Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-2l2gl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-25T14:43:14.086Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reproductive performance in a semi-wild cattle herd (Bos indicus)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

V. Reinhardt
V. Reinhardt
Affiliation:
Institut für Anatomie, Physiologie und Hygiene der Haustiere, Katzenburgweg 7, 53 Bonn, West Germany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Reproductive performance was assessed in a semi-wild Boran cattle herd living on a grassland ranch in Kenya. Male calves copulated with cows a long time after they were weaned naturally. Up to the age of 16 months they were prevented from mating by adult bulls. Female calves conceived at the average age of 25 months and they had their first calves at about 34 months. Calving interval ranged from 304 to 801 days and averaged 430 days. Calving interval of managed Boran cattle living on the same ranch as the semi-wild herd averaged 494 days with a range of 306–798 days. It is concluded that in herds which are permanently accompanied by adult males artificial weaning and the continuous shift of animals between different cattle groups is not a prerequisite for good reproductive performance.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 98 , Issue 3 , June 1982 , pp. 567 - 569
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Arave, C. W. & Albright, J. L. (1976). Social rank and physiological traits of dairy cows as influenced by changing group membership. Journal of Dairy Science 59, 974–981.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bouissou, M. F. & Hövels, J. (1976 a). Effet d'un contact précoce sur quelques aspects du comportement social des bovins domestiques. Biology of Behaviour 1, 17–36.Google Scholar
Bouissou, M. F. & Hövels, J. (1976 b). Effet des conditions d'élevage sur le comportement de génisses dans une situation de compétition alimentaire. Annales de Zootechnie 25, 213—219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuhrmann, R. (1965). Der Zebu (Bos taurus indicus) und seine Bedeutung für die Rinderzucht tropischer und subtropischer Gebiete. Zeilschrifl für Tierzüchiung und Zülchtungsbiologie 81, 101–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hünermund, G. (1969). Das individuelle und soziale Verhalten von Rindern bei Kamphaltung in Südwestafrika. Eine ethologische Studie. Veterinärmedizinische Dissertation, Giessen.Google Scholar
Koller, G. & Bogner, H. (1968). Die Haltung von Rindern zur Fleischnutzung, insbesondere von Mutterkühen, in Bayern. Bayerisches Landwirtschaftliches Jahrbuch 45, 714–762.Google Scholar
Lampkin, G. H. & Lampkin, K. (1960). Studies on the production of beef from zebu cattle in East Africa. I. A description of the Mugaga herd. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 55, 229–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porzig, E. & Wenzel, G. (1969). Verhalten der Milchkühe nach der Umstellung aus dem Abkalbestall in den Boxenlaufstall. Tierzucht 23, 535–537.Google Scholar
Porzig, E. (1977). Untersuchungen zur Gruppen- und Einzeltierumstellung von Milchkühen in industriemäβig produzierten Laufstallanlagen. Monatshefte für Veterinärmedizin 32, 7–11.Google Scholar
Reinhardt, V. & Reinhardt, A. (1981). Cohesive relationships in a cattle herd. Behaviour 77, 121–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schein, M. W., Hyde, C. E. & Fohrman, M. H. (1955). The effect of psychological disturbances on milk production in dairy cattle. In Proceedings of the Association of Southern Agricultural Workers 52nd Convention, pp. 79–80.Google Scholar
Sommer, H., Greuel, E. & Müller, W. (1976). Tierhygiene. Stuttgart: Verlag Eugen Ulmer.Google Scholar
Trail, J. C. M. & Gregory, K. E. (1981). Characterization of the Boran and Sahiwal breeds of cattle for economic characters. Journal of Animal Science 52, 1286–1295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar