PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16726068

Controlling estrus in dairy cows - A comparative field study.

Abstract

Two prostaglandins, Estrumate and Dinolytic, and two progestagens, PRID and Norgestomet were compared for their effectiveness in controlling estrus in dairy cows. A total of 636 animals on 62 different farms in southern Lower Saxony/FRG were used in this study. After treatment with one of the four drugs a double fixed time insemination was always performed at 24-hour intervals. Later, an additional untreated animal was assigned to each group of four. The conception rate in the 734 cows which were inseminated and evaluated under standardized experimental conditions were ES, 51.0%; DY, 46.0%; PRID, 44.5%; NOR, 34.7% and untreated animals, 46.9%. When only those cows which had already calved were considered, the rates were 48.0%, 44.6%, 46.9%, 31.9% and 59.1% respectively. The time of treatment post-partum proved to be significant for the non-return rate 90 (P < 0.01) and the conception rate (P < 0.05). Treatment influenced the estrus cycle in all of the cows. Abnormal cycle length following treatment was observed in 50.7%, 52.0%, 41.6% and 52.8% of the cows in each group as compared to 12.1% in the untreated animals. After the third insemination at least 90% of the cows in each group had conceived. The effect of the various farms proved to be significant with regard to the insemination index (P < 0.01), NRR 90 (P < 0.05) and the conception rate (P < 0.05). All four drugs established their suitability for use under field conditions. Still, modifications in the treatment methods and the insemination regimen could lead to higher fertilization rates.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

H J Voss, W Holtz. 1985. Controlling estrus in dairy cows - A comparative field study.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0093-691x(85)90179-7

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗