Tropical Animal Health and Production

, Volume 51, Issue 7, pp 1829–1837 | Cite as

Conception rates and calving intervals of different beef breeds at a farm in the semi-arid region of Namibia

  • Alaster Samkange
  • Erick Kandiwa
  • Borden Mushonga
  • Alec Bishi
  • Erdwin Muradzikwa
  • Oscar Madzingira
Regular Articles


A retrospective study from 2004 to 2017 investigated the effect of bull age, cow age and breed on conception rates, and calving intervals of beef cattle at Neudamm farm, Khomas region, Namibia. Bulls ranging from 4 to 14 years of age were used to breed cows up to 17 years of age. A total of 1804 pregnancies were diagnosed in Afrikaner (81.8%), Nguni (14.1%), and Simmental (4.1%) cows. The overall conception rate of beef cattle during the study period was 71.7 ± 9.5%. The overall conception rate of the Nguni cows (78.3%) was significantly higher than that of the Afrikaner (70.9%) and the Simmental cows (64.9%) (p < 0.05). The age of sires had no effect on overall conception rate in all three breeds (p > 0.05). Afrikaner dams more than 10 years old had the least rate of conception (60.4%, p < 0.05) within that breed category. Nguni dams between four to 10 years had the greatest conception rate (86.5%, p < 0.05). Age of dams had no effect on conception rates in Simmental cattle (p > 0.05). The overall mean length of all calving intervals in the Nguni cows (366 ± 35 days) was significantly shorter than those of the Afrikaner cows (487 ± 62 days) and the Simmental cows (484 ± 110 days) (p < 0.05). The 2013 breeding season produced the highest overall conception rates (~ 85%), and the 2007 breeding season produced the lowest overall conception rate (~ 51%). From a fertility point of view, the Nguni breed seemed best suited for the semi-arid conditions which are prevalent in most of Namibia.


Conception rates Calving intervals Nguni Simmental Afrikaner Namibia 



The authors would like to thank the University of Namibia’s Neudamm Campus management for availing the data which was used in this research. The authors also wish to sincerely thank the University of Namibia for funding the publication of this manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Anon, 2008. Nguni cattle [WWW Document]. Anim. Heal. Compedium. URL (accessed 11.3.17).
  2. Argiris, A., Ondho, Y.S., Santoso, S.I., Kurnianto, E., 2018. Effect of Age and Bulls on Fresh Semen Quality and Frozen Semen Production of Holstein Bulls in Indonesia. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 119, 1–10. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baez, G.M., Barletta, R. V., Guenther, J.N., Gaska, J.M., Wiltbank, M.C., 2016. Effect of uterine size on fertility of lactating dairy cows. Theriogenology 85, 1357–1366. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Beukes, E.(2018). Farm manager, Neudamm farm. Personal communicationGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhagat, R.L., Gokhale, S.B., 2016. Studies on factors influencing conception rate in rural cattle. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 86, 550–552.Google Scholar
  6. Brameld, J.M., Greenwood, P.L., Bell, A.W., 2010. Biological Mechanisms of Fetal Development Relating to Postnatal Growth, Efficiency and Carcass Characteristics in Ruminants, in: Greenwood, P.L., Bell, A.W., Vercoe, P.E., Viljoen, G.J. (Eds.), Managing the Prenatal Environment to Enhance Livestock Productivity. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, New York, pp. 93–113.Google Scholar
  7. Buzanskas, M.E., Grossi, D. do A., Ventura, R.V., Schenkel, F.S., Chud, T.C.S., Stafuzza, N.B., Rola, L.D., Meirelles, S.L.C., Mokry, F.B., Mudadu, M. de A., Higa, R.H., da Silva, M.V.G.B., de Alencar, M.M., Regitano, L.C. de A., Munari, D.P., 2017. Candidate genes for male and female reproductive traits in Canchim beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 8.
  8. Carvalheira, J.G., Blake, R.W., Pollak, E.J., Van Soest, P.J., 1995. Comparison of Landim and Africander cattle in southern Mozambique: II. Female fertility, reproduction, and beef offtake. J. Anim. Sci. 73, 3527. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Corah, L., Lusby, K., 2000. Factors Influencing Conception Rate (No. BCH-2210), Beef Cattle Handbook. Madison.Google Scholar
  10. Cordeiro, M.B., Peres, M.S., de Souza, J.M., Gaspar, P., Barbiere, F., Sá Filho, M.F., Filho, M.M., Dinardi, R.N., Nogueira, G.P., Mesquita, F.S., Pugliesi, G., Martins, T., Binelli, M., Membrive, C.M.B., 2015. Supplementation with sunflower seed increases circulating cholesterol concentrations and potentially impacts on the pregnancy rates in Bos indicus beef cattle. Theriogenology 83, 1461–1468. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. D’Occhio, M.J., Baruselli, P.S., Campanile, G., 2018. Influence of nutrition, body condition, and metabolic status on reproduction in female beef cattle: A review. Theriogenology 125, 277–284. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. De Rensis, F., Garcia-Ispierto, I., Lopez-Gatius, F., 2015. Seasonal heat stress: Clinical implications and hormone treatments for the fertility of dairy cows. Theriogenology 84, 659–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Diskin, M.G., Kenny, D.A., 2014. Optimising reproductive performance of beef cows and replacement heifers. Animal 8, 27–39. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Ducháček, J., Biniová, Z., Stádník, L., Ptáček, M., Doležalová, M., Beran, J., 2015. Effect of breed on basic characteristics of bull semen immediately after collection. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 50, 51.Google Scholar
  15. Greenwood, P., Clayton, E., Bell, A., 2017. Developmental programming and beef production. Anim. Front. 7, 38. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grobler, S.M., Scholtz, M.M., Greyling, J.P.C., Neser, F.W.C., 2014. Reproduction performance of beef cattle mated naturally following synchronization in the Central Bushveld bioregion of South Africa. South African J. Anim. Sci. 44, S70–S74. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Júnior, D.R.O., Dias, E.A.R., Campanholi, S.P., Monteiro, F.M., Paz, C.C.P., Mercadante, M.E.Z., 2016. Relationship between scrotal circumference of nellore bulls and cow pregnancy rate in natural mating. Bol. Indústria Anim. 73, 319–328. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kamga-Waladjo, A.R., Tebug, S.F., Keambouc, T.C., Ndambid, O.A., Ndukume, J.A., Thiam, O., 2011. Factors influencing conception rates of cameroonian zebu cattle (Bos indicus) following oestrus synchronisation and artificial insemination. Anim. Heal. Prod. 59, 227–232.Google Scholar
  19. Kandiwa, E., Madzingira, O., Mushonga, B., Samkange, A., Bishi, A., Nyoni, N., 2017. A 13-year retrospective study of the beef and dairy cattle losses at Neudamm Farm in the Khomas region of Namibia. Alexandria J. Vet. Sci. 55, 8. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kastelic, J.P., 2013. Male involvement in fertility and factors affecting semen quality in bulls. Anim. Front. 3, 20–25. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lemma, A., Shemsu, T., 2015. Effect of age and breed on semen quality and breeding soundness evaluation of pre-service young bulls. J. Reprod. Infertil. 6, 35–40. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mendelsohn, J., Jarvis, A., Roberts, C., Robertson, T., 2002. Atlas of Namibia. A Portrait of the Land and its People. David Philip Publishers, Cape Town. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mir, M.A., Naha, B.C., Valsalan, J., Veterinary, K., Patil, C., Sciences, A., 2015. Optimizing age of bull at first use in relation to fertility of Murrah breeding bulls. Vet. World 8, 518–522. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Mollah, M.F.K., Gofur, M.R., Asaduzzaman, K.M., Bhuiyan, M.M.U., 2015. Conception rate of non-descript Zebu cows and its attributing factors in Bangladesh. Res. J. Vet. Sci. 8, 42–51. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Moorad, J.A., Nussey, D.H., 2016. Evolution of maternal effect senescence. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 113, 362–367. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Mushonga, B., Chiwome, B., Kandiwa, E., 2017a. Persistent corpus luteum in a 9 year-old Afrikaner cow: a case report. Glob. Vet. 18, 146–150.Google Scholar
  27. Mushonga, B., Twiyizeyimna, S., Habarugira, G., Kandiwa, E., Chinyoka, S., Samkange, A., Bishi, A., 2017b. Study of incidence of gross urogenital lesions and abnormalities on does slaughtered at Nyagatare slaughterhouse, Eastern Province, Rwanda. J. Vet. Med. 2017, 1–7. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mwai, O., Hanotte, O., Kwon, Y.J., Cho, S., 2015. African indigenous cattle: unique genetic resources in a rapidly changing world. Asian-Australasian J. Anim. Sci. 28, 911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nava-Trujillo, H., Hernández, A., Hernández-Fonseca, H., Soto-Belloso, E., Perea-Ganchou, F., 2005. 154 effects of the breed and season on the fertility of tropical dual purpose cows. Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 18, 184–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nishimwe, K., Bizimana, J., Manishimwe, R., Ayabagabo, J., Byukusenge, M., Habimana, R., Bareeba, F., 2015. Factors affecting the pregnancy rate in small scale dairy farms after the artificial insemination in rural area, Rwanda. Int. J. Livest. Res. 5, 19. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Noseir, W.M., 2013. Disorders of the postpartum bovine uterus: A Literature Review. MRVSA Wael MB. Noseir 2, 32–42.Google Scholar
  32. Pagthinathan, M., Dasinaa, S., Nafees, M.S.M., Ramees, M.L.M., 2016. Effects of environmental and animal factors on conception rate at the time of insemination of Shahiwal cattle in dry zone of Sri Lanka [WWW Document]. E-Repository.Google Scholar
  33. Pala, A., Mccraw, R., 2005. Replacement heifer selection in a beef cattle herd. Am. J. Appl. Sci. 2, 542–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Parr, M.H., Crowe, M.A., Lonergan, P., Evans, A.C.O., Fair, T., Diskin, M.G., 2015. The concurrent and carry over effects of long term changes in energy intake before insemination on pregnancy per artificial insemination in heifers. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 87–94.Google Scholar
  35. Perea F., Soto E., Hernández H., González D., Palomares R., De Ondiz A., González C., 2006. Monthly variation of fertility and oestrus frequency in crossbred dual-purpose cows in three agroecological areas of the South American tropics. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 38, 353–363. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Perry, G., 2005. Factors Affecting Breeding Success, in: The Range Beef Cow Symposium XIX. Rapid City, South Dakota, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
  37. Ramsay, J.M., 2017. Maximizing Use of an Extension Beef Cattle Data Set : Part 2 — Reproductive Rates. J. Ext. 55, 1–110.Google Scholar
  38. Rawat, S., Nain, A.., Roy, S., 2014. Biometeorological aspects of conception rate in cattle. J. Agrometeorol. 16, 116–120.Google Scholar
  39. Sakatani, M., Balboula, A.Z., Yamanaka, K., Takahashi, M., 2012. Effect of summer heat environment on body temperature, estrous cycles and blood antioxidant levels in Japanese Black cow. Anim. Sci. J. 83, 394–402. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Sanders, J., 2012. Productive Longevity in Beef Cows, in: BIF Meeting. Houston, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
  41. Schoeman, S.J., 1989. Recent research into the production potential of indigenous cattle with special reference to the Sanga. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 19.Google Scholar
  42. Stangroom, J., 2018. Social Science Statistics [WWW Document]. Soc. Sci. Stat. URL (accessed 11.2.17).
  43. Strydom, P.E., 2008. Do indigenous Southern African cattle breeds have the right genetics for commercial production of quality meat? Meat Sci. 80, 86–93. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Thirunavukkarasu, M., Kathiravan, G., 2009. Factors affecting conception rates in artificially inseminated bovines. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 79, 871–875.Google Scholar
  45. Titterington, F.M., Lively, F.O., Dawson, S., Morrison, S.J., 2016. The effects of breed , month of parturition , and progeny gender on beef cow fertility. Adv. Anim. Biosci. 8, s67–s71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Toledo-Alvarado, H., Cecchinato, A., Bittante, G., 2017. Fertility traits of Holstein, Brown Swiss, Simmental, and Alpine Grey cows are differently affected by herd productivity and milk yield of individual cows. J. Dairy Sci.
  47. Upadhyay, V.K., Tomar, A.K.S., Patel, B.H.M., 2015. Effect of early weaning on milking behaviour , production and reproduction of Tharparkar cows. Indian J. Dairy Sci. 68, 477–482.Google Scholar
  48. Utt, M.D., 2016. Prediction of bull fertility. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 169, 37–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural ResourcesUniversity of NamibiaWindhoekNamibia
  2. 2.WindhoekNamibia

Personalised recommendations