This document examines the use of estrous synchronization (ES) and artificial insemination (AI) compared to natural service (NS) in beef cattle herds of different sizes. The author conducted an economic analysis and found that for small herds of 13-25 head, ES/AI expenses exceeded returns from NS. However, for larger herds of 50 head, ES/AI expenses decreased due to distribution across more cattle and returns from higher weaning weights exceeded NS. While initial costs of ES/AI may outweigh benefits for small operations, the long term genetic improvement can eventually offset expenses for all herd sizes. Adoption of these techniques can improve herd performance over time even if not initially profitable.

1.
Using
Estrous
Synchroniza2on
and
Ar2ficial
Insemina2on
to
Increase
Compe2veness
and
Profitability
of
Beef
Farms
Dennis
J.
A2yeh,
Michael
J.
Baker1
and
Nancy
I.
Glazier2
1
Cornell
University
Department
of
Animal
Science
Senior
Extension
Associate,
2
Northwest
New
York
(NWNY)
Dairy,
Livestock
and
Field
Crops
Team
Extension
Support
Specialist
• Estrous
synchroniza2on
(ES)
allows
for
estrous
cycle
manipula2on
so
all
animals
come
into
heat
at
the
same
period
of
2me,
allowing
for
the
use
of
ar2ficial
insemina2on
(AI)
in
an
efficient
and
effec2ve
manner.
• ES
and
AI
of
beef
caVle
has
shown
to:
1.
increase
gene2c
quality
of
progeny
and
2.
be
economically
compe22ve
with
natural
service
(NS)
• While
this
technology
is
size
neutral,
it
has
not
been
well
adopted
in
the
beef
industry.
1. Evaluate
the
value
of
breeding
caVle
with
ES
and
AI
versus
NS
2. Assist
in
ar2ficially
breeding
caVle
3. Learn
to
AI
caVle
and
apply
estrous
synchroniza2on
protocols
4. Perform
daily
farm
tasks
such
as
feeding
caVle
and
fixing
fence
• Assump2ons
made
for
the
analysis:
1)
numeric
values
were
based
off
of
New
York
State
(NYS)
averages
and
current
market
prices,
2)
weaning
weight
was
the
only
Expected
Progeny
Difference
(EPD)
value
calculated,
3)
breeding
season
starts
early
in
the
year.
• Three
different
sized
herds
were
accounted
for
in
this
study:
1)
13
head
herd
(NYS
average),
25
head
herd
and
50
head
herd.
• Cow
and
calf
expenses
were
calculated
and
subtracted
from
the
calf
sale
receipts,
giving
the
net
return
from
NS
and
ES/AI.
• NS
and
ES/AI
calcula2ons
included
1st
and
2nd
services.
• Analysis
of
economics
between
NS
and
ES/AI
was
adapted
from
Mississippi
State
Extension
“Economic
Comparisons
of
Ar/ficial
Insemina/on
vs.
Natural
Ma/ng
for
Beef
Ca<le
Herds.”
• The
expenses
for
ES
and
AI
decreased
as
the
herd
size
increased.
This
results
from
the
distribu2on
of
expenses
over
more
head
of
caVle.
• Similarly,
calf
sale
receipts
and
net
return
increased
with
an
increase
in
herd
size.
Higher
returns
occurred
with
increased
herd
size
and
higher
weaning
weights
for
ES
and
AI
herds.
• The
expenses
of
ES
and
AI
were
greater
than
NS
with
the
13
and
25
head
herd
(Tables
1
and
2)
but
were
less
in
a
50
head
herd
(Table
4).
• Calf
receipts
and
net
returns
for
the
13
and
25
head
herd
were
less
than
the
NS
herds
(Tables
1
and
2)
but
50
head
herd
calf
receipts
and
net
returns
were
greater
than
NS
herds
(Table
4).
• Based
on
this
study,
using
ES
and
AI
for
smaller
herds
may
not
be
profitable
for
beef
producers.
However,
these
reproduc2ve
prac2ces
should
not
be
viewed
as
a
financial
burden,
but
as
a
means
to
improve
the
overall
performance
of
the
herd.
• With
2me,
the
value
of
gene2c
improvement
in
the
herd
can
outweigh
the
cost
of
ES
and
AI.
Introduc2on
Objec2ves
Discussion
Methods
Conclusion
Results
I
would
like
to
give
a
special
thanks
to
Dr.
David
Wilson
for
showing
me
the
ropes
on
his
beef
farm
and
Calvin
Crosby
for
teaching
me
to
ar2ficially
inseminate
caVle.
For
further
ques2ons,
contact
Dennis
A2yeh
(dja234@cornell.edu).
Acknowledgements
and
Contact
Informa2on
References
Mississippi
State
University
Extension
(2016).
Economic
Comparisons
of
Ar/ficial
Insemina/on
vs.
Natural
Ma/ng
for
Beef
Ca<le
Herds.
Publica2on
2468
(POD-­‐01-­‐16).
Table
1.
Budget
assump2ons
made
for
the
economic
analysis
of
NS
versus
ES
and
AI
Table
2.
Evalua2on
of
13
head
herd
for
NS
versus
ES
and
AI
Table
3.
Evalua2on
of
25
head
herd
for
NS
versus
ES
and
AI
Table
4.
Evalua2on
of
a
50
head
herd
for
NS
versus
ES
and
AI
AI
Technique
1.
3.
5.
7.
2.
4.
6.
8.