Australian veterinary journal · 2003
Comparison of four methods for detection of oestrus in dairy cows with resynchronised oestrous cycles.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cavalieri J, Eagles V, Ryan M, Macmillan K L
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the sensitivity and positive predictive value of four methods for detection of oestrus in dairy cows with resynchronised oestrous cycles.
PROCEDURE: Oestrous cycles in cows in three herds were synchronised for a first round of artificial insemination (AI) and then resynchronised for a second round of AI. Sensitivity and positive predictive value of four aids (pedometers, radiotelemetric transmitters [HeatWatch; HW], tail-paint and heatmount detectors) that were used to detect the resynchronised oestrus were compared. Milk progesterone concentration and pregnancy testing at 12 weeks were used as the reference standard for cows being in oestrus.
RESULTS: The mean sensitivity and positive predictive value for detecting the resynchronised oestrus, for each aid that was used, was > 80%. Tail-paint was significantly more sensitive at detecting oestrus compared to heatmount detectors (P = 0.002), but not significantly more sensitive than pedometers (P = 0.07) or HW (P = 0.55) for detecting oestrus (91.3, 85.7; 81.4 and 88.4%, respectively). Positive predictive value of HW for detecting oestrus was greater than tail-paint (P = 0.014) and heatmount detectors (P = 0.024) but not pedometers (P = 0.25; 100, 91.7, 92.9 and 87.5%, respectively). Positive predictive value of heatmount detectors was greater than pedometers in herd C (93.4% vs 73.3%; P = 0.035) but not in herds A (95.0% vs 90.0%; P = 0.56) or B (90.8% vs 100%; P = 0.10). No other significant differences in sensitivity or positive predictive value of detection of oestrus were found between aids.
CONCLUSION: Tail-paint, heatmount detectors, pedometers and HW provide a high sensitivity (> 80%) and positive predictive value (> 85%) of detecting oestrus in dairy cows with resynchronized oestrous cycles.
PROCEDURE: Oestrous cycles in cows in three herds were synchronised for a first round of artificial insemination (AI) and then resynchronised for a second round of AI. Sensitivity and positive predictive value of four aids (pedometers, radiotelemetric transmitters [HeatWatch; HW], tail-paint and heatmount detectors) that were used to detect the resynchronised oestrus were compared. Milk progesterone concentration and pregnancy testing at 12 weeks were used as the reference standard for cows being in oestrus.
RESULTS: The mean sensitivity and positive predictive value for detecting the resynchronised oestrus, for each aid that was used, was > 80%. Tail-paint was significantly more sensitive at detecting oestrus compared to heatmount detectors (P = 0.002), but not significantly more sensitive than pedometers (P = 0.07) or HW (P = 0.55) for detecting oestrus (91.3, 85.7; 81.4 and 88.4%, respectively). Positive predictive value of HW for detecting oestrus was greater than tail-paint (P = 0.014) and heatmount detectors (P = 0.024) but not pedometers (P = 0.25; 100, 91.7, 92.9 and 87.5%, respectively). Positive predictive value of heatmount detectors was greater than pedometers in herd C (93.4% vs 73.3%; P = 0.035) but not in herds A (95.0% vs 90.0%; P = 0.56) or B (90.8% vs 100%; P = 0.10). No other significant differences in sensitivity or positive predictive value of detection of oestrus were found between aids.
CONCLUSION: Tail-paint, heatmount detectors, pedometers and HW provide a high sensitivity (> 80%) and positive predictive value (> 85%) of detecting oestrus in dairy cows with resynchronized oestrous cycles.