ABSTRACT
The Standardized Performance Analysis (SPA) process can be an important business analysis activity. This article outlines the important considerations in terms of the process, necessary data, and interpretations and limitations of SPA measures of performance. A case ranch example is used to illustrate the SPA process.
Subject(s)
Agriculture/economics , Animal Husbandry/economics , Animal Husbandry/standards , Cattle , Financial Management/standards , Accounting/statistics & numerical data , Agriculture/organization & administration , Agriculture/statistics & numerical data , Animals , Cattle/growth & development , Female , Financial Management/statistics & numerical data , Forms and Records Control , Income/statistics & numerical data , Male , Quality Control , Reference Standards , Software , United StatesABSTRACT
The objectives of this study were to determine 1) the effect of bull:heifer ratio on reproductive performance and associated costs and return on heifers in synchronized estrus and 2) the effect of estrus synchronization on reproductive performance and economic variables, in a multiple-sire, pasture breeding situation. Eight hundred yearling beef heifers and 28 mature, sexually experienced beef bulls were allotted to four treatments (two replicates per treatment) at bull:heifer ratios of 2 per 100 (1:50; Treatment 1), 2 per 100 (1:50; Treatment 2), 4 per 100 (1:25; Treatment 3), and 6 per 100 (1:16; Treatment 4). Treatment 1 (control) used nonsynchronized heifers, whereas heifers in Treatments 2, 3, and 4 were synchronized using the 33-d melengestrol acetate (MGA)-prostaglandin F2 alpha (PGF2 alpha) program. Pregnancy results after a 28-d breeding season indicate that there may be a limit to how many estrus-synchronized heifers bulls can impregnate. Treatment 2 showed a 6% decrease (P < .10) in pregnancy rate (77%) compared with Treatment 3 (83%), indicating that the bulls probably were not able to service all the synchronized heifers. Treatments 3 and 4 had similar pregnancy rates (83 and 84%, respectively). Treatment 4 had a 3-d advantage (P < .01) over Treatment 3 in average day of conception. However, based on economic analysis, Treatment 3 exhibited greater returns. Estrus synchronization failed to provide any advantage in pregnancy rate or day of conception. For unknown reasons, the control, nonsynchronized heifers cycled and conceived as if they were synchronized.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
