Economics of Estrus Synchronization and Artificial Insemination:

Fewer than 10% of the beef cows in the United States are bred by artificial insemination (AI) each year. There are several reasons why AI isn’t used extensively, including the lack of adequate facilities and lack of knowledge concerning calculating costs and profits. Many producers don’t have adequate information to make the decisions regarding return on investment and profitability when considering using AI.

Les Anderson, a researcher at the University of Kentucky, compared the costs and benefits of using estrus synchronization and AI (ESAI) vs. natural service, for both short-term and long-term return on investments. He made his comments at a reproductive symposium hosted by the National Association of Animal Breeders (NAAB) May 28, 2003. The symposium preceded the 35th Annual Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) Meeting in Lexington, Ky.

To discover the short-term return on investment using ESAI, researchers developed a trial to determine if the implementation of ESAI is cost-efficient and enhances the producer’s net return. Cows were divided into two groups for the study. Two-thirds of the cows were placed on an estrus synchronization program using a fixed-time insemination called Co-Synch. The remaining cows were bred by natural service. Click on the link for the proceedings paper for a full explanation on the setup of the study.

The results of the trial showed more cows calved using the Co-Synch program (90%) than in the natural service group (81%); and more cows calved in the first 30 days of the calving season using Co-Synch (85%) than natural service (62%).

Revenue increased by $99.62 per cow in the Co-Synch group with an investment of $29.88 per cow. Therefore the total return on investment using ESAI was $69.74.

Data collected from 1991-2003 served as the baseline for a trial to determine the long-term return on investment for using ESAI. During this time, 45 cows were exposed to a 60-day natural service season using two bulls per year. The breeding system was then changed to determine the effects of ESAI. At the end of this study, researchers found that the incorporation of ESAI increased the percentage of cows that calved, the percent of calf crop weaned and the average weaning weight of the steer calves (see Table 9 in the proceedings paper for full results). This trial is ongoing, but Anderson says he expects the long-term benefits of using ESAI will continue to show that the increases in production efficiency lead to an increase in profitability.
 
Anderson concluded that based on the study there is a dramatic difference between using ESAI and natural service, even in the first year. He found that ESAI is profitable in the short- and long-term, and returns could be greatly increased if producers took advantage of programs that make value-added products.

To access the proceedings paper or the audio of Anderson’s presentation, visit the newsroom.
— by Stephanie Veldman