Next Article in Journal
Genome Sequencing Reveals the Adaptation of Chickens to High Altitudes in Different Regions
Previous Article in Journal
Transferrin Receptor 2 in Canine Testicular Tumors: An Emerging Key Role in Seminomas
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Animals
Volume 15
Issue 2
10.3390/ani15020266
animals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Prospective Study of the Prevalence and Predictive Risk Factors of Repeat Breeder Syndrome in Dairy Cattle in the North of Spain

by
Sofía L. Villar
1,
Carlos C. Pérez-Marín
2,
Jacobo Álvarez
1,
Antía Acción
1,
Renato Barrionuevo
1,
Juan J. Becerra
1,3,
Ana I. Peña
1,
Pedro G. Herradón
1,3,
Luis A. Quintela
1,3,* and
Uxía Yáñez
1
1
Unit of Reproduction and Obstetrics, Department of Animal Pathology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela (USC), 27002 Lugo, Spain
2
Department of Animal Medicine and Surgery, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universidad de Córdoba, 14014 Córdoba, Spain
3
Instituto de Biodiversidade Agraria e Desenvolvemento Rural (IBADER), USC, Lugo Campus s/n, 27002 Lugo, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Animals 2025, 15(2), 266; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15020266
Submission received: 2 December 2024 / Revised: 26 December 2024 / Accepted: 17 January 2025 / Published: 18 January 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Cattle)
Review Reports Versions Notes

Simple Summary

The study addresses repeat breeder syndrome (RB), a significant reproductive issue in dairy cattle, where cows fail to conceive after three or more inseminations despite appearing healthy. The research aimed to identify risk factors contributing to RB in primiparous (first-time calving) and multiparous (multiple calvings) cows on dairy farms in northern Spain. Analyzing 2370 cows, the study identified critical risk factors such as body condition loss, reproductive pathologies (e.g., dystocia, endometritis), metabolic disorders (e.g., ketosis), lameness, and mastitis. For multiparous cows, delaying the first insemination postpartum reduced the RB risk. Seasonal effects showed fewer cases when calving occurred in summer or autumn. The findings suggest that addressing these factors through improved management, health monitoring, and breeding practices can enhance reproductive efficiency, lower costs, and support animal welfare. Therefore, reducing RB prevalence contributes to sustainable dairy farming and supports societal concerns about food production’s economic and environmental impacts.

Abstract

This study examined the prevalence and risk factors of repeat breeder syndrome (RB) in 2370 dairy cows in northern Spain. Data collected included the prevalence of postpartum pathologies, metabolic markers, and productive and reproductive parameters. The overall RB prevalence was 21.1%. In primiparous cows, the postpartum body condition loss (Odds Ratio (OR): 2.9–8.1, depending on severity), ketosis (OR: 3.5), lameness (OR: 3.4), clinical mastitis (OR: 4.2), dystocia (OR: 5.2), and endometritis (OR: 12.2) significantly increased the RB risk. Summer (OR: 0.4) or autumn (OR: 0.6) calvings reduced this likelihood compared to winter or spring calvings. In multiparous cows, risk factors included body condition loss (OR: 2.0), ketosis (OR: 4.3), lameness (OR: 2.5), clinical mastitis (OR: 4.2), dystocia (OR: 1.9), endometritis (OR: 6.2), metritis (OR: 1.38), and subclinical mastitis (OR: 1.9). A longer interval between calving and first postpartum insemination reduced the RB risk (OR: 0.99). Overall, metabolic and reproductive disorders were significant risk factors for RB across both cow groups, while seasonal calving and delayed insemination mitigated risk in primiparous and multiparous cows, respectively.

1. Introduction

Repeat breeder syndrome (RB) is one of the main reproductive issues that affects cattle dairy farms worldwide [1]. This syndrome includes those animals that have normal length estrous cycles (between 17 and 25 days), and palpation or ultrasound of the genital organs show no gross evidence of anatomical abnormality or existing inflammation, or persisting pathology, but they do not become pregnant after three or more artificial inseminations [2,3,4]. This disorder has been shown to be of multifactorial etiology in which several causes may converge simultaneously, making the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention at the farm level challenging.
Over the years, numerous risk factors for RB have been described, including postpartum reproductive [5,6,7] and metabolic pathologies [8,9], production level [10], farm-related parameters [11], and climate [12]. However, the results documented are still inconsistent, as they may be affected by different management practices, such as intensive or extensive production systems; the productive and/or reproductive capacities of individual animals or herds; and/or geographic or regional characteristics. Suboptimal housing conditions, such as small and uncomfortable cubicles, limited bunk space per cow, and reduced or inadequate dry matter intake increase the risk of RB, reducing the reproductive performance and hence economic efficiency [7]. Although the risk factors that have been documented to be involved in this syndrome may vary, understanding them will significantly improve control of this important issue in dairy farms.
The prevalence of RB varies widely across studies, ranging from 9% in the United Kingdom [13], to 10.1% in Sweden [3], 11% in Bangladesh [14], 12.4% in Poland [15], 14% in Japan [12], 22% in the United States [16], 23% in Australia [17] and India [18], 25% in Spain [19], 33.9% in Ethiopia [10], and 62% in Indonesia respectively [20]. These variations may be due to diverse production systems, the management techniques used, herd size, and genetic merit, as well as the influence of environmental conditions (e.g., heat stress) to which herds are subjected, among other factors like metabolic stress due to negative energy balance (NEB) during the peripartal period [4]. While the low prevalence in the United Kingdom and Sweden may reflect the benefits of advanced production systems and management practices, Spain’s relatively high prevalence highlights gaps in its current RB prevention and management strategies. Similarly, other factors such as temperature and the consequent heat stress may interfere in the difference between Spain and colder regions. Addressing these deficiencies is critical for improving reproductive performance and underscores the importance of this study in identifying and mitigating key risk factors in Spanish dairy farms.
The economic importance of this problem is significant due to the influence that reproductive performance has on milk production [13,21]. The associated subfertility generates costs related to reduced conception rates (CR), increased days open (DO), higher culling rates, reduced life-time milk production, as well as increased replacement costs and expenses associated with veterinary care and repeated inseminations [3,22,23]. In a sector like dairy production, characterized by high production costs, reproductive efficiency is essential to ensure the profitability of dairy farms [24,25].
Regarding environmental impact, such as decreased methane emissions per liter of milk produced, it has been shown that increasing productive efficiency (through improvements in management, nutrition, reproduction, and welfare) is an effective way to reduce emissions per unit of milk [26]. On the other hand, reproductive failure is the most common reason for the involuntary culling of dairy cows worldwide [27,28], and in the current context of concern about animal welfare, it is expected that society may begin to demand longer productive lifespans according to natural cycles [29]. Considering the close relationship between reproductive efficiency and dairy productivity, identifying and treating repeat breeders is particularly important, as RB leads to prolonged calving intervals, reduced conception rates, and increased culling, all of which negatively impact overall herd reproductive performance and productivity
Therefore, this prospective study has been designed to determine the risk factors involved in RB by analyzing the reproductive data collected in dairy cattle farms in northern Spain.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Ethics

The procedures were conducted according to the European Union Legislation (Directive 2010/63/EU) and the Spanish Regulations for the protection of animals used for scientific purposes (RD 53/2013).

2.2. Animals

This study involved 2370 cows (1445 multiparous and 925 primiparous) from 4 commercial farms located in Cantabria (northern Spain). The herd sizes ranged from 265 to 370 milking cows, with an average standardized production of 12,128 L over 305 days. The total mixed rations used on all farms were based on corn silage, grass silage, alfalfa, and supplemented with concentrates. In all cases, the cows were housed in free-stall barns with individual cubicles. Three of the farms had conventional milking parlors, with cows being milked 2–3 times a day, while the fourth farm used a robotic milking system, averaging 3.1 milkings per day. In all herds, weekly reproductive examinations were performed by an experienced veterinarian, along with weekly uterine health checks that included detection and management of reproductive problems, monitoring of general health status, heat synchronization programs, and recording and analysis of reproductive data during the first four weeks postpartum.

2.3. Data Collection

All cows that calved between March 2020 and May 2022 on the 4 farms were monitored, with the data recorded from on-farm software as shown in Table 1.
As for multiparous cows, when the animal was included in the study, a number of historical data were also collected and stored in the farm management programs (DairyPlan (GEA, Düsseldorf, Germany) for three farms and Lely Horizon (Lely, Maassluis, Netherlands) for the remaining farm) (Table 2).

2.4. Statistical Analysis

Data were analyzed using the SPSS statistical software (SPSS version 28.0.1.1; IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA).
To evaluate the risk factors for RB, a binary logistic regression was performed, using the backward conditional method to select the most relevant variables. In all cases, p-values < 0.05 were significant. Two separate analyses were conducted: one for primiparous cows and another for multiparous cows. In both cases, the dependent variable was RB (yes/no). The independent variables and their corresponding classification are represented in Table 3.
Additionally, in the analysis of multiparous cows, the following independent variables were added: calving number (2, 3, >3), 305-day standardized production in the previous calving (kg), and dry period duration in the previous calving (days). Finally, contingency tables were prepared to determine the prevalence of RB based on the variables included in the models. Cases that showed missing or doubtful data were excluded for statistical analysis.

3. Results

The overall prevalence of RB in the population studied was 21.1% (18.6% (11.8–29.4) primiparous and 22.8% (16.3–32.1) multiparous).

3.1. Risk Factors in Primiparous Dairy Cows

Table 4 shows the risk factors for RB in primiparous cows. The model obtained from the logistic regression analysis was significant and presented an R2 of 0.17. Endometritis (OR, 12.23; p < 0.01), severe postpartum body condition loss (−0.75: OR, 2.2; p < 0.01; −1 to −1.5: OR, 8.1; p < 0.01), dystocia (OR, 5.2; p < 0.01), clinical mastitis (OR, 4.2; p < 0.01), ketosis (OR, 3.5; p < 0.01), and lameness (OR, 3.4; p < 0.01) were identified as risk factors for RBS in the studied population, while summer and fall calvings had a protective effect (OR, 0.4; p < 0.01/OR, 0.6; p < 0.05). Metritis did not show a statistically significant effect (p > 0.05). Additionally, twin births, stillbirths, retained placenta, displaced abomasum, and subclinical mastitis were not included in the final model.

3.2. Risk Factors in Multiparous Dairy Cows

Table 5 presents the risk factors for RB in multiparous cows. The model obtained in this case was also significant and showed an R2 of 0.18. Endometritis (OR, 6.2; p < 0.01), ketosis (OR, 4.3; p < 0.01), clinical mastitis (OR, 4.2; p < 0.01), metritis (OR, 2.6; p < 0.01), lameness (OR, 2.5; p < 0.01), severe loss of body condition after calving (−1 to −1.5: OR, 2.0; p < 0.05), dystocia (OR, 1.9; p < 0.01), and subclinical mastitis (OR, 1.9; p < 0.01) were risk factors for RB in the population studied, while delaying the first insemination showed a protective effect (OR, 0.99; p < 0.01). On the other hand, displacement of the abomasum did not show a statistically significant effect (p > 0.05). Furthermore, the parity number, twin births, stillbirths, retained placenta, normalized milk yield, and dry period length in the previous calving were not included in the final model.

4. Discussion

In the present study, the prevalence of RB was 21.1%. Several studies have linked higher parity with an increased incidence of RB [11,14,17,40], which may be due to the development of reproductive pathologies after successive calvings, resulting in uterine alterations. Advanced age may negatively impact fertility, either due to a decline in oocyte quality or the development of ovarian abnormalities and ovulation failure caused by defects in hormone production by the hypothalamus or pituitary gland [16]. In contrast, some authors have observed a higher prevalence of this syndrome in primiparous cows [3,5,12,14], possibly due to a reduced ability to adapt to the metabolic demands of lactation at an early age.
Regarding the risk factors, it should be clarified as to why some of the collected data were not included in the final model. Many of the factors studied are interrelated and may influence outcomes indirectly through others. In this way, twins, stillbirths, and retained placenta are closely associated with dystocia or endometritis, which are included in the model. In the case of subclinical mastitis, it is a risk factor for clinical mastitis, which is present in the model. Furthermore, for primiparous cows, many diseases commonly observed in multiparous cows have a lower incidence in this group.

4.1. Reproductive Pathologies

The development of reproductive pathologies during the postpartum period increased the risk of RB occurrence in the animals included in our study. Dystocia was an important risk factor in both primiparous and multiparous cows, aligning with the results described in other studies [3,11,41]. Dystocia has been associated with reduced conception rates and more days open [31], as it delays uterine involution, increases the risk of uterine pathologies [32,42], and delays the resumption of ovarian activity [43]. Additionally, several authors have demonstrated the association between RB and the aforementioned abnormal resumption of ovarian activity [12,16]. In this study, postpartum uterine infections significantly increased the likelihood of RB. In this respect, the presence of endometritis was a risk factor in both primiparous and multiparous cows, consistent with the results reported in several studies [5,7,11,44]. Moreover, particular in multiparous cows, metritis promoted the occurrence of this syndrome, which is in line with the observations of other authors [5,6,11,40,44]. It is known that postpartum uterine pathologies affect cows’ fertility [45,46], as they alter the uterine environment and ovarian function, consequently reducing gamete and embryo survival [33,47,48]. However, previous research conducted in the same geographical area as this study did not report a significant association of dystocia or metritis with higher risk of RB [7].

4.2. Specific Animal Factors

Based on the records obtained in this study, a marked BC loss after calving significantly increased the risk of RB development in both primiparous (losses of 0.75 and between 1–1.5 points) and multiparous cows (losses of 1–1.5 points). Without considering BC loss during the transition period, other authors have described a higher prevalence of RB in cows with poor BCS compared to those with moderate or good BCS around parturition [10,11,14,49]. Additionally, previous studies have associated postpartum BC loss with reduced fertility [35,50]; specifically, either a too low BCS at first AI (≤2.50) or significant BC loss in the first three postpartum weeks led to a reduction in the conception rate and reduced embryo quality [51]. These detrimental effects may be due to the negative energy balance that occurs in the peripartum period due to the increased demand for energy associated with the strong increased milk production during the early postpartum period [52]. This negative energy phenomenon can lead to immune function disturbances [53,54], which in turn may increase the risk of uterine pathologies, as well as ovarian reproductive disturbances and lower fertility [55,56,57]. However, other studies have not observed a direct association between BCS and RB incidence [7,12,58].

4.3. Metabolic Diseases

Metabolic disorders have also been studied as a potential risk factor for RB. In our study, ketosis significantly increased the risk of RB in both primiparous and multiparous cows. In agreement with these results, Jeong and Kim [7] reported a significant increase in RB incidence in animals that suffer from metabolic disorders like hypocalcemia and ketosis. Additionally, cows with hypocalcemia have been reported to have a higher likelihood of RB [5]; this descent in blood calcium levels may increase dystocia incidence, which has been shown to be also associated with higher RB incidence. Regarding abomasum displacement, which is often associated with ketosis or hypocalcemia, this study did not find a statistically significant effect on RB risk. Conversely, previous studies have suggested an adverse effect of abomasum displacement on fertility in dairy cows [8,9] as well as a higher risk of RB [7].

4.4. Other Diseases

In this study, clinical mastitis was a risk factor for RB development in both primiparous and multiparous cows. For the latter, subclinical mastitis was also shown to be a risk factor. These results align with those reported by Befekadu et al. [10], who observed a 2.63 times higher risk of RB in cows that were diagnosed for mastitis. It is important to consider that cases of mastitis may have a direct or indirect effect, potentially indicating poor management practices within the operation, which in turn can negatively impact reproductive performance. Likewise, Gustafsson and Emanuelson [3] described a higher proportion of cows with RB in herds with high clinical mastitis incidence. The negative effects of mastitis on fertility have been previously described, being associated with lower conception rates [30,59] and longer calving-to-conception intervals [30,60,61]. Notably, these detrimental effects on fertility have been associated with both clinical and subclinical mastitis [62]. Cows that suffer from mastitis are thought to experience an increase in proinflammatory cytokine synthesis during infection [63,64,65], which together with bacterial endotoxins causes hormonal imbalances affecting folliculogenesis and ovulation [37,62], as well as early embryo survival [64].
Moreover, lameness also has shown to significantly increase the risk of RB in the animals included in this study, like mastitis mentioned above [66]. Increased services per conception [39] and extended calving-to-conception intervals [67] have been reported in lame cows compared to healthy herd mates. These lameness-associated infectious processes may affect fertility through the aforementioned proinflammatory mechanisms but also do cause pain and stress, resulting in increased glucocorticoid and catecholamine levels in plasma, which in turn alter follicular development and ovulation [39,68].
Data analysis for primiparous cows revealed a significantly lower risk of RB when parturitions studied occurred in summer or autumn. While some authors have not observed a relationship between calving season and RB [12,13], others described a higher RB incidence in winter [49] or autumn–winter compared to summer and autumn [3,69].
It should be noted that the increased incidence during autumn and winter observed in Scandinavia may be due to the influence of a reduced length of the photoperiod during these seasons on hormonal secretion, which could lead to reproductive disturbances [3]. Moreover, a higher incidence of RB during spring and summer has been reported [5], which may be due to the negative effects of heat stress on fertility. These detrimental effects can mainly be explained by a reduced DMI and hence the occurrence of an NEB status, which lead to disruptions in hormone production and follicular development [70,71], as well as in the manifestation of estrus [19,70], impacting the quality of oocytes and hence embryo survival [19,72].
Delaying the first postpartum insemination reduced the risk of RB in multiparous cows in this study. These results indicate that, considering the OR, for each additional day to the voluntary waiting period, the likelihood of RB decreases by 0.01. In this regard, Jeong et al. [7] reported a significantly lower risk of RB in cows inseminated after 80 days postpartum compared to those inseminated ≤ 80 days after calving. Additionally, other studies have previously noted an association between a shorter interval from calving to first insemination and a higher incidence of RB [3,12]. This effect may be due to the fact that longer voluntary waiting periods allow for improved uterine health, a reduction in postpartum related diseases and reduced systemic inflammation, and a sooner reestablishment of ovarian cyclicity [73]. Regarding subclinical endometritis, which has been proven to be one of the major causes of RB, a higher incidence has been reported when shorter calving-to-first-insemination intervals were used [74].
The findings of this study suggest several practical recommendations for reducing RB prevalence. Nutritional management is crucial to prevent excessive body condition loss during the transition period by providing balanced diets tailored to the energy demands of lactating cows. Routine postpartum health monitoring should be conducted to identify and address reproductive and metabolic disorders early, including prompt treatment of mastitis, ketosis, and lameness. Strategic breeding protocols, such as delaying the first insemination postpartum in multiparous cows, can significantly enhance reproductive outcomes. Additionally, optimizing calving periods to align with seasons offering protective benefits, such as summer and autumn as observed in this study, can further reduce the risk of RB.
While this study provides valuable insights, it is essential to acknowledge its limitations. The study’s geographic focus on northern Spain limits the generalizability of findings to other regions with differing management systems, climates, or genetic herds. Farm-specific practices and incomplete historical records may introduce biases in the results, and genetic predispositions and long-term reproductive outcomes were not assessed, presenting an area for future investigation.
Future research should explore RB in diverse geographical and management settings, investigate genetic influences, and evaluate the effectiveness of advanced diagnostic and artificial insemination techniques. A multidisciplinary approach integrating these factors is necessary to enhance reproductive performance further.

5. Conclusions

This study identified a prevalence of RB in northern Spain of 21.1% (18.6% in primiparous cows and 22.8% in multiparous cows). Risk factors for RB in primiparous cows included marked body condition loss, ketosis, lameness, clinical mastitis, and reproductive pathologies (dystocia and endometritis), while calving in summer and autumn reduced the likelihood of RB. For multiparous cows, additional factors included metritis and subclinical mastitis, with a protective effect observed when the first postpartum artificial insemination was delayed.
Addressing these factors through targeted management strategies can improve reproductive efficiency, reduce economic losses, and support sustainable dairy farming practices. Future research should focus on addressing the identified limitations, exploring genetic predispositions, and developing advanced tools for diagnosing and managing RB according to the characteristics of the farm.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.L.V. and U.Y.; methodology, S.L.V. and U.Y.; validation, C.C.P.-M., J.Á., A.A., R.B., J.J.B., A.I.P., P.G.H. and L.A.Q.; formal analysis, S.L.V. and U.Y.; investigation, S.L.V., C.C.P.-M., J.Á., A.A., R.B., J.J.B., A.I.P., P.G.H. and L.A.Q.; resources, S.L.V., U.Y., P.G.H. and L.A.Q.; data curation, S.L.V. and U.Y.; writing—original draft preparation, A.A., S.L.V.; writing—review and editing, S.L.V., C.C.P.-M., J.Á., A.A., R.B., J.J.B., A.I.P., P.G.H., L.A.Q. and U.Y.; visualization, S.L.V., J.Á., A.A., R.B. and U.Y.; supervision, L.A.Q., P.G.H., J.J.B., A.I.P. and U.Y.; project administration, L.A.Q.; funding acquisition, L.A.Q. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Uxía Yáñez Ramil holds a postdoctoral contract funded by Xunta de Galicia (Ref. ED481B_033/2024).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The experiment was exempted from ethics review, as stated by the Ethics Committee of the Rof Codina Veterinary Teaching Hospital, as this practice fell into the exceptions referred in Article 2 (5.f) of the national decree-law RD53/2013 (2010/63/EU Directive).

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be available from the corresponding author under reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the owners and workers of the farms that have collaborated in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Salasel, B.; Mokhtari, A.; Taktaz, T. Prevalence, Risk Factors for and Impact of Subclinical Endometritis in Repeat Breeder Dairy Cows. Theriogenology 2010, 74, 1271–1278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Casida, L.E. Present Status of the Repeat-Breeder Cow Problem. J. Dairy Sci. 1961, 44, 2323–2329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Gustafsson, H.; Emanuelson, U. Characterisation of the Repeat Breeding Syndrome in Swedish Dairy Cattle. Acta Vet. Scand. 2002, 43, 115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Pérez-Marín, C.C.; Quintela, L.A. Current Insights in the Repeat Breeder Cow Syndrome. Animals 2023, 13, 2187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Crivei, I.C.; Ruginosu, E.; Sănduleanu, C.; Borș, S.I.; Bugeac, T.; Dascălu, L.D.; Creangă, Ș. Incidence of repeat breeding syndrome in Holstein Friesian Cattle. Sci. Pap. Anim. Sci. Ser. Lucr. Ştiinţifice Ser. Zooteh. 2019, 72, 33–37. [Google Scholar]
  6. Yasir Hasib, F.M.; Moktadir Billah Reza, M.; Maksud Ul Alam, M.; Hasan, T. Azizunnesa Occurrence and Risk Factors of Repeat Breeding on Household Dairy Cows of Hathazari in Chattogram. Bangladesh J. Vet. Anim. Sci. 2020, 8, 102–111. [Google Scholar]
  7. Jeong, J.K.; Kim, I.H. Risk Factors for Repeat Breeder Dairy Cows and Their Impacts on Reproductive Performance. Korean J. Vet. Res. 2022, 62, e15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Loeffler, S.H.; De Vries, M.J.; Schukken, Y.H. The Effects of Time of Disease Occurrence, Milk Yield, and Body Condition on Fertility of Dairy Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 1999, 82, 2589–2604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Brodzki, P.; Brodzki, A.; Kurek, Ł.; Marczuk, J.; Tatara, M.R. Reproductive System Condition in Dairy Cows with Left-Sided Displacement of the Abomasums. Ann. Anim. Sci. 2015, 15, 359–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Befekadu, K.; Eshete, T.; Demissie, T.; Yilma, T. Contributing Factors to Repeat Breeding and Postpartum Anestrus and Pregnancy Rate Subsequent to Hormonal Intervention in Crossbred Dairy Cows. Ethiop. Vet. J. 2023, 27, 144–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Eshete, T.; Demisse, T.; Yilma, T.; Tamir, B. Repeat Breeding and Its’ Associated Risk Factors in Crossbred Dairy Cattle in Northern Central Highlands of Ethiopia. Vet. Med. Int. 2023, 2023, 1176924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Yusuf, M.; Nakao, T.; Ranasinghe, R.B.K.; Gautam, G.; Long, S.T.; Yoshida, C.; Koike, K.; Hayashi, A. Reproductive Performance of Repeat Breeders in Dairy Herds. Theriogenology 2010, 73, 1220–1229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Bartlett, P.C.; Kirk, J.H.; Mather, E.C. Repeated Insemination in Michigan Holstein- Friesian Cattle: Incidence, Descriptive Epidemiology and Estimated Economic Impact. Theriogenology 1986, 26, 309–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Asaduzzaman, K.M.; Bhuiyan, M.M.U.; Rahman, M.M.; Bhattacharjee, J. Prevalence of repeat breeding and its effective treatment in cows at selected areas of Bangladesh. Bangladesh J. Vet. Med. 2017, 14, 183–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Janowski, T.; Baranski, W.; Lukasik, K.; Skarzynski, D.; Rudowska, M.; Zdunczyk, S. Prevalence of Subclinical Endometritis in Repeat Breeding Cows and MRNA Expression of Tumor Necrosis Factor α and Inducible Nitric Oxide Synthase in the Endometrium of Repeat Breeding Cows with and without Subclinical Endometritis. Pol. J. Vet. Sci. 2013, 16, 693–699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Bulman, D.C.; Lamming, G.E. Milk Progesterone Levels in Relation to Conception, Repeat Breeding and Factors Influencing Acyclicity in Dairy Cows. Reproduction 1978, 54, 447–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Moss, N.; Lean, I.J.; Reid, S.W.J.; Hodgson, D.R. Risk Factors for Repeat-Breeder Syndrome in New South Wales Dairy Cows. Prev. Vet. Med. 2002, 54, 91–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Deka, R.P.; Magnusson, U.; Grace, D.; Randolph, T.F.; Shome, R.; Lindahl, J.F. Estimates of the Economic Cost Caused by Five Major Reproductive Problems in Dairy Animals in Assam and Bihar, India. Animals 2021, 11, 3116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Garcia-Ispierto, I.; López-Gatius, F. A Three-Day PGF 2α Plus ECG-Based Fixed-Time AI Protocol Improves Fertility Compared with Spontaneous Estrus in Dairy Cows with Silent Ovulation. J. Reprod. Dev. 2013, 59, 393–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Yusuf, M.; Rahim, L.; Asja, M.A.; Wahyudi, A. The Incidence of Repeat Breeding in Dairy Cows under Tropical Condition. Media Peternak. Fak. Peternak. Inst. Pertan. Bogor. 2012, 35, 28–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Jaureguiberry, M.; Madoz, L.V.; de la Sota, R.L. Actualización En El Síndrome de Vaca Repetidora. Taurus 2015, 17, 14–19. [Google Scholar]
  22. Levine, H.D.; Act, D. The Repeat Breeder Cow. Am. Assoc. Bov. Pract. 1999, 33, 97–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Nowicki, A. Embryo Transfer as an Option to Improve Fertility in Repeat Breeder Dairy Cows. J. Vet. Res. 2021, 65, 231–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Berry, D.P.; Wall, E.; Pryce, J.E. Genetics and Genomics of Reproductive Performance in Dairy and Beef Cattle. Animal 2014, 8, 105–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Cardoso Consentini, C.E.; Wiltbank, M.C.; Sartori, R. Factors That Optimize Reproductive Efficiency in Dairy Herds with an Emphasis on Timed Artificial Insemination Programs. Animals 2021, 11, 301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Place, S.E.; Mitloehner, F.M. Invited Review: Contemporary Environmental Issues: A Review of the Dairy Industry’s Role in Climate Change and Air Quality and the Potential of Mitigation through Improved Production Efficiency. J. Dairy Sci. 2010, 93, 3407–3416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Pinedo, P.J.; De Vries, A.; Webb, D.W. Dynamics of Culling Risk with Disposal Codes Reported by Dairy Herd Improvement Dairy Herds. J. Dairy Sci. 2010, 93, 2250–2261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Dallago, G.M.; Wade, K.M.; Cue, R.I.; McClure, J.T.; Lacroix, R.; Pellerin, D.; Vasseur, E. Keeping Dairy Cows for Longer: A Critical Literature Review on Dairy Cow Longevity in High Milk-Producing Countries. Animals 2021, 11, 808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. De Vries, A.; Marcondes, M.I. Review: Overview of Factors Affecting Productive Lifespan of Dairy Cows. Animal 2020, 14, S155–S164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Santos, J.E.; Cerri, R.L.; Ballou, M.A.; Higginbotham, G.E.; Kirk, J.H. Effect of Timing of First Clinical Mastitis Occurrence on Lactational and Reproductive Performance of Holstein Dairy Cows. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2004, 80, 31–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Stevenson, J.S.; Call, E.P. Reproductive Disorders in the Periparturient Dairy Cow. J. Dairy Sci. 1988, 71, 2572–2583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Földi, J.; Kulcsár, M.; Pécsi, A.; Huyghe, B.; de Sa, C.; Lohuis, J.A.C.M.; Cox, P.; Huszenicza, G. Bacterial Complications of Postpartum Uterine Involution in Cattle. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2006, 96, 265–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Gilbert, R.O. The Effects of Endometritis on the Establishment of Pregnancy in Cattle. Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 2012, 24, 252–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Martinez, N.; Risco, C.A.; Lima, F.S.; Bisinotto, R.S.; Greco, L.F.; Ribeiro, E.S.; Maunsell, F.; Galvão, K.; Santos, J.E.P. Evaluation of Peripartal Calcium Status, Energetic Profile, and Neutrophil Function in Dairy Cows at Low or High Risk of Developing Uterine Disease. J. Dairy Sci. 2012, 95, 7158–7172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Gillund, P.; Reksen, O.; Gröhn, Y.T.; Karlberg, K. Body Condition Related to Ketosis and Reproductive Performance in Norwegian Dairy Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2001, 84, 1390–1396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Edmonson, A.J.; Lean, I.J.; Weaver, L.D.; Farver, T.; Webster, G. A Body Condition Scoring Chart for Holstein Dairy Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 1989, 72, 68–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Hockett, M.E.; Almeida, R.A.; Rohrbach, N.R.; Oliver, S.P.; Dowlen, H.H.; Schrick, F.N. Effects of Induced Clinical Mastitis during Preovulation on Endocrine and Follicular Function. J. Dairy Sci. 2005, 88, 2422–2431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Sadeghi, H.; Yáñez, U.; De Prado, A.I.; Gharagozlou, F.; Becerra, J.J.; Herradon, P.G.; Peña, A.I.; Quintela, L.A. Effect of Subclinical Mastitis on Reproductive Performance of Holstein dairy Cows in the Northwest of Spain. Span. J. Agric. Res. 2021, 19, e04SC01. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Melendez, P.; Bartolome, J.; Archbald, L.F.; Donovan, A. The Association between Lameness, Ovarian Cysts and Fertility in Lactating Dairy Cows. Theoriogenology 2003, 59, 927–937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Bonneville- Hébert, A.; Bouchard, E.; Tremblay, D.D.; Lefebvre, R. Effect of Reproductive Disorders and Parity on Repeat Breeder status and Culling of Dairy Cows in Quebec. Can. J. Vet. Res. 2011, 75, 147–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Matubber, B.; Kumar Paul, A.; Das, S. Agriculture, livestock and fisheries Evaluation of different parameters in relation to repeat breeding of cows at the coastal areas of Bangladesh. Res. Agric. Livest. Fish. 2018, 5, 49–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Pascottini, O.B.; Opsomer, G. Diagnosis and treatment of postpartum uterine disease in dairy cows: A review with emphasis on subclinical endometritis. Compend. Cienc. Vet. 2017, 7, 29–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Opsomer, G.; Hertl, J.; Coryn, M.; Deluyker, H.; De Kruif, A. Risk Factors for Post Partum Ovarian Dysfunction in High Producing Dairy Cows in Belgium: A Field Study. Theoriogenology 2000, 53, 841–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Nath, B.; Das, B.; Bari, M.; Rahman, M. Prevalence and Risk Factors of Repeat Breeding in Commercial Dairy Farms of Chittagong District of Bangladesh. Int. J. Nat. Sci. 2016, 4, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. LeBlanc, S.J.; Duffield, T.F.; Leslie, K.E.; Bateman, K.G.; Keefe, G.P.; Walton, J.S.; Johnson, W.H. The Effect of Treatment of Clinical Endometritis on Reproductive Performance in Dairy Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2002, 85, 2237–2249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Sheldon, I.; Price, S.; Cronin, J.; Gilbert, R.; Gadsby, J. Mechanisms of Infertility Associated with Clinical and Subclinical Endometritis in High Producing Dairy Cattle. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 2009, 44, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Mateus, L.; Lopes Da Costa, L.; Bernardo, F.; Robalo Silva, J. Influence of Puerperal Uterine Infection on Uterine Involution and Postpartum Ovarian Activity in Dairy Cows. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 2002, 37, 31–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Hill, J.; Gilbert, R. Reduced Quality of Bovine Embryos Cultured in Media Conditioned by Exposure to an Inflamed Endometrium. Aust. Vet. J. 2008, 86, 312–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Malik, M.H.; Verma, H.K.; Sharma, R.K. Prevalence, Risk Factors and Constraints in Control of Repeat Breeding in Dairy Animals of Punjab. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 2019, 89, 837–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Pryce, J.E.; Coffey, M.P.; Simm, G. The Relationship between Body Condition Score and Reproductive Performance. J. Dairy Sci. 2001, 84, 1508–1515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Carvalho, P.D.; Souza, A.H.; Sartori, R.; Hackbart, K.S.; Dresch, A.R.; Vieira, L.M.; Baruselli, P.S.; Guenther, J.N.; Fricke, P.M.; Shaver, R.D.; et al. Effects of Deep-Horn AI on Fertilization and Embryo Production in Superovulated Cows and Heifers. Theriogenology 2013, 80, 1074–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Butler, W.R. Energy Balance Relationships with Follicular Development Ovulation and Fertility in Postpartum Dairy Cows. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2003, 83, 211–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Hammon, D.S.; Evjen, I.M.; Dhiman, T.R.; Goff, J.P.; Walters, J.L. Neutrophil Function and Energy Status in Holstein Cows with Uterine Health Disorders. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 2006, 113, 21–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Grinberg, N.; Elazar, S.; Rosenshine, I.; Shpigel, N.Y. β-Hydroxybutyrate Abrogates Formation of Bovine Neutrophil Extracellular Traps and Bactericidal Activity against Mammary Pathogenic Escherichia Coli. Infect. Immun. 2008, 76, 2802–2807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Lucy, M.C.; Beck, J.; Staples, C.R.; Head, H.H.; De, R.L.; Sota, L.; Thatcher, W.W. Follicular Dynamics, Plasma Metabolites, Hormones and Insulin-like Growth Factor I (IGF-I) in Lactating Cows with Positive or Negative Energy Balance during the Preovulatory Period. Reprod. Nutr. Dev. 1992, 32, 331–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Leroy, J.L.M.R.; Van Soom, A.; Opsomer, G.; Bols, P.E.J. The Consequences of Metabolic Changes in High-Yielding Dairy Cows on Oocyte and Embryo Quality. Animal 2008, 2, 1120–1127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Bisinotto, R.S.; Greco, L.F.; Ribeiro, E.S.; Martinez, N.; Lima, F.S.; Staples, C.R.; Thatcher, W.W.; Santos, J.E.P. Influences of Nutrition and Metabolism on Fertility of Dairy Cows. Anim. Reprod. 2012, 9, 260–272. [Google Scholar]
  58. Nishi, S.; Sarder, M.; Islam, M.; Kamruzzaman, S.; Islam, M.; Khaton, R. Factors Affecting the Incidence of Repeat Breeding in Dairy Cows. Int. J. Livest. Res. 2018, 8, 90–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Hertl, J.A.; Schukken, Y.H.; Welcome, F.L.; Tauer, L.W.; Gröhn, Y.T. Effects of Pathogen-Specific Clinical Mastitis on Probability of Conception in Holstein Dairy Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2014, 97, 6942–6954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Schrick, F.N.; Hockett, M.E.; Saxton, A.M.; Lewis, M.J.; Dowlen, H.H.; Oliver, S.P. Influence of Subclinical Mastitis during Early Lactation on Reproductive Parameters. J. Dairy Sci. 2001, 84, 1407–1412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Wilson, D.J.; Grohn, Y.T.; Bennett, G.J.; González, R.N.; Schukken, Y.H.; Spatz, J. Milk Production Change Following Clinical Mastitis and Reproductive Performance Compared among J5 Vaccinated and Control Dairy Cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 2008, 91, 3869–3879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Lavon, Y.; Leitner, G.; Voet, H.; Wolfenson, D. Naturally Occurring Mastitis Effects on Timing of Ovulation, Steroid and Gonadotrophic Hormone Concentrations, and Follicular and Luteal Growth in Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2010, 93, 911–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Rambeaud, M.; Almeida, R.A.; Pighetti, G.M.; Oliver, S.P. Dynamics of Leukocytes and Cytokines during Experimentally Induced Streptococcus Uberis Mastitis. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 2003, 96, 193–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Soto, P.; Natzke, R.P.; Hansen, P.J. Identification of Possible Mediators of Embryonic Mortality Caused by Mastitis: Actions of Lipopolysaccharide, Prostaglandin F2α, and the Nitric Oxide Generator, Sodium Nitroprusside Dihydrate, on Oocyte Maturation and Embryonic Development in Cattle. Am. J. Reprod. Immunol. 2003, 50, 263–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Herath, S.; Lilly, S.T.; Santos, N.R.; Gilbert, R.O.; Goetze, L.; Bryant, C.E.; White, J.O.; Cronin, J.; Sheldon, I.M. Expression of Genes Associated with Immunity in the Endometrium of Cattle with Disparate Postpartum Uterine Disease and Fertility. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 2009, 7, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Kara, N.K.; Galic, A.; Koyuncu, M. Effects of Stall Type and Bedding Materials on Lameness and Hygiene Score and Effect of Lameness on Some Reproductive Problems in Dairy Cattle. J. Appl. Anim. Res. 2011, 39, 334–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Kiliç, N.; Ceylan, A.; Serin, I.; Gökbulut, C. Possible Interaction between Lameness, Fertility, Some Minerals and Vitamin E in Dairy Cows. Bull. Vet. Inst. Pulawy 2014, 51, 425–429. [Google Scholar]
  68. Whay, H.R.; Waterman, A.E.; Webster, A.J.F. Associations Between Locomotion, Claw Lesions and Nociceptive Threshold in Dairy Heifers During the Peri-Partum Period. Vet. J. 1997, 154, 155–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Hewett, C.D. A Survey of the Incidence of the Repeat Breeder Cow in Sweden with Reference to Herd Size, Season, Age, and Milk Yield. Br. Vet. J. 1968, 124, 342–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Wolfenson, D.; Roth, Z. Impact of Heat Stress on Cow Reproduction and Fertility. Anim. Front. 2019, 9, 32–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. De Rensis, F.; Lopez-Gatius, F.; García-Ispierto, I.; Morini, G.; Scaramuzzi, R.J. Causes of Declining Fertility in Dairy Cows during the Warm Season. Theriogenology 2017, 91, 145–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Roth, Z. Heat Stress, the Follicle, and Its Enclosed Oocyte: Mechanisms and Potential Strategies to Improve Fertility in Dairy Cows. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 2008, 43, 238–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Stangaferro, M.L.; Wijma, R.; Masello, M.; Thomas, M.J.; Giordano, J.O. Extending the Duration of the Voluntary Waiting Period from 60 to 88 Days in Cows That Received Timed Artificial Insemination after the Double-Ovsynch Protocol Affected the Reproductive Performance, Herd Exit Dynamics, and Lactation Performance of Dairy Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2018, 101, 717–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Pascottini, O.B.; Hostens, M.; Sys, P.; Vercauteren, P.; Opsomer, G. Risk Factors Associated with Cytological Endometritis Diagnosed at Artificial Insemination in Dairy Cows. Theriogenology 2017, 92, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Table 1. List of information collected, since calving, from 2370 Holstein cows.
Table 1. List of information collected, since calving, from 2370 Holstein cows.
Collected DataDefinitionReferences
Reproductive parameters
Calving dateDate of the latest calving
Calving numberNumber of calvings
Number of artificial inseminations needed to conceive after previous calvingNumber of artificial inseminations required to achieve pregnancy in the previous calving
Date of first postpartum inseminationDate of the first insemination performed after the last calving[30]
Reproductive diseases
Repeat breeder syndromeCows that have calved at least once, have not become pregnant after 3 or more inseminations, and show no detectable reproductive abnormalities following an examination of the genital tract using transrectal ultrasound[4]
DystociaDifficult calving that requires human intervention[31]
StillbirthBirth of a full-term calf that is dead[31]
Twin birthBirth of two full-term calves[31]
Retained placentaPresence of fetal membranes in the genital tract ≥ 24 h after calving[1]
MetritisInflammation of the uterine wall, characterized by an abnormally enlarged uterus, reddish-brown foul-smelling discharge, systemic symptoms, and fever, occurring within the first 21 days after calving[32]
EndometritisInflammatory process of the endometrium, accompanied by purulent or mucopurulent vaginal discharge, without systemic symptoms, occurring 21 days or more after calving[33]
Metabolic Diseases
HypocalcemiaDecrease in serum calcium concentration[34]
KetosisElevated concentration of ketone bodies in the blood[35]
Displaced abomasumDistension of the abomasum with an accumulation of fluid and/or gas, displacing it to the left or right and dorsally within the abdominal cavity[9]
Body condition at 30 days before the date predicted of the calving and 30 days postpartumScore from 1 (very thin) to 5 (very fat) based on the amount of fat deposits in the rump area[36]
Other diseases
Clinical mastitisInflammation of the mammary gland with visible abnormalities in the milk[37]
Subclinical mastitisSomatic cell count > 200,000 cells/mL[38]
LamenessAbnormal gait due to limb lesions[39]
Lung infectionRespiratory tract condition with both local and systemic symptoms[31]
[36]
Table 2. Data collected from farm management software for the multiparous cows (n = 1445) included in the study.
Table 2. Data collected from farm management software for the multiparous cows (n = 1445) included in the study.
Collected DataDefinition
Date of previous calvingDate when the previous calving took place
Calving numberNumber of calvings
305-day standardized productionMilk production (kg) standardized from DIM 1 to DIM 305
Dry period durationPeriod between the end of one lactation and the start of the next lactation
DIM = days in milk.
Table 3. Independent variables included in the statistical analysis and corresponding classification of the data collected.
Table 3. Independent variables included in the statistical analysis and corresponding classification of the data collected.
Independent Variable Data Classification
Calving season Winter/Spring/Summer/Autumn
Change in BC between dry/pre-calving and postpartum+0.25 to −0.25/−0.5/−0.75/−1 to −1.5
Number of artificial inseminations required to achieve pregnancy in the previous calving1/2/3/>3.
Interval between the current calving and the first inseminationDays
Postpartum pathologies (dystocia, twin births, stillbirths, retained placenta, metritis, endometritis)YES/NO
Metabolic conditions (ketosis and displaced abomasum) YES/NO
Other conditions (clinical and subclinical mastitis and lameness)YES/NO
BC = body condition.
Table 4. Descriptive statistics and odds ratios for the variables included in the logistic regression model analyzing the risk factors for repeat breeder syndrome in primiparous dairy cows.
Table 4. Descriptive statistics and odds ratios for the variables included in the logistic regression model analyzing the risk factors for repeat breeder syndrome in primiparous dairy cows.
VariableLevelsRB/Total (%Cows with RB)OR (95% CI)p-Value
Calving seasonWinter55/259 (21.2%)Reference0.002
Spring49/217 (22.6%)1.084 (0.660–1.302)0.751
Summer27/199 (13.6%)0.400 (0.223–2.298)0.002
Autumn41/250 (53.6%)0.529 (0.352–2.249)0.047
BCS change between calving and 15 D PP +0.25 to −0.2517/160 (10.6%)Reference<0.001
−0.585/540 (15.7%)1.672 (0.907–3.080)0.099
−0.7557/195 (29.2%)2.919 (1.500–5.682)0.002
−1 to −1.5013/28 (16.4%)8.094 (2.817–23.258)<0.001
Reproductive diseases
DystociaNO143/870 (16.4%)Reference<0.001
YES29/55 (52.7%)5.179 (2.665–10.063)
MetritisNO160/905 (17.7%)Reference 0.098
YES12/20 (60.0%)2.380 (0.853–6.645)
EndometritisNO146/887 (16.5%)Reference<0.001
YES26/38 (68.4%)12.234 (5.548–26.975)
Metabolic diseases
KetosisNO 157/892 (17.6%)Reference0.003
YES15/33 (45.5%)3.497 (1.546–7.908)
Other diseases
Lameness NO 152/866 (17.6%)Reference0.003
YES 15/33 (45.5%)3.497 (1.546–7908)
Clinical mastitisNO 123/794 (15.5%)Reference<0.001
YES49/131 (37.4%)4.221 (2.656–6.709)
BCS = body condition score; RB: repeat breeder syndrome; OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval; PP = postpartum. Winter = January–March. Spring = April–June. Summer = July–September. Autumn = October–December.
Table 5. Descriptive statistics and odds ratios for the variables included in the logistic regression model analyzing the risk factors for repeat breeder syndrome in multiparous dairy cows.
Table 5. Descriptive statistics and odds ratios for the variables included in the logistic regression model analyzing the risk factors for repeat breeder syndrome in multiparous dairy cows.
VariableLevelsRB/Total (%Cows with RB)OR (CI)p-Value
Calving seasonWinter101/418 (24.2%)Reference0.013
Spring79/288 (27.4%)1.304 (0.882–1.928)0.183
Summer 65/356 (18.3%)0.694 (0.463–1.042)0.078
Autumn 80/383 (20.9%)0.747 (0.507–1.099)0.139
BCS change between calving and 15 D PP +0.25 to −0.2523/158 (14.6%)Reference0.022
−0.5125/666 (18.8%)1.035 (0.609–1.759)0.900
−0.75112/436 (25.7%)1.378 (0.798–2.381)0.250
−1 to −1.5065/180 (36.1%)1.951 (1.059–3.594)0.032
Interval calving first AI 581/14450.992 (0.987–0.997)0.002
Reproductive diseases
DystociaNO259/1289 (20.1%)Reference0.003
YES66/156 (42.3%)1.905 (1.250–2.902)
MetritisNO288/1382 (20.8%)Reference
YES37/63 (58.7%)2.586 (1.377–4.854)0.003
EndometritisNO263/1343 (19.6%)Reference<0.001
YES62/102 (60.8%)6.176 (3.434–10.215)
Metabolic diseases
Abomasum displacementNO293/1374 (21.3%)Reference
YES32/71 (45.1%)1.722 (0.920–3.224)0.089
KetosisNO 281/1366 (20.6%)Reference<0.001
YES44/79 (55.7%)4.285 (2.417–7.597)
Other diseases
Clinical mastitisNO 210/1189 (17.7%)Reference<0.001
YES115/256 (44.9%)4.154 (2.986–5.780)
Subclinical mastitisNO 177/953 (18.6%)Reference
YES148/492 (30.1%)1.866 (1.393–2.498)<0.001
Lameness NO 275/1303 (21.1%)Reference<0.001
YES 50/142 (35.2%)2.494 (1.619–3.842)
BCS = body condition score; RB: repeat breeder syndrome; OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval; PP = postpartum; AI: artificial insemination.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Villar, S.L.; Pérez-Marín, C.C.; Álvarez, J.; Acción, A.; Barrionuevo, R.; Becerra, J.J.; Peña, A.I.; Herradón, P.G.; Quintela, L.A.; Yáñez, U. A Prospective Study of the Prevalence and Predictive Risk Factors of Repeat Breeder Syndrome in Dairy Cattle in the North of Spain. Animals 2025, 15, 266. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15020266

AMA Style

Villar SL, Pérez-Marín CC, Álvarez J, Acción A, Barrionuevo R, Becerra JJ, Peña AI, Herradón PG, Quintela LA, Yáñez U. A Prospective Study of the Prevalence and Predictive Risk Factors of Repeat Breeder Syndrome in Dairy Cattle in the North of Spain. Animals. 2025; 15(2):266. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15020266

Chicago/Turabian Style

Villar, Sofía L., Carlos C. Pérez-Marín, Jacobo Álvarez, Antía Acción, Renato Barrionuevo, Juan J. Becerra, Ana I. Peña, Pedro G. Herradón, Luis A. Quintela, and Uxía Yáñez. 2025. "A Prospective Study of the Prevalence and Predictive Risk Factors of Repeat Breeder Syndrome in Dairy Cattle in the North of Spain" Animals 15, no. 2: 266. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15020266

APA Style

Villar, S. L., Pérez-Marín, C. C., Álvarez, J., Acción, A., Barrionuevo, R., Becerra, J. J., Peña, A. I., Herradón, P. G., Quintela, L. A., & Yáñez, U. (2025). A Prospective Study of the Prevalence and Predictive Risk Factors of Repeat Breeder Syndrome in Dairy Cattle in the North of Spain. Animals, 15(2), 266. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15020266

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop