fertility, somatic cell score, and production of
322
Normande×Holstein, Montbéliarde×Holstein, and Scandinavian Red × Holstein crossbreds
323
versus pure Holsteins during their first 5 lactations. J Dairy Sci 2012; 95: 918-924.
RI PT
321
[18] Heins BJ, Hansen LB, Hazel AR, Seykora AJ, Johnson DG, Linn JG. Short communication:
325
Jersey × Holstein crossbreds compared with pure Holsteins for body weight, body condition
326
score, fertility, and survival during the first three lactations. J Dairy Sci 2012; 95: 4130-4135.
327
[19] de Haas Y, Smolders EA, Hoorneman JN, Nauta WJ, Veerkamp RF. Suitability of cross-
328
bred cows for organic farms based on cross-breeding effects on production and functional
329
traits. Animal 2013; 7: 655-665.
333 334 335 336 337
M AN U
[21] Kadzere CT, Murphy MR, Silanikove N, Maltz E. Heat stress in lactating dairy cows: a
TE D
332
applied aspects. Anim Reprod Sci 2000; 61: 535-547.
review. Livestock Prod Sci 2002; 77: 59-91.
[22] De Rensis F, Scaramuzzi RJ. Heat stress and seasonal effects on reproduction in the dairy cow- a review. Theriogenology 2003; 60: 1139-1151.
EP
331
[20] Wolfenson D, Roth Z, Meidan R. Impaired reproduction in heat-stressed cattle: basic and
[23] West JW. Effects of Heat-Stress on Production in Dairy Cattle. Dairy Sci 2003; 86: 2131-
AC C
330
SC
324
2144.
338
[24] Boni R, Perrone LL, Cecchini S. Heat stress affects reproductive performance of high
339
producing dairy cows bred in an area of southern Apennines. Livestock Science 2014; 160:
340
172-177.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
[25] Schüller LK, Burfeind O, Heuwieser W. Impact of heat stress on conception rate of dairy
342
cows in the moderate climate considering different temperature– humidity index thresholds,
343
periods relative to breeding, and heat load indices. Theriogenology 2014; 81: 1050-1057.
344
[26] Boonkum W, Misztal I, Duangjinda M, Pattarajinda V, Tumwasorn S, Buaban S. Short
345
communication: Genetic effects of heat stress on days open for Thai Holstein crossbreds. J
346
Dairy Sci 2011; 94:1592-1596.
SC
RI PT
341
[27] Mellado M, Coronel F, Estrada A, Ríosb FG. Lactation performance of Holstein and
348
Holstein x Gyr cattle under intensive conditions in a subtropical environment. Tropical and
349
Subtropical Agroecosystems 2011; 14: 927-931.
351
352
[28] Hailu A. Cross breeding effect on milk productivity of Ethiopian indigenous cattle: Challenges and opportunities. Scholarly Journal of Agricultural Science 2013; 3: 515-520. [29] Murray B. Dairy Crossbreeds, The Rare Breed. Retrieved October 6, 2010, from Ministy of
TE D
350
M AN U
347
353
Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs, 2002.
354
http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/livestock/dairy/facts/info_breed.htm
EP
356
[30] Kendall PE, Webster JR. Season and physiological status affects the circadian body temperature rhythm of dairy cows. Livestock Sci 2009; 125: 155-160.
AC C
355
357
[31] SAS. SAS/STAT users guide. SAS Institute INC, Cary, NC 27513, USA, 2002.
358
[32] El-Tarabany MS, El-Bayoumi KM. Reproductive performance of backcross Holstein x
359
Brown Swiss and their Holstein contemporaries under subtropical environmental
360
conditions. Theriogenology 2015; 83: 444-448.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
361
[33] Veerkamp RF, Beerda B, van der Lende T. Effects of genetic selection for milk yield on
362
energy balance, levels of hormones, and metabolites in lactating cattle, and possible links to
363
reduced fertility. Livestock Prod Sci 2003; 83: 257-275.
365
[34] Walsh SW, Williams EJ, Evans ACO. A review of the causes of poor fertility in high milk producing dairy cows. Anim Reprod Sci 2011; 123: 127-138.
RI PT
364
[35] Tiezzi F, Maltecca C, Cecchinato A, Penasa M, Bittante G. Thin and fat cows, and the
367
nonlinear genetic relationship between body condition score and fertility. J Dairy Sci 2013;
368
96: 6730-6741.
370
[36] Lopez H, Satter LD, Wiltbank MC. Relationship between level of milk production and
M AN U
369
SC
366
estrous behavior of lactating dairy cows. Anim Reprod Sci 2004; 81: 209-223. [37] Garcia-Peniche TB. Comparisons of Holstein, Brown Swiss, and Jersey cows for age at first
372
calving, first calving interval, and true herd-life up to five years in seven regions of the
373
United States. Ph.D thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2004.
TE D
371
[38] Philip O. Literature Review on Crossbreeding in Dairy Cattle. In Partial Fulfillment Of the
375
Requirements for the Degree Bachelor of Science, Faculty of the Dairy Science Department,
376
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, 2010.
378 379 380 381 382
[39] Hollon BF, Branton C. Performance of Holstein and crossbred dairy cattle in Louisiana. III. Health and viability. J Dairy Sci 1975; 58: 93-101.
AC C
377
EP
374
[40] Swalve HH, Bergk N, Solms-Lich PH. Kreuzungszuchtbeim Milchrind-Ergebnisseauseinem Praxisbetrieb. Zuchtungskunde 2008; 80: 429-442. [41] Rincon EJ, Schermerhorn E. C, Mc Dowell RE, McDaniel BT. Estimation of genetic effects on milk yield and constituent traits in crossbred dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 1982; 65: 848-856.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
[42] Calderón-Robles RC, Flores-Domínguez B, Ríos-Utrera A, Rosete-Fernández JV, Lagunes-
384
Lagunes J. Reproductive performance of Holstein and Brown Swiss cows under intensive
385
grazing in a humid subtropical climate. Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 2011; 13:
386
429-435.
RI PT
383
[43] Hernández CJ. Efecto del estréscalórico en la reproduccióndelganadobovino: diferencia de
388
suceptibilidades entre razas. En: Simposio de estréscalórico en ganadolechero. UNAM-
389
FMVZ División de Educación Continua. 2005; 26-31.
SC
387
[44] Malchiodi F, Cecchinato A, Bittante G. Fertility traits of purebred Holsteins and 2- and 3-
391
breed crossbred heifers and cows obtained from Swedish Red, Montbéliarde, and Brown
392
Swiss sires. J Dairy Sci 2014; 97: 1-11.
393 394
M AN U
390
[45] Jiménez SH, De Los Santos VH. Reproducción animal. IV DíadelGanadero del C. E. PecuarioAldama. SARH-INIP 1984; 23-24.
[46] Gröhn YT, Rajala-Schultz PJ, Allore HG, DeLorenzo MA, Hertl JA, Galligan DT.
396
Optimizing replacement of dairy cows: modeling the effects of diseases. Prev Vet Med
397
2003; 61: 27-43.
TE D
395
[47] Alnimer M, DeRosa G, Grasso F, Napolitano F, Bordi A. Effect of climate on the response
399
to three estrous synchronization techniques in lactating dairy cows. Anim Reprod Sci 2002;
400
71: 157-168.
402 403 404
AC C
401
EP
398
[48] Yousef MK. Stress physiology: definition and terminology. Stress Physiology in Livestock. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. CRC Press, Boca Raton. 1984; 3-7 [49] Hansen PJ. Physiological and cellular adaptations of Zebu cattle to thermal stress. Anim Reprod Sci 2004; 82-83: 349-360.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
405
[50] Berman A, Folman Y, Kaim M, Mamen M, Herz Z, Wolfenson D, Arieli A, Graber Y.
406
Upper critical temperatures and forced ventilation effects for high-yielding dairy cows in a
407
subtropical environment. J Dairy Sci 1985; 68: 1488-1495.
409
[51] Armstrong DV. Heat stress interaction with shade and cooling. J Dairy Sci 1994; 77: 2044-
RI PT
408
2050.
[52] Al-Katanani YM, Webb DW, Hansen PJ. Factors affecting seasonal variation in 90 day non-
411
return rate to first service in lactating Holstein cows in a hotclimate. J Dairy Sci 1999; 82:
412
2611-2615.
SC
410
[53] Badinga L, Collier RJ, Thatcher WW, Wilcox CJ. Effects of climatic and management
414
factors on conception rate of dairy cattle in subtropical environment. J Dairy Sci 1985; 68:
415
78-85.
419 420 421 422
TE D
418
lifetime performance traits of dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 1994 ; 77: 1114-1125. [55] Ruvuna F, McDaniel BT, McDowell RE, Johnson JC, Hollon BT, Brandt GW. Crossbred and purebred dairy cattle in warm and cool seasons. J Dairy Sci 1983; 66: 2408-2417. [56] Lopez-Gatius F. Is fertility declining in dairy cattle? A retrospective study in northeastern
EP
417
[54] Fuerst C, Solkner J. Additive and nonadditive genetic variances for milk yield, fertility, and
Spain. Theriogenology 2003; 60: 89-99. [57] Mellado M, Sepulveda E,
AC C
416
M AN U
413
Macias-Cruz U,
Avendaño L, Garcia JE, Francisco G,
423
Rodríguez VA. Effects of month of breeding on reproductive efficiency of Holstein cows
424
and heifers inseminated with sex-sorted or conventional semen in a hot environment,
425
Tropical Animal Health and Production 2014; 46: 265-269.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
426
[58] Wilson SJ, Marion RS, Spain JN, Spiers DE, Keisler DH, Lucy MC. Effects of controlled
427
heat stress on ovarian function of dairy cattle. 1. Lactating cows. J Dairy Sci 1998; 81:
428
2124-2131.
430
[59] Finch VA. Body temperature in beef cattle: its control and relevance to production in the tropics. J Anim Sci 1986; 62: 531-542.
RI PT
429
[60] Brody S, Worstell DM, Ragsdale AC, Kibler HH. Growth and development with special
432
reference to domestic animals. LXV. Heat production and cardiorespiratory activities during
433
gestation and lactation in Holstein cattle. Mo. Agric Exp Sta Res Bull 1948, pp: 424.
SC
431
[61] Armstrong DV, Hillman PE. Evaluation of Brown Swiss, Holstein and Jerseys under hot
435
arid climates for dairy production. In: Proceedings of the Southwest Nutrition and
436
Management Conference. University of Arizona, Tucson, Ariz. 1998; 153-165.
M AN U
434
[62] Lacetera N, Bernabucci U, Scalia D, Basirico` L, Morera P, Nardone A. Heat stress elicits
438
different responses in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from Brown Swiss and Holstein
439
Cows. J Dairy Sci 2006; 89: 4606-4612.
441 442
[63] Maia ASC, daSilva RG, BattistonLoureiro CM. Sensible and latent heat loss from the body surface of Holstein cows in a tropical environment. Int J Biometeorol 2005; 50:17-22.
EP
440
TE D
437
[64] Paula-Lopes FF, Chase CCJ, Al-Katanani YM, Krininger CE, Rivera RM,
Tekin S,
Majewski, AC, Ocon OM, Olson TA, Hansen PJ. Genetic divergence in cellular resistance
444
to heat shock in cattle: differences between breeds developed in temperate versus hot
445
climates in responses of preimplantation embryos, reproductive tract tissues and
446
lymphocytes to increased culture temperatures. Reproduction 2003; 125: 285-294.
AC C
443
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
447
[65] Paula-Lopes PP,
Lima RS,
Satrapa RA,
Barros CM. Influence of cattle genotype
448
(Bosindicus versus Bostaurus) on oocyte and preimplantation embryo resistance to elevated
449
temperature. J Anim Sci 2013; 91: 1143-1153.
452 453
RI PT
451
[66] Paula-Lopes FF, Milazzotto M, Assumpcao MEOA, Visintin JA. Heat shock-induced damage in bovine oocytes. Reprod Fertil Dev 2008; 43: 208-208.
[67] Al-Katanani YM, Paula-Lopes FF, Hansen PJ. Effect of season and exposure to heat stress on oocyte competence in Holstein cows. J. Dairy Sci 2002; 85: 390-396.
SC
450
[68] Badinga L, Thatcher WW, Diaz T, Drost M, Wolfenson D. Effect of environmental heat
455
stress on follicular development and steriodogenesis in lactating Holstein cows.
456
Theriogenology 1993; 39: 797-810.
M AN U
454
[69] Wolfenson D, Thatcher WW, Badinga L, Savio JD, Meidan R, Lew BJ, Braw-Tal R,
458
Berman A. Effect of heat stress on follicular development during the estrous cycle in
459
lactating dairy cattle. Biol Reprod 1995; 52: 1106-1113.
TE D
457
[70] Roth Z, Meidan R, Braw-tal R, Wolfenson D. Immediate and delayed effects of heat stress
461
on follicular development and its association with plasma FSH and inhibin concentration in
462
cows. J Reprod Fertil 2000; 120: 83-90.
464
[71] Roman-Ponce H, Thatcher WW, Canton D, Barron DH,. Wolcox CJ. Thermal stress effects on uterine blood flow in dairy cows. J Anim Sci 1978; 46: 175-180.
AC C
463
EP
460
465
[72] Malayer JR, Hansen PJ, Buhi WC. Effect of day of oestrus cycle, side of the reproductive
466
tract and heat shock on in-vitro protein secretion by bovine endometrium. J Reprod Fertil
467
1988; 84: 567-578.
468 469
[73] Paula-Lopes FF, Hansen PJ. Heat shock-induced apoptosis in preimplantation bovine embryos is a developmentally regulated phenomenon. Biol Reprod 2002; 66: 1169-1177.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
Dairy Sci 2003; 86: 1036-1044.
EP
471
[74] VanRaden PM, Sanders AH. Economic merit of crossbred and purebred US dairy cattle. J
AC C
470
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 1. Reproductive, production and health performance indices in different genetic types. Metritis
Retained placenta
Mastitis
CI
BS
34.1a
32.8a
9.6b
14.1 b
15.6b
40.9
401 ± 7.5b
HO
28.6b
23.8b
16.9a
29.2a
16.8b
42.4
438 ± 6.8a
F1
36.9a
31.1a
10.2b
14.6b
35.2a
32.2
420 ± 8.2ab
BC
27.2b
24.6b
12.9b
31.8a
20.6ab
34.5
433 ± 7.9a
DO
CI: calving interval; DO: days open; AI: average insemination per parturition MY: milk yield. BS: purebred Brown Swiss. HO: purebred Holstein. F1: F1crossbred Brown Swiss X Holstein (50 % BS, 50 % HO). BC: backcross originated from Holstein sire x F1 (Brown Swiss x Holstein) cow. The actual number of the pure BS, HO, F1 and BC cows were 112, 850, 108 and 103, respectively. Values with different superscripts in each column are significantly different at (p<0.05).
TE D
AI
RI PT
Embryonic loss (%)
305-MY
Total-MY
Peak-MY
117 ± 7.2b
3.18 ± 0.18 b
7638 ± 121b
8537 ± 183c
35.4 ± 1.66b
158 ± 7.4a
4.12 ± 0.29a
9175 ± 258a
10364 ± 166a
46.7 ± 1.18a
143 ± 8.4a
3.45 ± 0.25 b
9022 ± 249a
9675 ± 198b
43.9 ± 2.53a
147 ± 8.8a
4.26 ± 0.32 a
8982 ± 196a
10118± 236a
44.1 ± 1.73a
SC
Pregnancy (%)
EP
473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480
Conception (%)
M AN U
Genetic type
AC C
472
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 2. Effect of temperature humidity index (THI) on conception, pregnancy and embryonic loss rate in different genetic types. Pregnancy (%)
Embryonic loss (%)
Low
Moderate
High
Low
Moderate
High
BS
40.8
36.1
39.2
34.7
34.2
31.1
HO
34.9a
26.8b
17.1c
29.7a
20.9b
14.6b
F1
43.1a
33.3ab
24.1 b
41.2
31.6
22.5
BC
32.8a
30.9a
14.8 b
28.9 a
29.5a
Low
Moderate
12.3b
M AN U
TE D EP
High
13.1
12.8
17.6
15.3b
18.9b
25.8a
2.8b
6.4b
15.2a
12.3 a
18.2a
2.7b
Low: THI less than 70; moderate: THI over 70 and less than 75; high: THI over 80 and up to 85. BS: purebred Brown Swiss. HO: purebred Holstein. F1: F1crossbred Brown Swiss X Holstein (50 % BS, 50 % HO). BC: backcross originated from Holstein sire x F1 (Brown Swiss x Holstein) cow. The actual number of the pure BS, HO, F1 and BC cows were 112, 850, 108 and 103, respectively. Values with different superscripts in each row are significantly different at (p<0.05).
AC C
483 484 485 486 487 488 489
Conception (%)
RI PT
Genetic type
SC
481 482
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
490
Figure legend
491
Figure 1: The monthly average temperature (
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
the area of the farm.
AC C
492
) and temperature humidity index (THI) (
) in
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
•
We evaluate the reproductive and health performance traits of the pure Brown Swiss, Holstein and their crosses. We assess the effects of different levels of THI index on some reproductive indices.
•
We determine the adaptability of different genetic types under subtropical environmental
RI PT
•
conditions.
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
Milk yield of the F1crossbred is comparable to that of the pure HO cows.
AC C
•
S0093-691X(15)00194-6
DOI:
10.1016/j.theriogenology.2015.04.012
Reference:
THE 13163
To appear in:
Theriogenology
Received Date: 16 November 2014 Revised Date:
28 March 2015
Accepted Date: 7 April 2015
Please cite this article as: El-Tarabany MS, Nasr MAF, Reproductive performance of Brown Swiss, Holstein and their crosses under subtropical environmental conditions, Theriogenology (2015), doi: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2015.04.012. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Revised
1
Reproductive performance of Brown Swiss, Holstein and their crosses under subtropical
3
environmental conditions
RI PT
2
Mahmoud S. El-Tarabany *, Mohammed A.F. Nasr
5
Department of Animal Wealth Development, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Zagazig
6
University, Egypt.
7
*To whom correspondence should be addressed: Mahmoud S. El-Tarabany, Department of
8
Animal Wealth Development, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Zagazig University, El-Zeraa
9
str. 114; 44511-Zagazig; Egypt
M AN U
SC
4
Tel: 00201223668785, Fax: 020552283683
11
Email: [email protected]
EP
[email protected]
AC C
12
TE D
10
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Abstract
14
Selection has been emphasized for increasing production traits with ignoring the fertility traits,
15
which leads to a general loss of reproductive fitness. The aim of this study was to evaluate the
16
reproductive performance of the pure Brown Swiss (BS), Holstein (HO), their first generation
17
crossbred (F1) and backcross (BC) cows under subtropical Egyptian conditions. The reproductive
18
performance and health traits were measured in the pure BS, HO, their F1 and BC crossbred, in
19
addition to investigating the impact of temperature humidity index level (THI) on reproductive
20
traits. BS and her F1 had a better reproductive efficiency and health traits than in HO and BC.
21
They possess a higher conception (34.1 and 36.9%, respectively), pregnancy rate (32.8 and
22
31.1%, respectively), a shorter calving interval (401 and 420 days, respectively) and a lower
23
average insemination per parturition (3.18 and 3.45, respectively), with a lower incidence of
24
metritis (14.1 and14.6%, respectively). Moreover, no difference has been detected to the fertility
25
of BS with different THI levels, while F1 was slightly affected by increasing THI, especially for
26
conception rate which declined from 43.1% at low to 24.1% at high THI. But, the pregnancy rate
27
did not change with different levels of THI. Our results indicate that BS and her F1 have a better
28
reproductive performance and adaptability than pure HO and backcross under subtropical
29
Egyptian conditions. Furthermore, milk yield of the F1crossbred is comparable to that of the pure
30
HO cows.
31
Key words: Brown Swiss, Holstein, crossbred, fertility, THI.
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
13
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
32
1. Introduction Fertility of the dairy cows is a complex trait and comprises the ability of the female to
34
return in heat within a passable period after calving, to show heat in an appropriate manner, and
35
to become pregnant with a finite number of inseminations [1]. Holstein is the most important
36
dairy cattle breed in many places of the world, and the selection within the breed has been
37
emphasized to increase production for several decades [2], but the fertility of dairy cattle was
38
ignored in selection programs of the HO breed until recent years. A pertinent body of literature
39
related to selection for milk yield traits caused a general loss of reproductive fitness, health, and
40
longevity [3-5].The genetic antagonism between yield and fertility has often been indicated to be
41
the major factor leading to disturbed reproductive performance [6,7]. In dairy cattle, production
42
traits (milk, fat, and protein) had negative genetic correlations with fertility traits [8].
M AN U
SC
RI PT
33
Though casualties of reproductive efficiency have been evidenced in the major dairy
44
breeds [9], several authors reported that improving the genetic aspects of the fertility is viable
45
[10-12]. It is difficult to recommend using crossbreeding for a commercial dairy farmer is not an
46
easy and obvious choice. Firstly, competitive dairy breeds rather than HO have to be identified.
47
Secondly, the method of crossbreeding has to be chosen. Terminal crossbreeding will allow a
48
maximum use of heterosis, whereas rotational crossbreeding will allow the breeding of own
49
replacements. Due to the relatively high costs of the rearing period and the value of each
50
individual animal, a natural choice would be to practice rotational crossbreeding [13].
AC C
EP
TE D
43
51
Holstein has been involved in many recent crossbreeding studies with different temperate
52
breeds, to obtain crosses with higher fertility than the pure HO. Some of these trials involved
53
Brown Swiss [13-15], Scandinavian Red [15-17], Normande and Montbéliarde [16,17] and
54
Jersey [15,18,19]. Most of these trials have been managed under temperate climatic conditions.
55
However, subtropical or tropical environment greatly influenced the reproductive performance of
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
the temperate breeds [20-25]. To overcome such problem, native breeds have been crossed with
57
temperate breeds to produce animals with improved adaptability to tropical and subtropical
58
conditions [26-28]. Such crossbreds had a relatively lower productivity than the pure temperate
59
breeds, so alternative methods of crossbreeding had been performed, involving the HO and
60
another high producing temperate breed that has higher resistance to stressful environmental
61
conditions. As far as we know, this is one of the few studies recently applied to assess the effect
62
of subtropical managerial conditions on the reproductive performance of crosses originated from
63
two temperate breeds. The Brown Swiss has a similar body size and comparable production level
64
to the Holstein under intensive conditions, and tends to retain body condition better than
65
Holstein, even in the F1 and BC generations. The ability to retain higher body condition scores
66
has been shown to have a genetic relation with cow fertility [29].The objectives of this study
67
were to evaluate the reproductive performance of the pure Brown Swiss (BS), Holstein (HO),
68
their F1, and BC crossbred cows under subtropical Egyptian conditions and to compare the
69
adaptability of those crosses to such conditions in comparison with their pure parents.
70
2. Materials and methods
73
SC
M AN U
TE D
EP
72
This work was reviewed and approved by the Animal Care and Welfare Committee of Zagzaig University, Egypt (ANWD-206).
AC C
71
RI PT
56
2.1. Animals and management
74
This study was conducted at expanded herd, Ismailia road, Cairo. Recently, to overcome the
75
higher incidence of health problems and lower fertility of the Holstein (HO), the breeders tended
76
to crossbred the Brown Swiss (BS) with the HO. The herd was consisted mainly of 112 purebred
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
77
BS and 850 purebred HO cows. Crossing the two breeds resulted in 108 F1 crossbred cows (F1,
78
50 % BS and 50 % HO), as well as 103 backcross cows (BC, 25 % BS and 75 % HO). All cows were housed in a free yard, milked 3 times daily with milk yield recorded at each
80
milking and the cows were fitted with pedometers. The total mixed ration (TMR) was provided
81
twice daily for the all cows. The ration was mixed daily and modified according to the body
82
condition score of the cows and exact milk production. The TMR was formulated to meet the
83
predicted requirements of energy, protein, minerals and vitamins. The TMR was sampled
84
monthly and analyzed by wet chemistry methods. The primary analysis of TMR include crude
85
protein (16.91 %), neutral detergent fiber (24.83 %) and net energy for lactation (Mcal ̸ kg =
86
1.76). Alfalfa hay was the primary used forage. The reproductive data (insemination,
87
reproductive problems, and so forth) were recorded and tracked using a commercial on-farm
88
computer software program (AfiFarm version 4.1).
M AN U
SC
RI PT
79
Milk yield was recorded over a period of 4 years (2009-2013), contributing parity order
90
from the 2nd to the 6th. The 305-MY refers to the amount of milk given during the first 305 days
91
postpartum without any correction equation. The total-MY refers to the amount of milk given
92
from parturition till drying. The number of milk records for HO, BS, F1 and BC cows were 3210,
93
540, 680 and 650, respectively.
94
2.2 Reproductive performance
AC C
EP
TE D
89
95
Cows thought to be in heat from visual inspection or evidenced by high levels of activity
96
through pedometer records, were introduced to insemination 14h later and concomitantly
97
received a dose of GnRH (10 µg, Buserelin; Receptal; Intervet). The BS, HO, F1 and BC cows
98
received 524, 2630, 512 and 464 inseminations, respectively. All cows were inseminated by
99
three proven inseminators, approximately with the same efficiency. Thirty days post-
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
100
insemination, ultrasound examination was performed to determine the conceived cows and at 75
101
days post-insemination, a confirmatory pregnancy diagnosis was done. The reproductive performance including; conception rate, pregnancy rate, calving interval,
103
days open and number of insemination per parturition were estimated for all cows in the farms
104
over a period of 4 years, between June 2009 and September 2013. The conception and the
105
pregnancy rates were calculated as a number of cows confirmed pregnant at 30 days or 75 days
106
post insemination, respectively divided by the total number of cows inseminated during such
107
specified period. The embryonic losses were calculated as a number of cows diagnosed non-
108
pregnant at 75 days post-insemination divided by the number of cows diagnosed pregnant at 30
109
days post-insemination during the same period.
110
2.3. Metrological data
M AN U
SC
RI PT
102
Temperature-humidity index (THI) is a single value representing the combined effects of
112
air temperature and humidity associated with the level of thermal stress. This index has been
113
developed as a weather safety index to monitor and reduce heat-stress related losses. The daily
114
relative humidity and ambient temperature in the farm area were collected from the nearest
115
meteorological station, approximately 46 kilometers faraway. These raw data were used to
116
calculate the daily temperature-humidity index (THI) according to the previous reported equation
117
[30]. THI= (1.8 * AT + 32) – ((0.55 – 0.0055 * RH) x (1.8 * AT – 26)), where AT = Air
118
temperature (°C), RH = Relative humidity (%).The monthly average temperature and THI is
119
showed in Figure 1. To investigate the effect of the THI on reproductive performance, the cows
120
in all genetic groups were classified according to the THI at the day of insemination into; low
121
THI, includes the months with average less than 70, moderate THI, includes the months with
AC C
EP
TE D
111
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
average over 70 and less than 75 and high THI, includes the months with average over 80 and up
123
to 85.
124
2.4. Statistical analysis
125
All statistical procedures were performed using SAS statistical system Package V9.2 [31]. Chi-
126
square test was used to evaluate the association between genetic type and proportion
127
dichotomous variables (conception, pregnancy and embryonic losses rates). Significant results
128
were followed by multiple Z-tests to compare corresponding proportions. P-values for all
129
pairwise comparisons were adjusted using the Bonferroni correction. The MIXED procedure of
130
SAS was used to analyze the reproductive and production variables (calving interval, days open,
131
average insemination per parturition and milk production traits). The model for statistical
132
analyses included the fixed effects of THI, genetic type, parity and the random effect of cow
133
nested within genetic type. The comparison of means was carried out with Duncan’s multiple
134
range tests, after verifying normality using Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.
135
3. Results
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
122
The BS, HO, F1 and BC cows received 524, 2630, 512 and 464 inseminations,
137
respectively. BS had significantly higher conception (34.1%) and pregnancy rate (32.8%), with
138
significantly lower incidence of metritis (14.1%) than BC (27.2, 24.6 and 31.8, respectively), but
139
not with F1 (36.9, 31.1and 14.6, respectively). The pure HO had the highest significant
140
embryonic loss (16.9 %) in comparison with other genetic types. There was no statistically
141
difference between the four genetic types of cows showing clinical mastitis (Table 1).
AC C
136
142
BS cows had significantly shorter calving interval (401 days) and lower average
143
insemination per parturition (3.18) than BC (43.3 and 4.26, respectively), but not with F1 (420
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
and 3.45, respectively). There was a significant difference in the days open between the four
145
genetic groups. BS cows had the shortest days open (117 days) in comparison with HO, F1 and
146
BC (158, 143 and 147 days, respectively) (Table 1).
RI PT
144
Synopsis of some milk production indices in different genetic types were presented in Table
148
1. Pure HO cows noted for their superior ability for milk production, which represented in their
149
notable milk production parameters. Pure HO, F1 and BC crossbred cows had significantly
150
higher 305-MY (9175, 9022 and 8982 kg, respectively) and peak-MY (46.7, 43.9 and 44.1 kg,
151
respectively) than pure BS cows (7638 and 35.4 kg, respectively).
M AN U
SC
147
Brown Swiss was robust and could tolerate the heat stress, as there were no differences in the
153
conception, pregnancy and embryonic loss rates at the different levels of THI. While, HO, F1
154
and BC suffered from heat stress, as the THI has a significant effect on these traits. The
155
conception rate declined from 43.1% at low to 24.1% at high THI in F1, but the pregnancy rate
156
did not reveal any differences at the three levels of THI. In BC cows, conception and pregnancy
157
rate have been declined from 32.8 and 28.9 at low to 14.8 and 12.3 at high THI, respectively.
158
Embryonic losses, increased from 15.3, 2.8 and 2.7 (low THI) to 25.8, 15.2 and 18.2 (high THI)
159
in HO, F1 and BC, respectively (Table 2).
160
4. Discussion
161
The primary objectives of this study were to investigate the reproductive performance of the pure
162
BS, HO, their F1 and BC crossbred cows under stressful subtropical conditions in Egypt. BS and
163
F1 showed better results in the investigated traits when compared with the recent study
164
performed on pure Holstein and their backcross with BS [32]. Fertility in dairy cows has been
165
declined due to intensive selection for milk production [33,34], deterioration of body condition
AC C
EP
TE D
152
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
166
[35], high milk yields reduce estrus time [36]. Poor fertility resulted in an increase in involuntary
167
culling and replacement costs [37]. The conception and pregnancy rates in the BC cows were comparable to recent findings
169
reported by El-Tarabany and El-Bayoumi [32]. This may be due to increasing the Holstein blood
170
in the crossbred animals that decreased their reproductive efficiency and fertility. Holstein cows
171
are well recognized for their prodigious milk production ability with a lower fertility [38].
172
Veerkamp et al. [33] reported that, drop in the fertility had apparently due to an increase of
173
energy utilization by the mammary gland, infection of the post partum uterus and later disturb
174
hormonal and metabolic profile. This might have an impact on the reproductive organs, leading
175
to poor ovulation rates, expression and detection of estrus and reduced success in embryo
176
establishment. While, BS had body size similar to the HO and tended to maintain their body
177
condition better than Holsteins, even in the F1 and F2 generations. The ability to retain higher
178
body condition scores has been revealed to have a genetic relation with the higher cow fertility
179
[29]. Embryonic losses in this study were lower than that reported previously in pure HO [32].
180
This was comparable to Hollon and Branton [39] who detected a reduction in the stillbirth rate of
181
calves for Brown Swiss-sired crossbred calves compared with pure HO calves.
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
168
This study revealed that F1 and BC cows had longer days open than BS, but was shorter
183
than that reported in HO and their crosses [32]. We noticed a direct proportional between days
184
open and the HO blood. Brown Swiss × Holstein crossbred cows had fewer days open when
185
compared with pure HO cows [14,40]. Our findings were higher than others [41,42]. This may
186
be due to environmental effect, feeding, reproductive management (mainly estrus detection) and
187
existence of infections in the reproductive tract that can affect fertility [42]. Also, it may be due
188
to the fact that the researchers considered the days open up to 250 days [13,14]. Generally, most
AC C
182
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
189
of studies stated that HO cows take longer period to become pregnant in comparison with BS
190
cows, which could be due to more susceptibility of the HO cows to heat stress [43]. Recent trials reported that the HO cows had higher calving interval and number of
192
services per conception compared to their backcross with BS [32]. However, in the current study,
193
BS and F1 cows had lower calving interval and number of services per conception and this was
194
in agreement with previous reports [44]. They found that BS×HO cows had higher non return
195
rate, conception rate and lower insemination number when compared with purebred HO cows.
196
Therefore, they concluded that the studied crossbred cows had a higher reproductive potential
197
than Holsteins. The number of services per conception recorded in this study for the BS and F1
198
were relatively high when compared with the other studies in humid subtropical conditions
199
[13,42,45]. This difference might be due to the environmental condition, artificial insemination
200
technician, calving number, feeding, milk yield [45] or due to concept that the services per
201
parturition recorded in the current study had been calculated without modification.
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
191
Our results showed better reproductive health traits for BS and F1 but not for HO and BC
203
which were comparable to the recent study on HO cows [32]. These findings obviously
204
interrelated with the shorter calving interval and days open in the BS and BF1. Many researchers
205
concluded that diseases related to the reproductive tract (metritis and dystocia) might be
206
influence the length of calving interval, days open and generally the reproductive efficiency [46].
207
Brown Swiss and F1 were robust and could tolerate the heat stress, when compared with
AC C
EP
202
208
HO and BC. In the current study, the stressful effect of heat on the reproductive performance
209
occurs in BC which carried more Holstein blood; therefore it was similar to the recent results of
210
pure Holsteins [32]. BC cows had higher pregnancy rate for cows inseminated in temperate
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
211
climate conditions than in heat stress and this was in agreement with Alnimer et al. [47], who
212
found the same results with HO cows inseminated in winter than in summer. Heat stress can be defined as the aggregate of forces external to a homeothermic animal
214
that shifts body temperature from the resting condition [48], causing physiologic, cellular,
215
metabolic and molecular changes. Mammals are homeothermic animals that hold a constant
216
internal body temperature via the balance between the produced metabolic heat and dissipated
217
heat to the environment [49]. Genetic selection for high milk yield decreases the
218
thermoregulatory ability in dairy animals exposed to heat stress [50]. Lactating cows are more
219
susceptible to heat stress [51] because the association between the high metabolic heat
220
production and lactation may lead to hyperthermia. Therefore, the consequences of the harmful
221
effects of heat stress on fertility are more obvious in high-producing dairy cows [52], whereas
222
the fertility of heifers is usually not affected [53]. Heat stress disrupts reproduction in dairy cattle
223
[21], and is a common problem in areas with hot environment. Fertility traits are usually
224
characterized by a lower heritability which influenced by non-additive than additive genetic
225
effects [54]. These results suggested that the environment plays a crucial role in fertility, hence
226
the difference between genotype by environment interaction may exist when comparing data
227
from different rearing conditions.
SC
M AN U
TE D
EP
Brown Swiss showed evidence of heat-stress resistance and had shorter first calving
AC C
228
RI PT
213
229
interval when compared with HO in warm environment [42], and this supported our findings.
230
Our results are also in accordance with Ruvuna et al. [55], who reported a better reproductive
231
performance in the warm season for BS than for HO or their crosses. Conception rate of cattle
232
decreased 20-30 % in summer than in winter [48,56,57] and the ovulation can be reduced from
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
233
91 to 18% when comparing cows in a thermo neutral environment with cows undergoing heat
234
stress [58]. Warm season increases the days open in HO when compared with HO X BS [55]. Brown
236
Swiss cows were less sensitive to heat stress which might be attributed to their coat colour.
237
Brown Swiss had a light brown colour which reduces the inward flow of heat than the black one
238
[59], producing less metabolic heat [60], has a higher rate of cutaneous evaporation which
239
resulting in a lower skin temperature [61]. Earlier studies revealed that peripheral blood
240
mononuclear cells from the HO were more tolerant to chronic heat exposure than those from the
241
BS cows [62]. The ability of the cows to dissipate heat to the environment and to retard the heat
242
gain from surrounding stressful environment conditions control the capability of the cow to
243
maintain its body temperature in a physiological homeostasis and in a thermoneutral zone [63].
244
Food intake and the metabolic rate determined the heat gain, while the heat dissipating ability
245
was affected by the character of the hair coat, the number of sweat glands, the surface area and
246
the fat distribution [21]. Furthermore, presence of a distinct mechanism that involved some genes
247
controlling the resistance to cellular heat shock was suggested [64].
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
235
Extremely hot weather reduces reproductive performance and interrupts homeostasis in
249
cattle [57,65], as the major targets of the deleterious effects of heat stress are the bovine germinal
250
vesicle, maturing oocyte and the early embryo. This may be attributed to, oocyte cellular damage
251
occurred in both cytoplasmic and nuclear compartments, resulted in a reduction of oocyte
252
nuclear maturation [66], reduced cleavage capacity of oocytes [67], induced apoptosis,
253
compromised oocyte cytoskeleton and impaired mitochondria function, inactive ovaries,
254
increased ovarian cysts [58], compromised follicular growth [68,69], hormonal secretion [69,70],
255
uterine blood flow [71], and endometrial function [72], preimplantation embryonic development
AC C
EP
248
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
256
[73]. Also, Calderón-Robles [42], mentioned that in the dry season ovaries take longer to resume
257
ovarian activity due to the lower availability of forage in the pasture. The HO is the dominant dairy breed within many countries, reflecting a highly genetic
259
potential for milk production. In the current study, pure HO, F1 and BC crossbred cows had
260
significantly higher 305-MY and peak-MY than pure BS cows. Consistent with the findings of
261
the current study, Swalve et al. [40] reported no difference between milk yield in both BS × HO
262
cows and pure HO in the first and second lactations. Also, there were no significant differences
263
for mature-equivalent milk yields between BS × HO and HO cows [14]. The competitive
264
performance of milk production traits in both BS × HO and HO had also been shown in other
265
studies [41]. Contrastingly, in a large study based on national data from the United States, HO
266
cows recorded higher milk production level than BS× HO and Jersey × HO cows [74].
M AN U
SC
RI PT
258
In conclusion, this study revealed that the Brown Swiss and her F1 crossbred had better
268
fertility and reproductive efficiency (higher conception and pregnancy rate, shorter calving
269
interval and lower average insemination per parturition) with a good health (a lower incidence of
270
metritis). Moreover, they can tolerate the heat stress than pure HO and BC. Therefore, Brown
271
Swiss and her F1 crossbred adapted well under subtropical Egyptian conditions and we
272
recommend the crossbreeding of Brown Swiss with Holstein especially for F1 which possesses
273
better productive (from Holstein) and reproductive traits (from Brown Swiss).
274
Conflict of interest statement
275
None of the authors have any conflict of interest to declare.
AC C
EP
TE D
267
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Acknowledgements
277
The authors wish to thank the owner of the expanded herd, Ismailia road, Cairo for allowing us
278
to collect the data. We greatly appreciated the great help of the head mangers of the farms in
279
collecting and managing the data by the AfiFarm.
280
References
281
[1] Groen AF, Steine T, Colleau JJ, Pedersen J, Pribyl J, Reinsch N. Economic values in dairy
282
cattle breeding, with special reference to functional traits. Report of an EAAP-working group.
283
Livestock Prod Sci 1997; 49: 1-21.
288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297
SC
M AN U
287
[3] Dematawewa CMB, Berger P J. Genetic and phenotypic parameters for 305-day yield, fertility, and survival in Holsteins. J Dairy Sci 1998; 81: 2700-2709.
TE D
286
144-150.
[4] Lucy M C. Reproductive loss in high-producing dairy cattle: Where will it end? J Dairy Sci 2001; 84: 1277-1293.
[5] Wall E, Brotherstone S, Woolliams JA, Banos G, Coffey MP. Genetic evaluation of fertility
EP
285
[2] Cassell BG. Optimal genetic improvement for high producing cows. J Dairy Sci 2001; 84:
using direct and correlated traits. J Dairy Sci 2003; 86: 4093-4102. [6] Hansen LB, Freeman AE, Berger PJ. Yield and fertility relationships in dairy cattle. J Dairy
AC C
284
RI PT
276
Sci 1983; 66: 293–305.
[7] Oltenacu PA, Frick A, Lindhé B. Relationship of fertility to milk yield in Swedish cattle. J Dairy Sci 1991; 74: 264-268. [8] Faust MA, McDaniel B. T, Robison OW. Genetics of reproduction in primiparous Holsteins. J Dairy Sci 1989; 72: 194-201.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
298 299
[9] Hare E, Norman HD, Wright JR. Trends in calving ages and calving intervals for dairy cattle breeds in the United States. J Dairy Sci 2006; 89: 365-370. [10] Andersen-Ranberg IM, Klemetsdal G, Heringstad B, Steine T. Heritabilities, genetic
301
correlations, and genetic change for female fertility and protein yield in Norwegian dairy
302
cattle. J Dairy Sci 2005; 88: 348-355.
RI PT
300
[11] Holtsmark M, Heringstad B, Madsen P, Ødegård J. Genetic relationship between culling,
304
milk production, fertility, and health traits in Norwegian Red cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2008; 91:
305
4006-4012.
SC
303
[12] Heringstad B, Larsgard AG. Correlated selection responses for female fertility after
307
selection for high protein yield or low mastitis frequency in Norwegian Red cows. J Dairy
308
Sci 2010; 93: 5970-5976.
M AN U
306
[13] Blöttner S, Heins BJ, Wensch-Dorendorf M, Hansen LB, Swalve HH. Brown Swiss ×
310
Holstein crossbreds compared with pure Holsteins for calving traits, body weight, back fat
311
thickness, fertility, and body measurements. J Dairy Sci 2011; 94: 1058-1068.
TE D
309
[14] Dechow CD, Rogers GW, Cooper JB, Phelps MI, Mosholder AL. Milk, fat, protein, somatic
313
cell score, and days open among Holstein, Brown Swiss, and Their Crosses. J Dairy Sci
314
2007; 90: 3542-3549.
AC C
EP
312
315
[15] Schaeffer LR, Burnside EB, Glover P, Fatehi J. Crossbreeding results in canadian dairy
316
cattle for production, reproduction and conformation. The Open Agriculture Journal 2011; 5:
317
63-72.
318
[16] Heins B.J, Hansen LB, Seykora AJ. Fertility and survival of pure Holsteins versus
319
crossbreds of Holstein with Normande, Montbeliarde, and Scandinavian Red. J Dairy Sci
320
2006; 89: 4944-4951.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
[17] Heins BJ, Hansen LB. Short communication: Fertility, somatic cell score, and production of
322
Normande×Holstein, Montbéliarde×Holstein, and Scandinavian Red × Holstein crossbreds
323
versus pure Holsteins during their first 5 lactations. J Dairy Sci 2012; 95: 918-924.
RI PT
321
[18] Heins BJ, Hansen LB, Hazel AR, Seykora AJ, Johnson DG, Linn JG. Short communication:
325
Jersey × Holstein crossbreds compared with pure Holsteins for body weight, body condition
326
score, fertility, and survival during the first three lactations. J Dairy Sci 2012; 95: 4130-4135.
327
[19] de Haas Y, Smolders EA, Hoorneman JN, Nauta WJ, Veerkamp RF. Suitability of cross-
328
bred cows for organic farms based on cross-breeding effects on production and functional
329
traits. Animal 2013; 7: 655-665.
333 334 335 336 337
M AN U
[21] Kadzere CT, Murphy MR, Silanikove N, Maltz E. Heat stress in lactating dairy cows: a
TE D
332
applied aspects. Anim Reprod Sci 2000; 61: 535-547.
review. Livestock Prod Sci 2002; 77: 59-91.
[22] De Rensis F, Scaramuzzi RJ. Heat stress and seasonal effects on reproduction in the dairy cow- a review. Theriogenology 2003; 60: 1139-1151.
EP
331
[20] Wolfenson D, Roth Z, Meidan R. Impaired reproduction in heat-stressed cattle: basic and
[23] West JW. Effects of Heat-Stress on Production in Dairy Cattle. Dairy Sci 2003; 86: 2131-
AC C
330
SC
324
2144.
338
[24] Boni R, Perrone LL, Cecchini S. Heat stress affects reproductive performance of high
339
producing dairy cows bred in an area of southern Apennines. Livestock Science 2014; 160:
340
172-177.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
[25] Schüller LK, Burfeind O, Heuwieser W. Impact of heat stress on conception rate of dairy
342
cows in the moderate climate considering different temperature– humidity index thresholds,
343
periods relative to breeding, and heat load indices. Theriogenology 2014; 81: 1050-1057.
344
[26] Boonkum W, Misztal I, Duangjinda M, Pattarajinda V, Tumwasorn S, Buaban S. Short
345
communication: Genetic effects of heat stress on days open for Thai Holstein crossbreds. J
346
Dairy Sci 2011; 94:1592-1596.
SC
RI PT
341
[27] Mellado M, Coronel F, Estrada A, Ríosb FG. Lactation performance of Holstein and
348
Holstein x Gyr cattle under intensive conditions in a subtropical environment. Tropical and
349
Subtropical Agroecosystems 2011; 14: 927-931.
351
352
[28] Hailu A. Cross breeding effect on milk productivity of Ethiopian indigenous cattle: Challenges and opportunities. Scholarly Journal of Agricultural Science 2013; 3: 515-520. [29] Murray B. Dairy Crossbreeds, The Rare Breed. Retrieved October 6, 2010, from Ministy of
TE D
350
M AN U
347
353
Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs, 2002.
354
http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/livestock/dairy/facts/info_breed.htm
EP
356
[30] Kendall PE, Webster JR. Season and physiological status affects the circadian body temperature rhythm of dairy cows. Livestock Sci 2009; 125: 155-160.
AC C
355
357
[31] SAS. SAS/STAT users guide. SAS Institute INC, Cary, NC 27513, USA, 2002.
358
[32] El-Tarabany MS, El-Bayoumi KM. Reproductive performance of backcross Holstein x
359
Brown Swiss and their Holstein contemporaries under subtropical environmental
360
conditions. Theriogenology 2015; 83: 444-448.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
361
[33] Veerkamp RF, Beerda B, van der Lende T. Effects of genetic selection for milk yield on
362
energy balance, levels of hormones, and metabolites in lactating cattle, and possible links to
363
reduced fertility. Livestock Prod Sci 2003; 83: 257-275.
365
[34] Walsh SW, Williams EJ, Evans ACO. A review of the causes of poor fertility in high milk producing dairy cows. Anim Reprod Sci 2011; 123: 127-138.
RI PT
364
[35] Tiezzi F, Maltecca C, Cecchinato A, Penasa M, Bittante G. Thin and fat cows, and the
367
nonlinear genetic relationship between body condition score and fertility. J Dairy Sci 2013;
368
96: 6730-6741.
370
[36] Lopez H, Satter LD, Wiltbank MC. Relationship between level of milk production and
M AN U
369
SC
366
estrous behavior of lactating dairy cows. Anim Reprod Sci 2004; 81: 209-223. [37] Garcia-Peniche TB. Comparisons of Holstein, Brown Swiss, and Jersey cows for age at first
372
calving, first calving interval, and true herd-life up to five years in seven regions of the
373
United States. Ph.D thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2004.
TE D
371
[38] Philip O. Literature Review on Crossbreeding in Dairy Cattle. In Partial Fulfillment Of the
375
Requirements for the Degree Bachelor of Science, Faculty of the Dairy Science Department,
376
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, 2010.
378 379 380 381 382
[39] Hollon BF, Branton C. Performance of Holstein and crossbred dairy cattle in Louisiana. III. Health and viability. J Dairy Sci 1975; 58: 93-101.
AC C
377
EP
374
[40] Swalve HH, Bergk N, Solms-Lich PH. Kreuzungszuchtbeim Milchrind-Ergebnisseauseinem Praxisbetrieb. Zuchtungskunde 2008; 80: 429-442. [41] Rincon EJ, Schermerhorn E. C, Mc Dowell RE, McDaniel BT. Estimation of genetic effects on milk yield and constituent traits in crossbred dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 1982; 65: 848-856.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
[42] Calderón-Robles RC, Flores-Domínguez B, Ríos-Utrera A, Rosete-Fernández JV, Lagunes-
384
Lagunes J. Reproductive performance of Holstein and Brown Swiss cows under intensive
385
grazing in a humid subtropical climate. Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 2011; 13:
386
429-435.
RI PT
383
[43] Hernández CJ. Efecto del estréscalórico en la reproduccióndelganadobovino: diferencia de
388
suceptibilidades entre razas. En: Simposio de estréscalórico en ganadolechero. UNAM-
389
FMVZ División de Educación Continua. 2005; 26-31.
SC
387
[44] Malchiodi F, Cecchinato A, Bittante G. Fertility traits of purebred Holsteins and 2- and 3-
391
breed crossbred heifers and cows obtained from Swedish Red, Montbéliarde, and Brown
392
Swiss sires. J Dairy Sci 2014; 97: 1-11.
393 394
M AN U
390
[45] Jiménez SH, De Los Santos VH. Reproducción animal. IV DíadelGanadero del C. E. PecuarioAldama. SARH-INIP 1984; 23-24.
[46] Gröhn YT, Rajala-Schultz PJ, Allore HG, DeLorenzo MA, Hertl JA, Galligan DT.
396
Optimizing replacement of dairy cows: modeling the effects of diseases. Prev Vet Med
397
2003; 61: 27-43.
TE D
395
[47] Alnimer M, DeRosa G, Grasso F, Napolitano F, Bordi A. Effect of climate on the response
399
to three estrous synchronization techniques in lactating dairy cows. Anim Reprod Sci 2002;
400
71: 157-168.
402 403 404
AC C
401
EP
398
[48] Yousef MK. Stress physiology: definition and terminology. Stress Physiology in Livestock. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. CRC Press, Boca Raton. 1984; 3-7 [49] Hansen PJ. Physiological and cellular adaptations of Zebu cattle to thermal stress. Anim Reprod Sci 2004; 82-83: 349-360.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
405
[50] Berman A, Folman Y, Kaim M, Mamen M, Herz Z, Wolfenson D, Arieli A, Graber Y.
406
Upper critical temperatures and forced ventilation effects for high-yielding dairy cows in a
407
subtropical environment. J Dairy Sci 1985; 68: 1488-1495.
409
[51] Armstrong DV. Heat stress interaction with shade and cooling. J Dairy Sci 1994; 77: 2044-
RI PT
408
2050.
[52] Al-Katanani YM, Webb DW, Hansen PJ. Factors affecting seasonal variation in 90 day non-
411
return rate to first service in lactating Holstein cows in a hotclimate. J Dairy Sci 1999; 82:
412
2611-2615.
SC
410
[53] Badinga L, Collier RJ, Thatcher WW, Wilcox CJ. Effects of climatic and management
414
factors on conception rate of dairy cattle in subtropical environment. J Dairy Sci 1985; 68:
415
78-85.
419 420 421 422
TE D
418
lifetime performance traits of dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 1994 ; 77: 1114-1125. [55] Ruvuna F, McDaniel BT, McDowell RE, Johnson JC, Hollon BT, Brandt GW. Crossbred and purebred dairy cattle in warm and cool seasons. J Dairy Sci 1983; 66: 2408-2417. [56] Lopez-Gatius F. Is fertility declining in dairy cattle? A retrospective study in northeastern
EP
417
[54] Fuerst C, Solkner J. Additive and nonadditive genetic variances for milk yield, fertility, and
Spain. Theriogenology 2003; 60: 89-99. [57] Mellado M, Sepulveda E,
AC C
416
M AN U
413
Macias-Cruz U,
Avendaño L, Garcia JE, Francisco G,
423
Rodríguez VA. Effects of month of breeding on reproductive efficiency of Holstein cows
424
and heifers inseminated with sex-sorted or conventional semen in a hot environment,
425
Tropical Animal Health and Production 2014; 46: 265-269.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
426
[58] Wilson SJ, Marion RS, Spain JN, Spiers DE, Keisler DH, Lucy MC. Effects of controlled
427
heat stress on ovarian function of dairy cattle. 1. Lactating cows. J Dairy Sci 1998; 81:
428
2124-2131.
430
[59] Finch VA. Body temperature in beef cattle: its control and relevance to production in the tropics. J Anim Sci 1986; 62: 531-542.
RI PT
429
[60] Brody S, Worstell DM, Ragsdale AC, Kibler HH. Growth and development with special
432
reference to domestic animals. LXV. Heat production and cardiorespiratory activities during
433
gestation and lactation in Holstein cattle. Mo. Agric Exp Sta Res Bull 1948, pp: 424.
SC
431
[61] Armstrong DV, Hillman PE. Evaluation of Brown Swiss, Holstein and Jerseys under hot
435
arid climates for dairy production. In: Proceedings of the Southwest Nutrition and
436
Management Conference. University of Arizona, Tucson, Ariz. 1998; 153-165.
M AN U
434
[62] Lacetera N, Bernabucci U, Scalia D, Basirico` L, Morera P, Nardone A. Heat stress elicits
438
different responses in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from Brown Swiss and Holstein
439
Cows. J Dairy Sci 2006; 89: 4606-4612.
441 442
[63] Maia ASC, daSilva RG, BattistonLoureiro CM. Sensible and latent heat loss from the body surface of Holstein cows in a tropical environment. Int J Biometeorol 2005; 50:17-22.
EP
440
TE D
437
[64] Paula-Lopes FF, Chase CCJ, Al-Katanani YM, Krininger CE, Rivera RM,
Tekin S,
Majewski, AC, Ocon OM, Olson TA, Hansen PJ. Genetic divergence in cellular resistance
444
to heat shock in cattle: differences between breeds developed in temperate versus hot
445
climates in responses of preimplantation embryos, reproductive tract tissues and
446
lymphocytes to increased culture temperatures. Reproduction 2003; 125: 285-294.
AC C
443
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
447
[65] Paula-Lopes PP,
Lima RS,
Satrapa RA,
Barros CM. Influence of cattle genotype
448
(Bosindicus versus Bostaurus) on oocyte and preimplantation embryo resistance to elevated
449
temperature. J Anim Sci 2013; 91: 1143-1153.
452 453
RI PT
451
[66] Paula-Lopes FF, Milazzotto M, Assumpcao MEOA, Visintin JA. Heat shock-induced damage in bovine oocytes. Reprod Fertil Dev 2008; 43: 208-208.
[67] Al-Katanani YM, Paula-Lopes FF, Hansen PJ. Effect of season and exposure to heat stress on oocyte competence in Holstein cows. J. Dairy Sci 2002; 85: 390-396.
SC
450
[68] Badinga L, Thatcher WW, Diaz T, Drost M, Wolfenson D. Effect of environmental heat
455
stress on follicular development and steriodogenesis in lactating Holstein cows.
456
Theriogenology 1993; 39: 797-810.
M AN U
454
[69] Wolfenson D, Thatcher WW, Badinga L, Savio JD, Meidan R, Lew BJ, Braw-Tal R,
458
Berman A. Effect of heat stress on follicular development during the estrous cycle in
459
lactating dairy cattle. Biol Reprod 1995; 52: 1106-1113.
TE D
457
[70] Roth Z, Meidan R, Braw-tal R, Wolfenson D. Immediate and delayed effects of heat stress
461
on follicular development and its association with plasma FSH and inhibin concentration in
462
cows. J Reprod Fertil 2000; 120: 83-90.
464
[71] Roman-Ponce H, Thatcher WW, Canton D, Barron DH,. Wolcox CJ. Thermal stress effects on uterine blood flow in dairy cows. J Anim Sci 1978; 46: 175-180.
AC C
463
EP
460
465
[72] Malayer JR, Hansen PJ, Buhi WC. Effect of day of oestrus cycle, side of the reproductive
466
tract and heat shock on in-vitro protein secretion by bovine endometrium. J Reprod Fertil
467
1988; 84: 567-578.
468 469
[73] Paula-Lopes FF, Hansen PJ. Heat shock-induced apoptosis in preimplantation bovine embryos is a developmentally regulated phenomenon. Biol Reprod 2002; 66: 1169-1177.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
Dairy Sci 2003; 86: 1036-1044.
EP
471
[74] VanRaden PM, Sanders AH. Economic merit of crossbred and purebred US dairy cattle. J
AC C
470
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 1. Reproductive, production and health performance indices in different genetic types. Metritis
Retained placenta
Mastitis
CI
BS
34.1a
32.8a
9.6b
14.1 b
15.6b
40.9
401 ± 7.5b
HO
28.6b
23.8b
16.9a
29.2a
16.8b
42.4
438 ± 6.8a
F1
36.9a
31.1a
10.2b
14.6b
35.2a
32.2
420 ± 8.2ab
BC
27.2b
24.6b
12.9b
31.8a
20.6ab
34.5
433 ± 7.9a
DO
CI: calving interval; DO: days open; AI: average insemination per parturition MY: milk yield. BS: purebred Brown Swiss. HO: purebred Holstein. F1: F1crossbred Brown Swiss X Holstein (50 % BS, 50 % HO). BC: backcross originated from Holstein sire x F1 (Brown Swiss x Holstein) cow. The actual number of the pure BS, HO, F1 and BC cows were 112, 850, 108 and 103, respectively. Values with different superscripts in each column are significantly different at (p<0.05).
TE D
AI
RI PT
Embryonic loss (%)
305-MY
Total-MY
Peak-MY
117 ± 7.2b
3.18 ± 0.18 b
7638 ± 121b
8537 ± 183c
35.4 ± 1.66b
158 ± 7.4a
4.12 ± 0.29a
9175 ± 258a
10364 ± 166a
46.7 ± 1.18a
143 ± 8.4a
3.45 ± 0.25 b
9022 ± 249a
9675 ± 198b
43.9 ± 2.53a
147 ± 8.8a
4.26 ± 0.32 a
8982 ± 196a
10118± 236a
44.1 ± 1.73a
SC
Pregnancy (%)
EP
473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480
Conception (%)
M AN U
Genetic type
AC C
472
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Table 2. Effect of temperature humidity index (THI) on conception, pregnancy and embryonic loss rate in different genetic types. Pregnancy (%)
Embryonic loss (%)
Low
Moderate
High
Low
Moderate
High
BS
40.8
36.1
39.2
34.7
34.2
31.1
HO
34.9a
26.8b
17.1c
29.7a
20.9b
14.6b
F1
43.1a
33.3ab
24.1 b
41.2
31.6
22.5
BC
32.8a
30.9a
14.8 b
28.9 a
29.5a
Low
Moderate
12.3b
M AN U
TE D EP
High
13.1
12.8
17.6
15.3b
18.9b
25.8a
2.8b
6.4b
15.2a
12.3 a
18.2a
2.7b
Low: THI less than 70; moderate: THI over 70 and less than 75; high: THI over 80 and up to 85. BS: purebred Brown Swiss. HO: purebred Holstein. F1: F1crossbred Brown Swiss X Holstein (50 % BS, 50 % HO). BC: backcross originated from Holstein sire x F1 (Brown Swiss x Holstein) cow. The actual number of the pure BS, HO, F1 and BC cows were 112, 850, 108 and 103, respectively. Values with different superscripts in each row are significantly different at (p<0.05).
AC C
483 484 485 486 487 488 489
Conception (%)
RI PT
Genetic type
SC
481 482
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
490
Figure legend
491
Figure 1: The monthly average temperature (
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
the area of the farm.
AC C
492
) and temperature humidity index (THI) (
) in
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
•
We evaluate the reproductive and health performance traits of the pure Brown Swiss, Holstein and their crosses. We assess the effects of different levels of THI index on some reproductive indices.
•
We determine the adaptability of different genetic types under subtropical environmental
RI PT
•
conditions.
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
Milk yield of the F1crossbred is comparable to that of the pure HO cows.
AC C
•