Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-m58mf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-26T14:10:07.836Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Applications and cost benefits of sexed semen in pasture-based dairy production systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

S. T. Butler ,
I. A. Hutchinson ,
A. R. Cromie  and
L. Shalloo
S. T. Butler*
Affiliation:
Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
I. A. Hutchinson
Affiliation:
Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
A. R. Cromie
Affiliation:
Irish Cattle Breeding Federation, Highfield House, Bandon, Co. Cork, Ireland
L. Shalloo
Affiliation:
Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
*
† E-mail: stephen.butler@teagasc.ie
Get access

Abstract

Sexed semen technology is now commercially available in many countries around the world, and is primarily used in dairy cattle breeding. Sperm are sorted by flow cytometry on the basis of a 4% difference in DNA content between sperm containing X and Y chromosomes. Despite reliably producing a 90% gender bias, the fertility of the sexed semen product is compromised compared with conventional semen. The negative implications of the reduced fertility of sexed semen are amplified in seasonal systems of dairy production, as the importance of fertility is greater in these systems compared with year-round calving systems. A review of the literature indicates that conception rates (CR) to 1st service with frozen-thawed sexed semen are ~75% to 80% of those achieved with conventional frozen-thawed semen. Preliminary results from a large-scale field trial carried out in Ireland in 2013 suggest that significant improvements in the performance of sexed semen have been made, with CR of 87% of those achieved with conventional semen. The improved fertility of a sexed semen product that delivers a 90% gender bias has considerable implications for the future of breeding management in pasture-based dairy production systems. Sexed semen may facilitate faster, more profitable dairy herd expansion by increasing the number of dairy heifer replacements born. Biosecurity can be improved by maintaining a closed herd during the period of herd expansion. In a non-expansion scenario, sexed semen may be used to increase the value of beef output from the dairy herd. The replacement heifer requirements for a herd could be met by using sexed semen in the 1st 3 weeks of the breeding season, with the remaining animals bred to beef sires, increasing the sale value over that of a dairy bull calf. Alternatively, very short gestation sires could be used to shorten the calving interval. Market prices have a considerable effect on the economics of sexed semen use, and widespread use of sexed semen should be restricted to well managed herds that already achieve acceptable herd fertility performance.

Keywords

sexed semenfertilityseasonal-calvingdairybeef

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Archbold, H, Shalloo, L, Kennedy, E, Pierce, KM and Buckley, F 2012. Influence of age, body weight and body condition score before mating start date on the pubertal rate of maiden Holstein–Friesian heifers and implications for subsequent cow performance and profitability. Animal 6, 1143–1151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beukes, PC, Burke, CR, Levy, G and Tiddy, RM 2010. Using a whole farm model to determine the impacts of mating management on the profitability of pasture-based dairy farms. Animal Reproduction Science 121, 46–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bord, Bia. EU male calf prices. Retrieved November 8, 2013, from http://www.bordbia.ie/industryservices/information/cattle/pages/calves.aspx Google Scholar
Borchersen, S and Peacock, M 2009. Danish A.I. field data with sexed semen. Theriogenology 71, 59–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cerchiaro, I, Cassandro, M, Dal Zotto, R, Carnier, P and Gallo, L 2007. A field study on fertility and purity of sex-sorted cattle sperm. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 2538–2542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chebel, RC, Guagnini, FS, Santos, JEP, Fetrow, JP and Lima, JR 2010. Sex-sorted semen for dairy heifers: effects on reproductive and lactational performances. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 2496–2507.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeJarnette, JM, Nebel, RL and Marshall, CE 2009. Evaluating the success of sex-sorted semen in US dairy herds from on farm records. Theriogenology 71, 49–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeJarnette, JM, Nebel, RL, Marshall, CE, Moreno, JF, McCleary, CR and Lenz, RW 2008. Effect of sex-sorted sperm dosage on conception rates in Holstein heifers and lactating cows. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 1778–1785.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeJarnette, JM, McCleary, CR, Leach, MA, Moreno, JF, Nebel, RL and Marshall, CE 2010. Effects of 2.1 and 3.5×106 sex-sorted sperm dosages on conception rates of Holstein cows and heifers. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 4079–4085.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeJarnette, JM, Leach, MA, Nebel, RL, Marshall, CE, McCleary, CR and Moreno, JF 2011. Effects of sex-sorting and sperm dosage on conception rates of Holstein heifers: is comparable fertility of sex-sorted and conventional semen plausible? Journal of Dairy Science 94, 3477–3483.Google Scholar
Dematawena, CMB and Berger, PJ 1997. Effect of dystocia on yield, fertility, and cow losses and an economic evaluation of dystocia scores for Holsteins. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 754–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine (DAFM) 2010. A vision for Irish Agri-food and Fisheries. Food Harvest 2020. Retrieved June 8, 2012, from http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/media/migration/agri-foodindustry/foodharvest2020/2020FoodHarvestEng240810.pdf Google Scholar
De Vries, A, Overton, M, Fetrow, J, Leslie, K, Eicker, S and Rogers, G 2008. Exploring the impact of sexed semen on the structure of the dairy industry. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 847–856.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dillon, P, Crosse, S, Stakelum, G and Flynn, F 1995. The effect of calving date and stocking rate on the performance of spring-calving dairy cows. Grass and Forage Science 50, 286–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diskin, MG and Sreenan, JM 2000. Expression and detection of oestrus in cattle. Reproduction, Nutrition and Development 40, 481–491.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ettema, JF, Østergaard, S and Sørensen, MK 2011. Effect of including genetic progress in milk yield on evaluating the use of sexed semen and other reproduction strategies in a dairy herd. Animal 5, 1887–1897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frijters, ACJ, Mullaart, E, Roelofs, RMG, van Hoorne, RP, Moreno, JF, Moreno, O and Merton, JS 2009. What affects fertility of sexed bull semen more, low sperm dosage or the sorting process? Theriogenology 71, 64–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garner, DL, Gledhill, BL, Pinkel, D, Lake, S, Stephenson, D, Van Dilla, MA and Johnson, LA 1983. Quantification of the X- and Y-chromosome-bearing spermatozoa of domestic animals by flow cytometry. Biology of Reproduction 28, 312–321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Healy, AA, House, JK and Thomson, PC 2013. Artificial insemination field data on the use of sexed and conventional semen in nulliparous Holstein heifers. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 1905–1914.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herlihy, MM, Berry, DP, Crowe, MA, Diskin, MG and Butler, ST 2011. Evaluation of protocols to synchronize estrus and ovulation in seasonal calving pasture-based dairy production systems. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 4488–4501.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herlihy, MM, Crowe, MA, Berry, DP, Diskin, MG and Butler, ST 2013. Factors associated with fertility outcomes in cows treated with protocols to synchronize estrus and ovulation in seasonal-calving, pasture-based dairy production systems. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 1485–1498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hohenboken, WD 1999. Applications of sexed semen in cattle production. Theriogenology 52, 1421–1433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hutchinson, IA, Shalloo, L and Butler, ST 2013a. Expanding the dairy herd in pasture-based systems: the role for sexed semen use on virgin heifers. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 1312–1322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hutchinson, IA, Shalloo, L and Butler, ST 2013b. Expanding the dairy herd in pasture-based systems: the role of sexed semen use in virgin heifers and lactating cows. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 6742–6752.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
ICBF 2013. ICBF Active Dairy Bull List Spring 2013. Retrieved November 8, 2013, from http://www.icbf.com/wp/?page_id=206 Google Scholar
Johnson, LA, Flook, JP and Look, MV 1987. Flow cytometry of X and Y chromosome-bearing sperm for DNA using an improved preparation method and staining with Hoechst 33342. Gamete Research 17, 203–212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khalajzadeh, S, Nejati-Javaremi, A and Yeganeh, HM 2012. Effect of widespread and limited use of sexed semen on genetic progress and reproductive performance of dairy cows. Animal 6, 1398–1406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klinc, P, Frese, D, Osmers, H and Rath, D 2007. Insemination with sex sorted fresh bovine spermatozoa processed in the presence of antioxidative substances. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 42, 58–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Livestock Improvement Corporation (LIC) 2012. World first – sexed semen with near normal conception rates. Retrieved March 22, 2013, from http://www.lic.co.nz/lic_News_Archive.cfm?nid=413 Google Scholar
MacMillan, K 2012. The InCalf Project: improving reproductive performance of cows in Australian dairy herds. In Dairy cow fertility – reproductive performance for efficient pasture-based systems (ed. Butler ST), pp. 6–18. Teagasc, Oakpark Co., Carlow, Ireland.Google Scholar
Mathevon, M, Buhr, MM and Dekkers, JCM 1998. Environmental, management, and genetic factors affecting semen production in Holstein bulls. Journal of Dairy Science 81, 3321–3330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCullock, K, Hoag, DLK, Parsons, J, Lacy, M, Seidel, GE and Wailes, W 2013. Factors affecting economics of using sexed semen in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 6366–6377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McMillan, WH and Newman, MG 2011. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 71, 131–135.Google Scholar
Norman, HD, Hutchison, JL and Miller, RH 2010. Use of sexed semen and its effect on conception rate, calf sex, dystocia, and stillbirth of Holsteins in the United States. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 3880–3890.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olynk, NJ and Wolf, CA 2007. Expected net present value of pure and mixed sexed semen artificial insemination strategies in dairy heifers. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 2569–2576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roche, JF 2006. The effect of nutritional management of the dairy cow on reproductive efficiency. Animal Reproduction Science 96, 282–296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schenk, JL, Cran, DG, Everett, RW and Seidel, GE Jr 2009. Pregnancy rates in heifers and cows with cryopreserved sexed sperm: effects of sperm numbers per inseminate, sorting pressure and sperm storage before sorting. Theriogenology 71, 717–728.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seidel, GE 2003. Economics of selecting for sex: the most important genetic trait. Theriogenology 59, 585–598.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seidel, GE, Schenk, JL, Herickhoff, LA, Doyle, SP, Brink, Z, Green, RD and Cran, DG 1999. Insemination of heifers with sexed sperm. Theriogenology 52, 1407–1420.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seidel, JGE 2012. Sexing mammalian sperm – where do we go from here? Journal of Reproduction and Development 58, 505–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharpe, JC and Evans, KM 2009. Advances in flow cytometry for sperm sexing. Theriogenology 71, 4–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Veerkamp, RF, Dillon, P, Kelly, E, Cromie, AR and Groen, AF 2002. Dairy cattle breeding objectives combining yield, survival and calving interval for pasture-based systems in Ireland under different milk quota scenarios. Livestock Production Science 76, 137–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, PF 1995. Recent developments and concepts in the cryopreservation of spermatozoa and the assessment of their post-thawing function. Reproduction, Fertility and Development 7, 871–891.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weigel, KA 2004. Exploring the role of sexed semen in dairy production systems. Journal of Dairy Science 87 (suppl.), E120–E130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar