Using Socio-Sexual Stimulations for Sustainable Goat Production Under Subtropical Latitudes

  • José A. Delgadillo
  • Philippe Chemineau
  • Matthieu Keller


Several goat breeds from subtropical latitudes display seasonal variations of their sexual activity, which induce a seasonality of milk and meat productions. In females, the seasonal anestrous occurs during spring and summer, whereas in males, the sexual rest occurs during winter and spring. This seasonality is mainly controlled by the annual photoperiodic variations but the socio-sexual relationships can dramatically modify it. Indeed, the permanent presence of bucks rendered sexually active by appropriate photoperiodic treatments allows goats to ovulate all the year round. In addition, the sudden introduction of these photostimulated bucks into a group of seasonal anovulatory goats dramatically improves the occurrence of induced ovulations within the first 5 days after the contact between both genders. In subtropical latitudes, the combination of photoperiod and socio-sexual relationships is an original, cheap, and sustainable way to control the out-of-season sexual activity in goats, and therefore, the milk and meat productions.



We thank all members of the Centro de Investigación en Reproducción Caprina (CIRCA, Mexico) and the Unit of Physiologie de la Reproduction et des Comportements (INRA, France) for their kind participation in the experiments described in this chapter.


  1. Abecia JA, Chemineau P, Flores JA et al (2015) Continuous exposure to sexually active rams extends estrous activity in ewes in spring. Theriogenology 84(9):1549–1555CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Araya J, Bedos M, Duarte G et al (2016) Maintaining bucks over 35 days after a male effect improves pregnancy rate in goats. Anim Prod Sci. Google Scholar
  3. Bedos M, Flores JA, Fitz-Rodríguez G et al (2010) Four hours of daily contact with sexually active males is sufficient to induce fertile ovulation in anestrous goats. Horm Behav 58(3):473–477CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bedos M, Velázquez H, Fitz-Rodríguez G et al (2012) Sexually active bucks are able to stimulate three successive groups of females per day with a 4-hour period contact. Physiol Behav 106(2):259–263CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bedos B, Muñoz AL, Orihuela A et al (2016) The sexual behavior of male goats exposed to long days is as intense as during their breeding season. Appl Anim Behav Sci 184:35–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chasles M, Chesneau D, Moussu C et al (2016) Sexually active bucks are efficient to stimulate female ovulatory activity during the anestrous season also under temperate latitudes. Anim Reprod Sci 168:86–91CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Chemineau P (1987) Possibilities for using bucks to stimulate ovarian and oestrus cycles in anovulatory goats—a review. Livestock Prod Sci 17:135–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chemineau P, Malpaux B, Delgadillo JA et al (1992) Control of sheep and goat reproduction: use of light and melatonin. Anim Reprod Sci 30(1–3):57–184Google Scholar
  9. Delgadillo JA, Canedo GA, Chemineau P et al (1999) Evidence for an annual reproductive rhythm independent of food availability in male Creole goats in subtropical northern Mexico. Theriogenology 52(4):727–737CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Delgadillo JA, Carrillo E, Morán J et al (2001) Induction of sexual activity of male creole goats in subtropical northern Mexico using long days and melatonin. J Anim Sci 79(9):2245–2252CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Delgadillo JA, Flores JA, Véliz FG et al (2002) Induction of sexual activity of lactating anovulatory female goats using male goats treated only with artificial long days. J Anim Sci 80(11):2780–2786CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Delgadillo JA, Flores JA, Véliz FG et al (2006) Importance of the signals provided by the buck for the success of the male effect in goats. Reprod Nutr Dev 46(4):391–400CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Delgadillo JA, Vélez LI (2010) Stimulation of reproductive activity in anovulatory Alpine goats exposed to bucks treated only with artificially long days. Animal 4(12):2012–2016CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Delgadillo JA, Gelez H, Ungerfeld R et al (2009) The “male effect” in sheep and goats: revisiting the dogmas. Behav Brain Res 200(2):304–314CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Delgadillo JA, Flores JA, Hernández H et al (2015) Sexually active males prevent the display of seasonal anestrus in female goats. Horm Behav 69:8–15CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Delgadillo JA, Martin GB (2015) Alternative methods for control of reproduction in small ruminants: a focus on the needs of grazing industries. Anim Frontiers 5(1):57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Duarte G, Flores JA, Malpaux B et al (2008) Reproductive seasonality in female goats adapted to a subtropical environment persists independently of food availability. Domest Anim Endocrinol 35(4):362–370CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Fernández IG, Luna-Orozco JR, Vielma J et al (2011) Lack of sexual experience does not reduce the responses of LH, estrus or fertility in anestrous goats exposed to sexually active males. Horm Behav 60(5):484–488CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Fitz-Rodríguez G, De Santiago-Miramontes MA, Scaramuzzi RJ et al (2009) Nutritional supplementation improves ovulation and pregnancy rates in female goats managed under natural grazing conditions and exposed to the male effect. Anim Reprod Sci 116(1–2):85–94CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Leboeuf B, Delgadillo JA, Manfredi E et al (2008) Management of goat reproduction and insemination for genetic improvement in France. Reprod Dom Anim 43(Suppl 2):379–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Loya-Carrera J, Bedos M, Ponce-Covarrubias JL et al (2014) Switching photo-stimulated males between groups of goats does not improve the reproductive response during the male effect. Anim Reprod Sci 146(1–2):21–26CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Luna-Orozco JR, Fernández IG, Gelez H et al (2008) Parity of female goats does not influence their estrous and ovulatory responses to the male effect. Anim Reprod Sci. 106(3–4):352–360CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Muñoz AL, Bedos M, Aroña RM et al (2016) Efficiency of the male effect with photostimulated bucks does not depend on their familiarity with goats. Physiol Behav 158:37–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ott RS, Nelson DR, Hixon JE (1980) Effect of presence of the male on initiation of estrous cycle activity of goats. Theriogenology 13(2):183–190CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Ponce JL, Velázquez H, Duarte G et al (2014) Reducing exposure to long days from 75 to 30 days of extra-light treatment does not decrease the capacity of male goats to stimulate ovulatory activity in seasonally anovulatory females. Domest Anim Endocrinol 48:119–125CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Ramírez S, Bedos M, Chasles M et al (2016) Fifteen minutes of daily contact with sexually active male induces ovulation but delays its timing in seasonally anestrous goats. Theriogenology 87:148–153CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Rivas-Muñoz R, Fitz-Rodríguez G, Poindron P et al (2007) Stimulation of estrous behavior in grazing female goats by continuous or discontinuous exposure to males. J Anim Sci 85(5):1257–1263CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Sáenz-Escárcega P, Hoyos FG, Salinas GH et al (1991) Establecimiento de módulos caprinos con productores cooperantes. In: Flores S (ed) Evaluación de Módulos Caprinos en la Comarca Lagunera. Matamoros, Coahuila, México, pp 24–34Google Scholar
  29. Shelton M (1960) The influence of the presence of the male goat on the initiation of estrous and ovulation in Angora does. J Anim Sci 19:368–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zarazaga LA, Celi I, Guzmán JL et al (2012) Enhancement of the male effect on reproductive performance in female Mediterranean goats with long day and/or melatonin treatment. Vet J 192(3):441–444CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Zarazaga LA, Gatica MC, Hernández H et al (2017) The isolation of females from males to promote a later male effect is unnecessary if the bucks used are sexually active. Theriogenology 95:42–47CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • José A. Delgadillo
    • 1
  • Philippe Chemineau
    • 2
  • Matthieu Keller
    • 2
  1. 1.Centro de Investigación en Reproducción Caprina, Departamento de Ciencias Médico VeterinariasUniversidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro, Periférico Raúl López Sánchez y Carretera a Santa FeTorreónMexico
  2. 2.UMR Physiologie de la Reproduction & des ComportementsINRA, CNRS, Université de Tours, IFCE, AgreeniumNouzilly, ToursFrance

Personalised recommendations