Publicación:
Síndrome de la vaca repetidora de celo

dc.contributor.advisorMejia Gallego, Andres
dc.contributor.authorMontoya Marin, Monica Marcela
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-19T14:36:39Z
dc.date.available2020-03-19T14:36:39Z
dc.date.issued2020-03-16
dc.descriptionEn la medida que la tecnificación de las explotaciones ganaderas alcanza niveles de mayor exigencia para lograr un alto desempeño productivo, los aspectos reproductivos se convierten en una temática fundamental para que dichas explotaciones alcancen un buen comportamiento económico, convirtiéndose en un aspecto prioritario el recolección de datos o constitución de registros (Fecha de parto, días abiertos, presentación nuevo celo, número de servicios, etc.) los cuales nos servirán posteriormente para su análisis y evaluación, lo que nos va a llevar a encontrar la dimensión y solución de dicho problema reproductivo ya que los costos económicos como el valor de las pajillas, días abiertos, mano de obra, sal mineralizada, medicamentos veterinarios, etc. Son factores altamente incidente en el desempeño productivo de la finca. Podemos definir una vaca como repetidora (VR) como aquella que aparentemente está sana, que pasa desapercibida al examen ginecológico del Médico Veterinario, que ha tenido un parto como mínimo en la vida y que después de tres inseminaciones o montas sucesivas, con ciclos estrales de duración normal demostrando su buen funcionamiento reproductivo, no queda preñada (1). Según (Bruyas y col., 1993) las causas para que una vaca se considere como vaca repetidora (VR), podemos ubicarlas como multifactoriales, estableciéndose influencias maternas, paternas o medioambientales; Desde alteraciones en el ambiente uterino, deficiente manejo nutricional, épocas de elevada temperatura, fallas en la detección del celo o un inadecuado momento para la inseminación.es
dc.description.abstractAs the modernization of livestock farms reaches levelsmore demanding to achieve a high productive performance, the aspectsreproductive issues become a fundamental theme for these farms achieve good economic performance, becoming apriority aspect data collection or constitution of records (Date ofdelivery, open days, presentation of new heat, number of services, etc.) which they will later be used for analysis and evaluation, which will lead us to find the dimension and solution of this reproductive problem since the costs economic like the value of straws, open days, labor, saltmineralized, veterinary drugs, etc. They are highly incident factors in the productive performance of the farm. We can define a cow as repeater (VR) as one that apparently she is healthy, who goes unnoticed at the gynecological examination of the Veterinary Doctor, that you have had at least one birth in your life and that after three inseminations or successive mounts, with estrous cycles of normal duration demonstrating its good reproductive functioning, it is not pregnant (1). According to (Bruyas et al., 1993) the reasons for a cow to be considered as a cow repeater (VR), we can locate them as multifactorial, establishing maternal, paternal or environmental influences; Since alterations in the uterine environment, poor nutritional management, times of high temperature, failure to detect heat or an inappropriate time for insemination.es
dc.description.emailmonica.montoyam@campusucc.edu.coes
dc.format.extent20 p.es
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationMontoya Marin, M. M. (2016). Síndrome de la vaca repetidora de celo. (Tesis de pregrado). Recuperado de: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12494/17187es
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12494/17187
dc.publisherUniversidad Cooperativa de Colombia, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Medicina Veterinaría y Zootecnia, Ibaguées
dc.publisher.placeIbaguées
dc.publisher.programMedicina veterinaria y zootecniaes
dc.relation.referencesLesmes L. 2014. La Vaca Repetidora (Vr) Y Alternativas De Apoyo. Art Tecnicos PROVET: 1-4.es
dc.relation.referencesChenoweth P. 2012. Reproductive Science in the Global Village. Reprod Domest Anim. 47(s4):52-8.es
dc.relation.referencesSakaguchi M. 2011. Practical aspects of the fertility of dairy cattle. J Reprod Dev. 57(1):17-33es
dc.relation.referencesWalsh SW, Williams EJ, Evans AC. 2011. A review of the causes of poor fertility in high milk producing dairy cows. Anim Reprod Sci. 123(3-4):127-38.es
dc.relation.referencesNaveda R. 2005. Como prevenir el problema de las vacas repetidoras. Facultad de ciencias veterinarias. Maracaibo, Venezuelaes
dc.relation.referencesMotta JL, Waltero I, Abeledo MA. 2013. Prevalencia de anticuerpos al virus de la Diarrea Viral Bovina, Herpesvirus bovino 1 y Herpesvirus bovino 4 en bovinos y búfalos en el Departamento de Caquetá, Colombia. Rev Salud Anim. 5(3):174-181. 8es
dc.relation.referencesMartínez-Contreras A, Moreno-Figueredo G, CruzCarrillo A. 2013. Actualización de la neosporosis bovina. Conexión Agropecuaria. 2(1):49-66es
dc.relation.referencesAzawi OI, Omran SN, Hadad JJ. 2008. A Study on Postpartum Metritis in Iraqi Buffalo Cows: Bacterial Causes and Treatment. Reprod Dom Anim. 43:556 565es
dc.relation.referencesRabbani RA, Ahmad I, Lodhi L, Ahmad N, Muhammad G. 2010. Prevalence of various reproductive disorders and economic losses caused by genital prolapse in buffaloes. Pak Vet J. 30:44-8.es
dc.relation.references. Hanafi EM, Ahmed WM, El Khadrawy HH, Zabaal MM 2011. An Overview on Placental Retention in Farm Animals. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research. 7(5):643-651.es
dc.relation.referencesVale WG, Minervino AHH, Neves KAL, Morini AC, Coelho, JAS. 2013. Buffalo under threat in Amazon Valley, Brazil. Buffalo Bulletin. 32(1)1:121-131.es
dc.relation.referencesSingh M, Chaudhari BK, Singh JK, Singh AK, Maurya PK. 2013. Effects of thermal load on buffalo reproductive performance during summer season. J Biol Sci. 1(1):1-8.es
dc.relation.referencesViera RVG, Blake MdlCS, Senra SAS, Viera GEG, Rodríguez LMC, de Loyola Oriyes C, et al. 2012. Influencia de la estrategia de pariciones anuales en la eficiencia bioeconómica de microvaquerías en una empresa pecuaria. I. Concentración de partos en lluvia y seca. Rev Prod Anim. 24(1):1-6.es
dc.relation.referencesIdrovo TL, 2016. Evaluación de la tasa de preñez en vacas repetidoras con la aplicación de eCG al momento de la inseminación artificial. Rev. UPSes
dc.relation.referencesFray, M.D.; Mann, G.E.; Clarke, M.C.; Charleston, B. 1999. Bovine viral diarrhea virus: Its effects on estradiol, progesterone and prostaglandin secretion in the cow. Theriogenol 51:1533-1546es
dc.relation.referencesGonzalez, C.; Soto, E.; Goicochea, J.; Gonzalez, R.; Soto, G. 1988. Identificación de los factores causales y control del anestro en la ganadería mestiza de doble propósito. Premio Banco Consolidado. LUZ-GIRARZ. Maracaibo. Venezuela. 90 pp.es
dc.relation.references. Barbu, T.; Rus, I. 1980. Treatment of the repeat breeding syndrome in cows. Rev de Cresterea Animaletor: 12:39-42.es
dc.relation.references. Chetty, Av.; Rao, Ar. 1987. Incidence of infertility among crossbred cattle of chittoor district. Livestock-Adviser. 45-48 ppes
dc.relation.referencesGupta, R.C.; Sinha, A.K.; Krishnaswamy, A. 1983. Studies on the efficacy of some post-service intrauterine infusions on the conception rate of repeat breeding cattle. Theriogenol 20(5): 559-564es
dc.relation.referencesRao, Avn.; Kotayya, K. 1980. Incidence and causes of repeat breeding among cattle and buffaloes under field conditions of Andhra Pradesh. Indian J of Anim Health 7:121-124.es
dc.relation.referencesStolla, R.; Hueckmann-Voss, F. 1991. Studies on the etiology and treatment of the repeat breeding syndrome in cattle. Wiener Tierarztliche Monatsschrift. 337-339 ppes
dc.relation.references. Boitor, I.; Muntean, M. 1980. Laboratory and therapeutic studies of puerperal endometritis and repeat breeding in the cow. Zootehnie si Medicina Veterinaria Bul Instit Agron Cluj Napoca 48: 111-114 ppes
dc.relation.referencesGonzalez-Stagnaro, C. 2001. Reproducción bovina. Fundación GIRARZ. Ediciones Astro Data.C.A. Capitulo XIV; 205-220ppes
dc.relation.referencesGreen, M.P., Leadgard, A.M., Beaumont, S.E., Berg, C. McNatty, K.P., Peterson, A.J., Back, P.J. 2011. Long-term alteration of folicular steroid concentrations in relation to subclinical endometritis in postpartum dairy cows. J. Anim. Sci. 89: 3551-3560es
dc.relation.referencesLeBlanc, S.J. 2008. Postpartum uterine disease and dairy herd reproductive performance: A review. The veterinary journal 176:102-114es
dc.relation.referencesGilbert R.O, Shin S.T, Guard C.L, Erb H.N, Frajblat M. 2005. Prevalence of endometritis and its effects on reproductive performance of dairy cows. Theriogenology. 64:1879-1888es
dc.relation.referencesKasimanickam R, Duffield T.F, Foster R.A, Gartley C.J, Leslie K.E, Walton J.S, Johnson W.H. 2004. Endometrial cytology and ultrasonography for the detection of subclinical endometritis in postpartum dairy cows. Theriogenology. 62:9-23.es
dc.relation.referencesSalasel B, Mokhtarib A, Taktazc T. 2010. Prevalence, risk factors for and impacto of subclinical endometritis in repeat breeder dairy cows. Theriogenology. 74: 1271-1278es
dc.relation.referencesGalvao K.N. 2012. Postpartum uterine diseases in dairy cows. Animal reproduction. 9: 290-296es
dc.relation.referencesLee J.I, Kim I.H. 2007. Pregnancy loss in dairy cows: the contributing factors, the effects on reproductive performance and the economic impact. J. Vet. Sci. 8:283-288.es
dc.relation.referencesPlontzke J, Madoz L.V, De la Sota R.L, Drillich M. 2010. Subclinical endometritis and its impacto on reproductive performance in grazing dairy cattle in Argentina. Animal reproduction Science. 122: 52.57es
dc.relation.referencesLeBlanc S, J. Duffield T, F. Leslie K,E. Walton J.S. 2002. Defining and diagnosing postpartum clinical endometritis and its impacto n reproductive performance in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 85: 2223-2236es
dc.relation.referencesGrunert E. Berchtold M. 1988. Infertilidad en la vaca. Montevideo: Hemisferio sures
dc.relation.referencesDominguez G. Magnasco M. Risco C. 2006. Effect of clinical endometritis on reproductive performance in Holstein cows in Argentina. Theriogenelogy 66:679-680.es
dc.relation.referencesSheldon I.M. Lewis G.S. LeBlanc S. Gilbert R.O 2006. Defining postpartum uterine disease in cattle. Theriogenology. 65: 1516.1530es
dc.relation.referencesBarlund C.S. Carruthers T.D. Waldner C.L. Palmer C.W. 2008. A comparison of diagnostic techniques for postpartum endometritis in dairy cattle. Theriogenology. 69: 714-723.es
dc.relation.referencesPrunner I. Wagener K. Pothmann H. 2014. Risk factors for uterine diseases on small- and médium- sized dairy farms determined by clinical,, bacteriological, and cytological examinations. Theriogenology. 82: 857-865es
dc.relation.referencesDe la Sota, R.L. Madoz, L.V. Albarracin D. 2012. Endometritis subclínica en vacas de tambo: diagnostico, prevalencia e impacto sobre la eficiencia reproductiva. Universidad Nacional de la Plataes
dc.relation.referencesDiskin MG, Morris DG. 2008. Embryonic and early foetal losses in cattle and other ruminants. Reprod Domest Anim;43 Suppl 2:260-7es
dc.relation.referencesBonDurant RH. 2007. Selected diseases and conditions associated with bovine conceptus loss in the first trimester. Theriogenology;68:461-473es
dc.relation.referencesDunne LD, Diskin MG, Sreenan JM. 2000. Embryo and foetal loss in beef heifers between day 14 of gestation and full term. Anim Reprod Sci;58:39-44es
dc.relation.references. Romano JE, Thompson JA, Kraemer DC, Westhusin ME, Forrest DW, Tomaszweski MA. 2007. Early pregnancy diagnosis by palpation per rectum. influence on embryo/fetal viability in dairy cattle. Theriogenology;67:486–93es
dc.relation.referencesMann GE, Lamming GE. 1999. The influence of progesterone during early pregnancy in cattle. Reprod Dom Anim;34:269-274es
dc.relation.references. Sangsritavog S, Combs DK, Sartori R, Armentano LE, Wiltbank MC. 2002. High feed intake increases liver blood flow and metabolism of progesterone and estradiol-17 â in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science;85:2831-2842es
dc.relation.referencesMorales RS, Hernández CJ, Rodríguez TG, Peña FR. 2000. Comparación del porcentaje de concepción y la función lútea en vacas de primer servicio, vacas repetidoras y vaquillas Holstein. Vet Méx;31:179-184es
dc.relation.referencesHernández CJ, Morales RJS. 2001. Falla en la concepción en el ganado lechero: Evaluación de terapias hormonales. Vet Méx;32:279-287es
dc.relation.references. Lopez H, Satter LD, Wiltbank MC. 2004. Relationship between level of milk production and estrous behavior of lactating dairy cows. Animal Reproduction Science;81:209-223.es
dc.relation.references. Lluen, G. 2008. Causas de infertilidad en vacas lecheras. Cajamarca, Universidad Nacional de Cajamarca. Facultad de medicina veterinariaes
dc.relation.referencesGonzález, J.M. 2006. Obstetriciaes
dc.relation.referencesSagbay, C. 2012. Efecto de la gonadotropina corionica equina (eGC) aplicada al momento de retirar el dispositivo de progesterona (P4) sobre el porcentaje de preñez en vacas Holstein post-parto. Cuenca, Ecuadores
dc.relation.referencesHernández CJ, Porras AA, Benítez S. Eficiencia de la detección de estros y niveles de progesterona al momento de la inseminación de vacas Holstein. Av en Inv Agropecuaria 1994;3:12-17es
dc.relation.referencesMann GE, Lamming GE. The influence of progesterone during early pregnancy in cattle. Reprod Dom Anim 1999;34:269-274.es
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccesses
dc.rights.licenseAtribuciónes
dc.subjectReproducciónes
dc.subjectBovinoes
dc.subjectVaca Repetidoraes
dc.subjectCeloes
dc.subjectInseminaciónes
dc.subject.classificationTG 2020 MVZ 17187es
dc.subject.otherReproductiones
dc.subject.otherBovinees
dc.subject.otherRepeating Cowes
dc.subject.otherInseminationes
dc.titleSíndrome de la vaca repetidora de celoes
dc.typeTrabajos de grado - Pregrado
dspace.entity.typePublication

Archivos

Bloque original
Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
No hay miniatura disponible
Nombre:
2020_sindrome_vaca_repetidora.pdf
Tamaño:
453.97 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descripción:
trabajo de grado
Bloque de licencias
Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
No hay miniatura disponible
Nombre:
license.txt
Tamaño:
4.23 KB
Formato:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Descripción: