Department of Veterinary Science, University of Torino, 10095, Grugliasco, Italy.
Department of Dairy Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison 53705.
J Dairy Sci. 2020 Jun;103(6):5654-5661. doi: 10.3168/jds.2019-17658. Epub 2020 Apr 16.
Although hormonal synchronization programs can improve reproductive efficiency of dairy herds, some farmers question the economics of these programs based on the upfront cost of hormonal treatments as opposed to the economic value of the resulting reproductive performance. Our aim was to compare the economic impact of reproductive management programs that incorporate varying degrees of detection of estrus and timed artificial insemination (AI) in dairy herds with year-round calving in confinement total mixed ration systems. A reproductive economic analysis simulation model was used to compare the economic impact of pairs of reproductive management programs. We simulated sets of scenarios for 2 analyses. In the first analysis, we calculated the economic impact of switching from a Presynch-Ovsynch program to a Double-Ovsynch program that included a second PGF treatment during the Breeding-Ovsynch portion of the program (Double-Ovsynch+PGF). In the second analysis, we conducted a break-even analysis in which the cost of hormonal treatments was incrementally increased within various reproductive management programs. Our analyses revealed that a Double-Ovsynch+PGF program, the most intensive program evaluated, was more profitable than other programs compared, including a Presynch-Ovsynch program with 100% timed AI or a Presynch-Ovsynch program that incorporated detection of estrus, despite the higher upfront cost incurred by using more hormonal treatments. This advantage remained until the cost of hormones was increased 5 to 14 times current US market prices and 2 to 6 times current European market prices. The cost of GnRH had a greater impact on net profit gain than the cost of PGF. In conclusion, more intensive reproductive programs that use more hormonal treatments but result in substantially increased reproductive performance are more profitable than less intensive programs and remain so even if hormone prices are unusually high.
虽然激素同步程序可以提高奶牛场的繁殖效率,但一些农民基于激素处理的前期成本与由此产生的繁殖性能的经济价值相反,对这些程序的经济性提出了质疑。我们的目的是比较在全年舍饲全混合日粮系统中采用不同程度的发情检测和定时人工授精(AI)的繁殖管理程序对奶牛场的经济影响。使用繁殖经济分析模拟模型来比较两组繁殖管理程序的经济影响。我们模拟了两组场景的设置。在第一次分析中,我们计算了从同期发情-定时输精(P)程序转换为包括在发情-同期发情程序的 PGF 处理期间进行第二次 PGF 处理的双同期发情-定时输精(D)程序的经济影响(D+PGF)。在第二次分析中,我们进行了盈亏平衡分析,在各种繁殖管理程序中逐步增加激素处理的成本。我们的分析表明,与比较的其他程序相比,最密集的程序即 D+PGF 程序更有利可图,包括 100%定时 AI 的同期发情-定时输精(P)程序或纳入发情检测的同期发情-定时输精(P)程序,尽管使用更多激素处理会带来更高的前期成本。这种优势一直持续到激素成本增加到当前美国市场价格的 5 到 14 倍和当前欧洲市场价格的 2 到 6 倍。GnRH 的成本对净利润的影响大于 PGF 的成本。总之,使用更多激素处理但能显著提高繁殖性能的更密集的繁殖程序比不那么密集的程序更有利可图,即使激素价格异常高,这种情况仍然如此。