Site of PGF2α injection does not alter effectiveness of the Select Synch + controlled internal drug release and timed artificial insemination protocol.

Beef Quality Assurance programs have contributed to significant improvements in the wholesomeness of beef available for consumption. Injection site blemishes in the round have declined since the promotion of administering intramuscular injections in the neck. Unfortunately, many producers continue to administer estrus synchronization (ES) drugs in the rump. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of injection site of PGF2α, in ES protocols, on steroid hormone concentrations and pregnancy rates. A Select Synch + 7-day controlled internal drug release ES protocol was conducted with the site of PGF2α injection alternated between neck and rump in beef cattle (n = 312) at the Ohio State University Agricultural Technical Institute and North Carolina State University. Blood samples (n = 75) were collected at controlled internal drug release insertion and at the time of artificial insemination (AI) to determine if progesterone (P4) and estrogen (E2) concentrations varied due to PGF2α injection site. All cattle were confirmed pregnant by ultrasonography at approximately 30 and 90 days after insemination in North Carolina and approximately 70 days after insemination in Ohio. Data were analyzed as randomized complete block designs in PROC GLIMMIX with animal as the experimental unit. Differences were declared significant at P < 0.05. Site of PGF2α injection, in either the neck or rump, did not affect (P > 0.05) overall conception rates in response to AI (58.4% and 55.6%, respectively). Altering PGF2α injection site did not impact P4, E2 concentrations, or the P4:E2 ratio at AI (P > 0.05). However, cattle inseminated after displaying estrus had greater (P < 0.05) pregnancy rates than timed AI (67.8 vs. 47.5%, respectively). First service conception rates and pregnancy rates were consistent with previous reports. Overall, altering the location of the PGF2α injection during ES did not change circulating hormone concentrations at AI or pregnancy rates; therefore, cattle producers should follow Beef Quality Assurance guidelines when administering ES protocols.