A summary of 1127 breeding soundness examinations in beef bulls

Elmore, R.G.; Bierschwal, C.J.; Martin, C; Youngquist, R.S.

doi:10.1016/0093-691x(75)90139-9

Cited by 27 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our observed premating prevalence of high-risk status, 19.5%, fits in to the observed range seen in studies of beef bulls, where 6 to 33% of bulls were classified as high risk or unsatisfactory (Elmore et al, 1975;Bruner et al, 1995;Acuña and Campero, 1999;Chacón et al, 1999;Kennedy, 2002;Waldner et al, 2010;Menegassi et al, 2012). Those studies came from widely varied geographical locations and farming systems, with differences in the guidelines used for classification of breeding soundness.…”

Section: Overall Classifications and Physical Componentsupporting

confidence: 84%

An assessment of dairy herd bulls in southern Australia: 1. Management practices and bull breeding soundness evaluations

Hancock

Younis²,

Beggs

et al. 2016

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the pasture-based, seasonally calving dairy herds of southern Australia, the mating period usually consists of an initial artificial insemination period followed by a period of natural service using herd bulls. Bull breeding soundness evaluations (BBSE) were performed on 256 bulls from 32 dairy herds in southwest Victoria, using guidelines produced by the Australian Cattle Veterinarians, before and immediately after a single natural mating period. At the same time, herd managers were questioned regarding the management of the bulls. The objectives of this study were to describe the management practices of dairy herd bulls; to describe the causes of increased risk of reduced fertility in dairy herd bulls, as measured by a standard BBSE; and to describe the reasons for bull removal by herd managers during mating. At the premating BBSE, 19.5% of bulls were classified as high risk of reduced fertility, mostly due to physical abnormalities and reduced semen quality. At the postmating BBSE, 36.5% of bulls were classified as high risk of reduced fertility, mostly due to physical abnormalities, primarily lameness. Of the bulls used, 15.9% were removed from normal mating use by the herd manager, predominantly due to lameness and injuries. A premating BBSE is recommended in dairy herd bulls to identify bulls at risk of reduced fertility. Lameness is the most common problem in dairy herd bulls during the natural mating period, and risk factors associated with lameness in these bulls should be identified to better manage herd bulls.

show abstract

Section: Overall Classifications and Physical Componentsupporting

confidence: 84%

An assessment of dairy herd bulls in southern Australia: 1. Management practices and bull breeding soundness evaluations

Hancock

Younis²,

Beggs

et al. 2016

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Semen evaluation is generally an accepted way to estimate potential fertility of bulls. Thus, a breeding soundness evaluation consisting of a physical examination, scrotal circumference (SC) measurement, and semen evaluation is recommended (Elmore et al, 1976;Hopkins, 2003). Barth and Waldner (2002) reported that 49 and 73% of bulls evaluated in January and June, respectively, were of satisfactory breeding soundness.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Scrotal circumference may useful in predicting the quality and amount of spermatozoa-producing tissue (Elmore et al, 1976;Coe, 1999;Hopkins, 2003) and age at puberty (Brinks et al, 1978;Lunstra et al, 1978). Scrotal circumference of beef bulls has been reported to be moderately heritable (Koots et al, 1994a;Martinez-Velazquez et al, 2003).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic parameter estimates for scrotal circumference and semen characteristics of Line 1 Hereford bulls1

Kealey

MacNeil

Tess

et al. 2006

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objectives of this study were to estimate heritability for scrotal circumference (SC) and semen traits and their genetic correlations (rg) with birth weight (BRW). Semen traits were recorded for Line 1 Hereford bulls (n = 841), born in 1963 or from 1967 to 2000, that were selected for use at Fort Keogh (Miles City, MT) or for sale. Semen was collected by electroejaculation when bulls were a mean age of 446 d. Phenotypes were BRW, SC, ejaculate volume, subjective scores for ejaculate color, swirl, sperm concentration and motility, and percentages of sperm classified as normal and live or having abnormal heads, abnormal midpieces, proximal cytoplasmic droplets (primary abnormalities), bent tails, coiled tails, or distal cytoplasmic droplets (secondary abnormalities). Percentages of primary and secondary also were calculated. Data were analyzed using multiple-trait derivative-free REML. Models included fixed effects for contemporary group, age of dam, age of bull, inbreeding of the bull and his dam, and random animal and residual effects. Random maternal and permanent maternal environmental effects were also included in the model for BRW. Estimates of heritability for BRW, SC, semen color, volume, concentration, swirl, motility, and percentages of normal, live, abnormal heads, abnormal midpieces, proximal cytoplasmic droplets, bent tails, coiled tails, distal cytoplasmic droplets, and primary and secondary abnormalities were 0.34, 0.57, 0.15, 0.09, 0.16, 0.21, 0.22, 0.35, 0.22, 0.00 0.16, 0.37, 0.00 0.34 0.00, 0.30, and 0.33, respectively. Estimates of rg for SC with color, volume, concentration, swirl, motility, and percentages of live, normal, and primary and secondary abnormalities were 0.73, 0.20, 0.77, 0.40, 0.34, 0.63, 0.33, -0.36, and -0.45, respectively. Estimates of rg for BRW with SC, color, volume, concentration, swirl, motility, and percentages live, normal, and primary and secondary abnormalities were 0.28, 0.60, 0.08, 0.58, 0.44, 0.21, 0.34, 0.20, -0.02, and -0.16, respectively. If selection pressure was applied to increase SC, all of the phenotypes evaluated would be expected to improve. Predicted correlated responses in semen characteristics per genetic SD of selection applied to SC were 0.87 genetic SD or less. If selection pressure was applied to reduce BRW, the correlated responses would generally be smaller but antagonistic to improving all of the phenotypes evaluated. Predicted correlated responses in SC and semen characteristics per genetic SD of selection applied to BRW were less than 0.35 genetic SD.

show abstract

“…Much less information is available on natural fertility ofyearling beefbulls used under range conditions. Breeding soundness evaluation techniques have been used in several studies to assess fertilizing capacity of a relatively large number of bulls (Hill et al 1959; Maddox et al 1959;Carroll et al 1963;Elmore et al 1975;Ruttle et al 1983 (Table 4). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Variations in and Relationships Between Reproductive Performance and Growth Parameters in Yearling Beef Bulls in Single-Sire Mating at Pasture

Farid¹,

Makarechian²,

Berg³

et al. 1989

Can. J. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A summary of 1127 breeding soundness examinations in beef bulls

Cited by 27 publications

References 0 publications

An assessment of dairy herd bulls in southern Australia: 1. Management practices and bull breeding soundness evaluations

An assessment of dairy herd bulls in southern Australia: 1. Management practices and bull breeding soundness evaluations

Genetic parameter estimates for scrotal circumference and semen characteristics of Line 1 Hereford bulls1

Variations in and Relationships Between Reproductive Performance and Growth Parameters in Yearling Beef Bulls in Single-Sire Mating at Pasture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About