Effect of different estrus synchronization systems on embryo quality in multiparous sows and prepuberal gilts

• Autorzy: Antosik P , Kempisty B. , Bukowska D. , Lianeri M. , Biezynski J. , Jaskowski J.M. , Olechnowicz J.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The aim of this study was to assessed the differences in embryos quality between the natural estrus and two systems of estrus synchronization in multiparous sows and prepuberal gilts. In this experiment, multiparous sows (n = 63) and prepuberal gilts (n = 42) were used. The subgroups of these animals were treated with PMSG (1500 U.I.) + hCG (500 U.I.) or PG-600 synchronization systems. These animals were inseminated twice, 24 and 36 h after hCG injection. The control gilts (n = 20) were from the third subgroup and were inseminated two times at 12 h intervals during their natural estrus cycles. A statistically significant increased number of corpora lutea (CL) and embryos was observed between natural estrus and both synchronization systems in multiparous sows (p < 0.001). There were no differences found in the number of degenerative embryos isolated from both ovaries between PMSG + hCG, PG-600, and natural estrus groups in multiparous sows (p = 0.484), (p = 0.279), (p = 0.213), (p = 0.138), respectively. However, an increased number of unfertilized oocytes in multiparous sows after treatment with PMSG + hCG as compared to control animals (p = 0.041) was observed. A statistically higher number of embryos after treatment with PMSG + hCG was also observed in the separate groups of multiparous sows and prepuberal gilts as compared to PG-600 treated animals. No differences were found, however, in the number of degenerative embryos between those two separate groups of animals after treatment with PMSG + hCG and PG-600 of both ovaries: (p = 0.175), (p = 0.344), (p = 0.122), and (p = 0.055), respectively. It can be suggested that the differences in the number of embryos isolated from both ovaries after these two treatments systems in prepuberal gilts and multiparous sows may be a result of age-dependent different response to gonadotropins and the reproductive competence of these females.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

embryo quality; sow; multiparous sow; prepubertal gilt; prepuberal zob.prepubertal; oestrus synchronization; gonadotrophin

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Medycyna Weterynaryjna
• Rocznik: 2010
• Tom: 66
• Numer: 04
• Opis fizyczny: p.251-256,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Antosik P

• Poznan University of Life Sciences, Wojska Polskiego 52, 60-625 Poznan, Poland

autor

Kempisty B.

autor

Bukowska D.

autor

Lianeri M.

autor

Biezynski J.

autor

Jaskowski J.M.

autor

Olechnowicz J.

Bibliografia

• 1. Abeydera L. R.: In vitro fertilization and embryo development in pigs. Reprod. Suppl. 2001, 58, 159-173.
• 2. Baker R. D.,Coggins E. G.: Control of ovulation rate and fertilization in prepuberal gilts. Anim. Sci. 1968, 27, 1607-1610.
• 3. Bortolozzo F. P., Uemoto D. A., Bennemann P. E., Pozzobon M. C., Castagna C. D., Peixoto C. H., Barioni W. J. R., Wenetz I.: Influence of time of insemination relative to ovulation and frequency of insemination on gilt fertility. Theriogenology 2005, 64, 1956-1962.
• 4. Breen S. M., Rodriguez-Zas S. L., Knox R. V.: Effect of altering dose of PG600 on reproductive performance responses in prepuberal gilts and weaned sows. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2006, 95, 316-323.
• 5. Britt J. H., Day B. N., Webel S. K., Brauer M. A.: Induction of fertile estrus in prepuberal gilts by treatment with a combination of pregnant mare's serum gonadotropin and human chorionic gonadotropin. J. Anim. Sci. 1989, 67, 1148-1153.
• 6. Brüssow K. P., Ratky J., Torner H., Egerszegi I., Schneider F., Solti L., Tuchscherer A.: Follicular and oocyte development in gilts of different age. Acta Vet. Hung. 2002, 50, 101-110.
• 7. Cameron R. D., Beebe L. F., Blackshaw A. W.: Cryopreservation and transfer of pig embryos. Soc. Reprod. Fertil. Suppl. 2006, 62, 277-291.
• 8. Casida L. E.: Prepuberal development of the pig ovary and its relation to stimulation with gonadotropic hormones. Anat. Rec. 1935, 61, 389-391.
• 9. Coy P., Romar R.: In vitro production of pig embryos: a point of view. Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 2002, 5-6, 275-286.
• 10. Day B. N.: Estrus cycle regulation. Proc 10th Int. Cong. Anim. Reprod. Artif. Insem. 1984, Urbana, IL. pp. 1.
• 11. Estienne M. J., Harper A. F., Horsley B. R., Estenne C. E., Knight J. W.: Effect of P.G. 600 on the onset of estrus and ovulation rate in gilts treated with Regu-mate. J. Anim. Sci. 2001, 79, 2757-2761.
• 12. Gordon I.: Controlled Reproduction in Pigs. CAB International 1997, Wallingford, Oxon, UK., pp. 10-15.
• 13. Hazeleger W., Kemp B.: Recent developments in pig embryo transfer. Theriogenology 2001, 56, 1321-1331.
• 14. Holtz W., Schlieper B.: Unsatisfactory results with the transfer of embryos from gilts superovulated with PMSG and hCG. Theriogenology 1991, 6, 189-194.
• 15. Kaneko H., Kikuchi K., Noguchi J., Ozawa M., Ohnuma K., Maedomari N., Kashiwazaki N.: Effects of gonadotrophin treatments on meiotic and developmental competence of oocytes in porcine primordial follicles following xenografting to nude mice. Reproduction 2006, 131, 279-288.
• 16. Karalus U., Downey B. R., Ainsworth L.: Maintenance of ovulatory cycles and pregnancy in prepuberal gilts treated with PMSG and hCG. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 1990, 22, 235-241.
• 17. Kikuchi K.: Developmental competence of porcine blastocysts produced in vitro. J. Reprod. Dev. 2004, 1, 21-28.
• 18. Knox R. V., Tudor K. W., Rodriguez-Zas S. L., Robb J. A.: Effect of subcutaneous vs intramuscular administration of P.G. 600 on estrual and ovulatory responses of prepuberal gilts. J. Anim. Sci. 2000, 78, 1732-1737.
• 19. Langendijk P., Soede N. M., Kemp B.: Uterine activity, sperm transport, and the role of boar stimuli around insemination in sows. Theriogenology 2005, 63, 500-513.
• 20. Long C. R., Dobrinsky J. R., Johnson L. A.: In vitro production of pig embryos: comparisons of culturemediaandboars. Theriogenology 1999, 7, 1375-1390.
• 21. Nagai T., Funahashi H., Yoshioka K., Kikuchi K.: Up date of in vitro production of porcine embryos. Front Biosci. 2006, 11, 2565-2573.
• 22. Nagashima H., Fujimura T., Takahagi Y., Kurome M., Wako N., Ochiai T., Esaki R., Kano K., Saito S., Okabe M., Murakami H.: Development of efficient strategies for the production of genetically modified pigs. Theriogenology 2003, 59, 95-106.
• 23. Nephew K. E., Cardenas H., Pope W. F.: Effects of progesterone pretreatment on fertility of gilts mated at an induced pubertal estrus. Theriogenology 1994, 42, 99-106.
• 24. Niemann H., Rath D.: Progress in reproductive biotechnology in swine. Theriogenology 2001, 56, 1291-1304.
• 25. Polge C., Day B. N., Groves T. W.: Synchronisation of ovulation and artificial insemination in pigs. Vet. Rec. 1968, 83, 136-142.
• 26. Pope C. E., Christenson R. K., Zimmerman-Pope V. A., Day B. N.: Effect of number of embryos on embryonic survival in recipient gilts. J. Anim. Sci. 1972, 35, 805-808.
• 27. Shimatsu Y., Uchida M., Niki R., Imai H.: Induction of superovulation and recovery of fertilized oocytes in prepuberal miniature pigs after treatment with PG-600.Theriogenology 2000, 53, 1013-1022.
• 28. Silvestre M. A., Alfonso J., Garcia-Mengual E., Salvador I., Duque C. C., Molina I.: Effect of recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone on in vitro maturation of porcine oocytes evaluated by the subsequent in vitro development of embryos obtained by in vitro fertilization, intracytoplasmic sperm injection, or parthenogenetic activation. J. Anim. Sci. 2007, 85, 1156-1160.
• 29. Singleton W. L.: State of the art in artificial insemination of pigs in the United States. Theriogenology 2001, 56, 1305-1310.
• 30. Vazquez J. M., Martinez E. A., Roca J., Gil M. A., Parrilla I., Cuello C., Carvajal G., Lucas X., Vazquez J. L.: Improving the efficiency of sperm technologies in pigs: the value of deep intrauterine insemination. Theriogenology 2005, 63, 536-547.
• 31. Veeck L. L.: The morphological assessment of human oocytes and early concepti, [in:] Keel, B. A., Webster B. W. (eds): Handbook of the Laboratory Diagnosis and Treatment of Infertility. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Boston 2005, 353-369.
• 32. Veiga-Lopez A., Gonzales-Bulnes A., Garcia-Garcia R. M., Dominguez V., Cocero M. J.: The effects of previous ovarian status on ovulation rate and early embryo development in response to superovulatory FSH treatments in sheep. Theriogenology 2005, 63, 1973-1983.
• 33. Wiesak T., Hunter M. G., Foxcroft G. R.: Differences in follicular morphology, steroidogenesis and oocyte maturation in naturally cyclic and PMSG/hCG-treated prepuberal gilts. J. Reprod. Fertil. 1990, 89, 633-641.
• 34. Ziecik A. J., Biallowicz M., Kaczmarek M., Demianowicz W., Rioperez J., Wasielak M., Bogacki M.: Influence of estrus synchronization of prepuberal gilts on embryo quality. J. Reprod. Dev. 2005, 51, 379-384.