Yazar "Hanna, Lauren L." seçeneğine göre listele

Listeleniyor 1 - 2 / 2
  • Küçük Resim
    Öğe
    Effect of synchronized fixed-time AI and non-pregnant heifer delayed feedlot entry on reproductive performance and system economics
    (Oxford Univ Press Inc, 2024) Landblom, Douglas G.; Hanna, Lauren L.; Parman, Byron; Perry, George A.; Paisley, Steve; Şentürklü, Songül
    Heifer reproduction management research is being conducted at the NDSU–Dickinson Research Extension Center. Using crossbred heifers, the objective was to evaluate reproductive performance and economic efficiencies comparing a drylot synchronized fixed-time AI protocol with clean-up bulls to two grazing systems using a fixed-time AI protocol without clean-up bulls. Synchronization protocol:14-d CIDR-PG-GnRH (TAI 66 h ± 2 h). Fixed-time AI treatments: 1) Drylot Control (DLOT) with clean-up bulls, 2) Integrated diverse crop-heifer annual forage grazing (IAF, no clean-up bulls), and 3) Native range grazing (NR, no clean-up bulls). Following pregnancy ultrasound on d 85, non-pregnant heifers continued to bale-graze until late November, when they were transferred to the University of Wyoming SAREC feedlot, finished, harvested at Cargill Meat Solutions packing plant, Ft. Morgan, CO, and grid marketed. Data were analyzed using the MIXED procedure of SAS. Year 1 and 2 grazing days were 121, and 149, respectively. Synchronized TAI pregnancy rates yr 1 and 2 for DLOT, IAF, and NR were 59.4, 43.8, and 62.5%; 68.8, 46.9, and 34.4%, respectively. Total DLOT control pregnancy rates yr 1 and 2 were 90.6 and 100%. Grazing heifer feedlot performance Yr 1 did not differ for starting body weight (BW; 452 vs 436 kg, P = 0.29), ending BW (610 vs 600 kg, P = 0.74), gain (157 vs 164 kg, P = 0.69), average daily gain (ADG; 1.42 vs 1.48 kg, P = 0.70), dry matter (DM) feed intake (15.0 vs 14.7 kg, P = 0.73), F:G (4.81 vs 4.56 kg, P = 0.42), daily feed cost ($7.45 vs $9.47, P = 0.73), feed cost/kg BW gain ($3.11 vs $2.95, P = 0.51), and feed and yardage cost ($3.41 vs $3.24, P = 0.55). Year 2 grazing heifer feedlot performance for the IAF and NR were starting BW (501 vs 456 kg, P = 0.007), ending BW (670 vs 604 kg, P = 0.004), feedlot finishing gain (143 vs 123 kg, P = 0.05), ADG (1.08 vs 0.93 kg/day, P = 0.06), daily DM feed intake (20.1 vs 20.1 kg/d, P = 0.98), feed to gain ratio (7.13 vs 8.22 kg/d, P = 0.11), daily feed cost ($9.61 vs $9.54/d, P = 0.94), feed cost/kg BW gain ($4.05 vs $4.67/kg, P = 0.11), and feed and yardage cost/kg gain ($4.45 vs $5.13/kg, P = 0.092). IAF and NR Yr 1 HCW (P = 0.83), dressing % (P = 0.69), marbling score (P = 0.78) did not differ. Year 2, except for hot carcass weight (HCW; 379 vs 341 kg, P = 0.004), dressing pct (P = 0.99), fat depth (P = 0.29), marbling score (P = 0.94) did not differ. Systems 2-yr mean net return for DLOT, IAF, and NR were $592, $296, $379, respectively. Systems net return profitability was very good for all management comparisons, but reduced for IAF and NR due to IAF farming, finishing, and transportation costs, and NR finishing and transportation costs.
  • [ X ]
    Öğe
    Single Timed-Ai Heifer Development and Delayed Feedlot Entry of Non-Pregnant Heifers
    (Oxford Univ Press Inc, 2023) Landblom, Douglas G.; Senturklu, Songul; Hanna, Lauren L.; Parman, Bryon; Perry, George A.; Paisley, Steve
    [Anstract Not Available]