NAAS Score 2020

                   5.36

UserOnline

Free counters!

Previous Next

Effect of Non-Genetic Factors on Pre-partum Reproduction Traits in Gir Crossbreds

Mahendra Gorakh Mote Yogesh Chandrakant Bangar1 Sangita Uddhav Bhoite Dilip Kundlik Deokar
Vol 8(8), 142-150
DOI- http://dx.doi.org/10.5455/ijlr.20170811034109

The data on pre-partum reproduction traits viz. age at first conception (AFCon) and age at first calving (AFC) of five groups of Gir crossbred (FG: 50% Holstein Friesian X 50% Gir, IFG:FG Interse, FJG: 50% Holstein Friesian X 25% Jersey X 25% Gir, IFJG: FJG Interse and R: 5/8 Gir) maintained at Research-cum-Development Project on cattle, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth (M. P.K.V.), Rahuri Maharashtra (India) were collected from year 1972 to 2015. The effects of period of birth and season of birth on pre-partum reproductive traits were determined by using Harvey’s least-square technique. The overall least-squares means of AFCon in FG, IFG, FJG, IFJG and R group were 530.52 ± 8.35, 761.33 ± 10.66, 531.42 ± 6.60, 722.70 ± 8.64 and 798.06 ± 16.92 days, respectively. The overall least squares means of AFC in FG, IFG, FJG, IFJG and R genetic groups were 810.44 ± 8.41, 1040.64 ± 10.58, 809.88 ± 6.80, 1000.87 ± 8.69 and 1077.74 ± 17.17 days, respectively. The period of birth had significant effect on AFCon and AFC in IFG, FJG and IFJG genetic groups. The effect of season of birth on AFCon and AFC was non-significant in all the genetic groups.


Keywords : Age at First Conception Age at First Calving Gir Crossbreds Reproductive

India ranks first in milk production (146.3 million tonnes during 2014-15) by accounting for 18.5 per cent of world production (Anonymous, 2016). However, Indian dairy sector still faces the constraints of animals’ productivity and inferior reproduction performance. The productive and reproductive performance of an animal depends upon genetic makeup of animal and its interaction with the environment under which the animal is brought up and maintained in given time (Ekka et al., 2014). Additionally, pre-partum reproductive traits such as age at first conception or age at first calving in dairy cows plays very important in production cycle and thus, have high economic importance in farm profitability. An earlier age at first calving (AFC) can decrease rearing costs due to less feed, labour and managerial costs. Although, exotic cattle and their crosses are being used increasingly to raise milk production in hot climate of Indian subcontinent, it is extremely difficult to predict which breed, cross or generation will give highest economic returns over investment. This might be due to wide variation in productive and reproductive performance of crossbreds and adaptability of the crossbred to the divergent climatic conditions of the tropics (Patel and Dave, 1987). Hence, identification and stabilization of the optimum level of exotic inheritance is still moot point in the crossbreeding programme (Dalal et al., 1991). It is very essential to assess the comparative performance of crossbreds of various generations under divergent agro climatic environment for formulation and implementation of long term breeding programmes (Prabhukumar et al., 1990).

The aim of present study was to study the pre-partum reproductive performance in five genetic groups of Gir crossbreds by using data records of period from 1972 to 2015.

Materials and Methods

The present study was carried out to study two pre-partum traits viz. age at first conception (AFCon) and age at first calving (AFC). The data pertains to these pre-partum reproductive traits of five genetic groups of Gir crossbred (FG: 50% Holstein Friesian X 50% Gir, IFG:FG Interse, FJG: 50% Holstein Friesian X 25% jersey X 25% Gir, IFJG: FJG Interse and R: 5/8 Gir) were collected from Research Cum Development Project (RCDP) on cattle, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, for the period of 44 years from 1972 to 2015. The records of abnormal cases like abortion, dystokia, and still-births were not included. Similarly, half breds, Triple cross and 5/8 Gir crossbred cows which yielded less than 1500 kg milk in lactation or an lactation less than 200 days were not considered. The data for the period from 1972 to 2015 were classified according to period of birth. As per climatic condition the data of each year were divided into three seasons as S1 Rainy (June to September) S2 Winter (October to January) S3 Summer (February to May).

Statistical Methodology

The data were analysed with the help of two programmes Harvey (1990) and SAS version 9.3 (2013) available at Department of Statistics, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, Maharashtra, (India). The means and standard error of the traits were calculated using General linear model PROC GLM (SAS 2013). Model for estimation of pre-partum reproductive traits:

The model for estimation of effects of period and season of birth on age at first conception and age at first calving was as given:

Where,

Yijk  =  Observations on age at first conception and age at first calving of kth animal born in ith period and jth season.

µ= Overall mean

Ai = Effect of ith  period of birth  (i=1, 2,……n)

Bj = Effect of jth  season of birth (j=1, 2 and 3)

eijk = Random error associated with normally independently distributed with mean 0 and variance 62.

Duncan’s multiple range test (DMRT) as modified by Kramer (1957) was used to make pair wise comparison among the least-squares means.

Results and Discussion

Age at First Conception

The overall least-squares means of AFCon in FG, IFG, FJG, IFJG and R group were 530.52 ± 8.35, 761.33 ± 10.66, 531.42 ± 6.60, 722.70 ± 8.64 and 798.06 ± 16.92 days, respectively (Table 2). The lower AFCon was observed in cows of F1 generation (FG and FJG) than F2 generation (IFG and IFJG). This might be due to hetrotic effect in F1 and gene segregation effect in interse (F2).

Table 1: Analysis of variance of prepartum reproductive traits in Gir crossbreds as affected by various factors

      Trait

 

Source of variation

 

d. f.

AFCon AFC
M.S.S. M.S.S.
FG
Period of birth 2 26498.49 27102.36
Season of birth 2 9434.40 11815.47
Error 162 11055.84 11215.14
IFG
Period of birth 4 319694.98** 311088.02**
Season of birth 2 38772.83 37645.77
Error 265 22209.90 21872.21
FJG
Period of birth 1 91961.32** 77390.31**
Season of birth 2 676.13 202.20
Error 112 4761.07 5051.17
IFJG
Period of birth 4 764322.37** 750998.27**
Season of birth 2 27466.93 31196.83
Error 375 21279.34 21521.09
R
Period of birth 2 50643.76 45841.29
Season of birth 2 25090.26 24611.55
Error 83 23264.70 23945.61

** = P<0.01

These results were in close agreement with Kamble (2015) reported in FG half bred and FJG triple cross. The lower AFCon than the present results was reported by Bhoite (1996) in JG, IFG and IFJG genetic groups. However, higher AFCon was noticed by Rafique et al. (2000) in HS halfbreds, Madhuri et al. (2009) in FJH and in IFJG genetic groups and Saha et al. (2010) in Karan Swiss. The period of birth had significant (P<0.01) influence on AFCon in IFG, FJG and IFJG groups (Table 1). Similar results were reported by Bhoite (1996) in Gir crossbreds, Rafique et al. (2000) in HF × Sahiwal crossbreds and Madhuri et al. (2009) in triple crossbred cows. Kamble (2015) reported significant effect in IFG and IFJG interbreds and non-significant in FG and FJG Gir crossbreds. The variations in AFCon might be due to influence of environmental factors. The variation due to season of birth in AFCon was non-significant in all the genetic groups (Table 1). These results were in agreement with Bhoite (1996) reported in FG, IFG, JG, FJG, IFJG, JFG, IJFG, BFG and IBFG genetic groups, Rafique et al. (2000) in HF × Sahiwal crossbred, Sattar et al. (2005) in Holstein Friesian, Madhuri et al. (2009) in Hariana triple cross cows and Kamble (2015) in FG, FJG, IFG and IFJG groups.

Though the differences due to season of birth were statistically non-significant the heifers of FG, FJG, IFJG and R genetic groups born during summer season had shorter AFCon than those born in rainy and winter season. The non-significant effect of season of birth on AFCon in all the groups revealed that they are efficient to tolerate seasonal changes. This might be due to fact that one of the parent in all crossbreds being indigenous might have contributed its inheritance for better adoption.

Age at First Calving

The overall least squares means of AFC in FG, IFG, FJG, IFJG and R genetic groups were 810.44 ± 8.41, 1040.64 ± 10.58, 809.88 ± 6.80, 1000.87 ± 8.69 and 1077.74 ± 17.17 days, respectively (Table 3).

These results were in accordance with Deokar (2003) reported in Gir crossbred, Jadhav (2011) in interse of FG and FJG and Shelar (2012) in 5/8 Gir triple cross (R). The lower AFC than the present results were reported by Garudkar (2015) in FJG triple cross and Jawale (2015) in 5/8 Gir triple cross (R). However, higher values of AFC were noticed by Sahana and Gurnani (2000) in HJT triple cross, Singh et al. (2002) in FH halfbred, Thombre et al. (2002) in HF x Deoni halfbred and Dahiya et al. (2003) in FH and FJH crossbreds. AFC was significantly (P<0.01) influenced by period of birth in IFG, FJG and IFJG genetic groups (Table 1). These results were in consonance with Dahiya et al. (2003) in Hariana crossbreds, Zol (2007) and Ambhore et al. (2016) in Phule Triveni, Jadhav (2009) in Gir crossbreds, Singh et al. (2011) in Vrindavani cows, Shelar (2012), Ekka et al. (2014) in Kankrej and Jawale (2015) in 5/8 Gir crossbred cows. However, results did not agreed with Sawant et al. (2006) in Khillar cows, Talape (2010) in Jersey crossbreds and Jadhav (2011) in FG halfbred.

 

Table 2: Least squares means of age at first conception (days) in Gir crossbreds

  GG   

 

Source

of variation

FG IFG FJG IFJG R
N Mean±SE   N Mean±SE   N Mean±SE   N Mean±SE   N Mean±SE
Population mean

(µ)

 

167 530.52±8.35   272 761.33±10.66   116 531.42±6.60   382 722.70±8.64   88 798.06±16.92
Period of birth Period of birth Period of birth Period of birth Period of birth
P1 : 1972-73 44 554.76±16.09 1980-86 76 698.20±17.12c 1975-77 68 502.23±8.61b 1977-83 109 653.31±13.98c 1994-99 28 822.02±28.90
P2 : 1974-75 57 527.55±14.06 1987-93 59 719.40±19.48bc 1978-80 48 560.61±10.05a 1984-90 125 609.24±13.20d 2000-05 34 826.64±26.99
P3 : 1976-77 66 509.25±12.97 1994-00 62 881.23±19.10a     1991-97 70 767.32±17.47b 2006 & above 26 745.53±31.99
P4

 

  2001-07 59 768.09±19.63b     1998-04 50 873.86±20.65a    
P5

 

  2008-15 16 739.71±37.52bc     2005 & above 28 709.75±27.60bc    
Season of birth Season of birth  

Season of birth

 

Season of birth Season of birth
S1  : Rainy

 

60 541.32±13.59 Rainy 80 736.76±18.30 Rainy 29 530.90±12.81 Rainy 119 719.63±13.84 Rainy 20 781.96±34.83
S2  : Winter

 

61

 

535.45±13.48 Winter 100 768.46±15.70 Winter 45 535.67±10.66 Winter 149 738.45±12.93 Winter 36 831.19±26.21
S3 : Summer

 

46 514.79±15.97 Summer 92 778.76±16.39 Summer 42 527.69±10.64 Summer 114

 

710.01±14.41

 

Summer 32

 

781.04±27.69

 

Means under each class in the same column with different superscripts differed significantly

 

Table 3: Least squares means of age at first calving (days) in Gir crossbreds

    GG

 

Source

of variation

FG IFG FJG IFJG R
N Mean±SE   N Mean±SE   N Mean±SE   N Mean±SE   N Mean±SE
Population mean

(µ)

 

167

 

810.44±8.41

 

 

 

 

272

 

1040.64±10.58

   

116

 

809.88±6.80

   

382

 

1000.87±8.69

   

88

 

1077.74±17.17

Period of birth Period of birth Period of birth Period of birth Period of birth
P1 : 1972-73 44 834.56±16.21 1980-86 76 980.22±16.99c 1975-77 68 783.10±8.87b 1977-83 109 931.34±14.06c 1994-99 28 1101.18±29.32
P2 : 1974-75 57 808.23±14.16 1987-93 59 996.97±19.33bc 1978-80 48 836.65±10.35a 1984-90 125 889.82±13.28d 2000-05 34 1104.35±27.39
P3 : 1976-77 66 788.54±13.06 1994-00 62 1159.27±18.95a       1991-97 70 1045.84±17.57b 2006 & above 26 1027.69±32.46
P4

 

    2001-07 59 1048.04±19.48b       1998-04 50 1151.64±20.77a      
P5

 

    2008-15 16 1018.70±37.23bc       2005 & above 28 985.69±27.76bc      
Season of birth Season of birth Season of birth Season of birth Season of birth
S1  : Rainy

 

 

60 821.79±13.69 Rainy

 

80 1016.63±18.16 Rainy 29 810.23±13.2 Rainy 119 999.01±13.91 Rainy 20 1061.06±35.33
S2  : Winter

 

 

61 816.92±13.57 Winter

 

100 1046.98±15.58 Winter 45 811.88±10.98 Winter 149

 

1017.20±13.01 Winter 36 1110.62±26.59
S3 : Summer

 

46 792.61±16.08 Summer 92 1058.31±16.27 Summer 42 807.52±10.96 Summer 114 986.39±14.49 Summer 32 1061.54±28.09

Means under each class in the same column with different superscripts differed significantly

 

The variation due to season of birth in AFC was non-significant in all the genetic groups (Table 1).  These results were in agreement with Sahana and Gurnani (2000) reported in Karan Fries cows, Dahiya (2003) in FH, JH, FJH and JFH genetic groups, Dubey and Singh (2005) in Sahiwal crossbred, Zol (2007) in Phule Triveni, Jadhav (2009) in Gir crossbred, Talape (2010) in Jersey crossbreds, Manoj et al. (2012) in Sahiwal, Shelar (2012) in 5/8 Gir (R) crossbred, Ekka et al. (2014) in Kankrej and Garudkar (2015) in FG, IFG, FJG and IFJG groups. Whereas, contradictory results were obtained by Dutt et al. (2002) in Hariana crossbreds, Varade (2002) in Jersey, Gaolao and Tharparkar cows, Ahmed et al. (2007) in HF x Zebu halfbreds, Hassan and Khan (2013) in Holstein crossbred cows and Kumar et al. (2016) in Ongole cow.

Although the effect of season of birth on AFC was non-significant, the lowest AFC was observed in heifers born during summer season (792.61 ± 16.08 days) in FG and rainy season (1016.63 ± 18.16 days) in IFG group. In FJG and IFJG group lowest AFC as 807.52 ± 10.96 days and 986.39 ± 14.49 days was observed in heifers born during summer season. In R group lowest AFC was noticed in heifers born in rainy season (1061.06 ± 35.33 days).

Conclusion

On the basis of results obtained from present study, it can be concluded that the FG half bred and FJG triple cross had better performance with respect to pre-partum reproduction traits over their Interse and 5/8 Gir crossbred. Period of birth had significant influence on both pre-partum traits of FJG and interse mated population of FG and FJG.

Acknowledgements

The authors extend their sincere thanks to MPKV, Rahuri for providing the facilities for conducting the present investigation.

References

  1. Ahmed MA, Teirab, AB, Musa LMA and Kurt JP. 2007. Milk production and reproduction traits of different grades of Zebu x Friesian crossbreds under semi-arid conditions. Tierz., Dummerstorf., 50 (3): 240-249.
  2. Ambhore GS, Singh A, Deokar DK, Gupta AK, Chakravarty AK, Singh RK and Singh M. 2016. Comparison of heritability estimates of first lactation traits by different methods in Phule Triveni cattle. Indian J. Anim. Sci., 86 (6): 676-681.
  3. Anonymous, 2016. Press Information Bureau, Ministry of Finance, Government of India. http://pib.nic.in/ retrieved on 4 march 2018.
  4. Bhoite UY. 1996. Comparative performance of economic traits of half breds, triple crosses of Gir and their interbred cows. Ph.D. Thesis submitted to M.P.K.V., Rahuri.
  5. Dahiya DS, Singh RP and Khanna AS. 2003. Genetic group differences and the effect of non-genetic factors in crossbred cattle for reproduction traits. Indian J. Anim. Res., 37 (1): 61-64.
  6. Dalal DS, Arora KC and Rathi SS. 1991. Evaluation of performance traits in half bred cattle. Indian J. Dairy Sci., 44 (2): 401-405.
  7. Deokar DK. 2003. System analysis for optimization of production in crossbred cattle. Ph.D. Thesis submitted to M. P. K. V., Rahuri.
  8. Dutt T, Bhushan B and Pandey HN. 2002. First lactation production and reproduction traits in half breds and three-breed interse Indian J. Anim. Sci., 72 (3):261-262.
  9. Ekka P, Gupta JP, Pandey DP and Shah RR. 2014. Effect of Non-Genetic Factors on First Lactation and Reproduction Traits in Kankrej Cattle of North Gujarat. Indian Vet. J., 91: 18-20
  10. Garudkar SR. 2015. Lifetime comparison of fertility and milk production in half bred and three breed crosses of Gir. Ph.D. Thesis submitted to M.P.K.V., Rahuri.
  11. Harvey WR. 1990. Least-squares analysis of data with unequal subclass numbers. ARS H-4, U. S. D.A., Washington.
  12. Hassan F and Khan MS. 2013. Performance of crossbred dairy cattle at military dairy farms in Pakistan. Anim. Plant. Sci., 23(3): 705-714.
  13. Jadhav PD. 2011. Generation wise comparative reproduction and production performance of HF x Gir and Phule Triveni synthetic cows. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis submitted to M.P.K.V., Rahuri.
  14. Jadhav VA. 2009. Generation wise breeding efficiency of HF x Gir. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis submitted to M.P.K.V., Rahuri.
  15. Jawale 2015. Comparative reproduction performance of 5/8 Gir crossbred and Phule Triveni. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis submitted to M.P.K.V., Rahuri.
  16. Kamble SS. 2015. Estimation of genetic, phenotypic and environmental trends for economic traits in Gir crossbred cattle. D. Thesis submitted to the M.P.K.V., Rahuri.
  17. Kramer CY. 1957. Extension of multiple range test to group correlated adjusted mean. 13: 13-20.
  18. Kumar A, Singh U, Singh R and Vinoo R. 2016. Genetic studies on production and reproduction traits of Ongole cattle at organized farms. Indian J. Anim. Sci., 86 (7): 826-830.
  19. Madhuri SB, Suman CL and Pandey HS. 2009. Reproduction and Production performance of three-breeds crosses in cattle. Indian J. Anim. Res., 43 (1): 32-36.
  20. Manoj M, Gandhi RS, Raja TV, Singh A and Sachdeva GK. 2012. Effect of Non Genetic Factors on First Lactation Production and Reproduction Performance in Sahiwal. Cattle Indian J. Dairy Sci. 65(3): 264-265.
  21. Patel JM and Dave AD. 1987. Body weight changes and growth pattern in Jersey x Kankrej and Holstein x Kankrej F1 Indian J. Anim. Res., 21(2): 97-101.
  22. Prabhukumar V, Rao CH, Venkatramaian A and Naidu KM. 1990. Genetic group differences in the performance of the various crosses of ongole with Friesian, Brown Swiss and Jersey breeds. Indian J. Dairy. Sci., 43(1): 46-50.
  23. Rafique M, Chohan KR and Chaudhry QZ. 2000. Factors affecting age at maturity and age at first conception in Holstein-Friesian × Sahiwal crossbreds. Pakistan Vet. J., 20 (1): 40-42.
  24. Saha S, Joshi BK and Singh A. 2010. Performance of karan Swiss cattle at different levels of exotic inheritance. Indian J. Dairy Sci., 63(6): 452-454.
  25. Sahana G and Gurnani M. 2000. Performance of crossbred cattle and comparison of sires evaluation methods under organized farm condition. Indian J. Anim. Sci., 70(4): 409-414.
  26. Sattar A, Mirza RH, Niazi AAK and Latif M. 2005. Productive and reproductive performance of Holstein-Friesian cows in Pakistan. Pakistan Vet. J., 25 (2): 75-81.
  27. Sawant VS, Jagtap DZ, Deokar DK and Garkar RM. 2006. Reproductive traits and breeding efficiency of Khillar cow. Indian J. Anim. Sci., 76 (2): 141-142.
  28. Shelar MC. 2012. Studies on breeding efficiency of 5/8 Gir crossbred cows. M.Sc (Agri.) Thesis submitted to M. P. K. V., Rahuri.
  29. Singh RR, Dutt T, Kumar A, Tomar AKS and Singh M. 2011. Evaluation of production and reproduction traits in Vrindavani cattle. Indian J. Anim. Sci., 81 (3):296-298
  30. Singh K, Khanna AS and Jaiswal UC. 2002. Genetic and non-genetic factors affecting reproduction traits in crossbred cattle. Indian J. Anim. Res., 36 (2): 90-93.
  31. Statistical Analysis System. (SAS) 2013. Statistical Analysis System User’s guide: Release 9.2. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC, USA.
  32. Talape SK. 2010. Studies on production performance and breeding efficiency of Jersey crossbreds maintained at Panjarpole Ahmednagar. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis submitted to M.P.K.V., Rahuri.
  33. Thombare BM, Mitkari KR, Gujar BV and Padghan PV. 2002. Factors affecting reproductive traits in Deoni and Holstein Friesian x Deoni halfbreeds (F1). Indian J. Anim. Res., 36(2):141-143.
  34. Varade PK, Khire DW, Ali SZ and Kuralkar SV. 2002. Effect of genetic and non-genetic factors on productive and reproductive traits in Jersey crossbred cows. Indian J. Anim. Prod. Mgmt., 18 (12): 38-40.
  35. Zol SR. 2007. Generation wise breeding efficiency in Phule Triveni at organized farm. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis submitted to, M.P.K.V., Rahuri.
Full Text Read : 1445 Downloads : 280
Previous Next

Open Access Policy

Close