CSIRO Publishing Books Journals About Us Shopping Cart You are here: Journals > Reproduction, Fertility and Development   
Reproduction, Fertility and Development
  Vertebrate Reproductive Science & Technology
 
Search
 
 
  Advanced Search
   

Journal Home
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Contacts
Content
Online Early
Current Issue
Just Accepted
All Issues
Special Issues
Research Fronts
Sample Issue
For Authors
General Information
Instructions to Authors
Submit Article
Open Access
For Referees
General Information
Review Article
For Subscribers
Subscription Prices
Customer Service
Print Publication Dates

 e-Alerts
Subscribe to our email Early Alert or RSS feeds for the latest journal papers.

 Connect with us
facebook   youtube

 

Article << Previous     |     Next >>   Contents Vol 16(2)

18 OVARIAN SUPPRESSION WITH THE PROGESTIN LEVONORGESTREL IMPROVES OVULATION INDUCTION FOR ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION IN THE DOMESTIC CAT

K.M. Pelican A, J.L. Brown A, D.E. Wildt A, M.A. Ottinger B, J.G. Howard A

A Conservation & Research Center, Smithsonian’s National Zoological Park, Front Royal, VA, USA. email: kpelican@nzp.si.edu
B Department of Animal and Avian Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
 
 Full Text
 PDF (124 KB)
 Export Citation
 Print
  


Abstract

Ovarian response to gonadotropin stimulation for artificial insemination (AI) is variable in the domestic cat. After ovulation induction with gonadotropins, a secondary wave of corpora lutea (CL) is often produced that alters endocrine profiles. This study assessed the impact of ovarian suppression with the progestin, levonorgestrel, before ovarian stimulation with equine chorionic gonadotropin (eCG) and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) on ovarian response in the cat. Queens were assigned randomly to: 1) levonorgestrel (LNG), 6 Norplant® rods implanted for 37 d + eCG/hCG (n = 6cats); and 2) Control, eCG/hCG alone (n = 6). Ovarian response was graded (scale 1–4; 1 = excellent, 4 = ovulation failure) 36–40 h post hCG (Day 5) using laparoscopy. Ovariohysterectomy (OVH) was performed on Day 23 and CL number and CL progesterone (P) content determined. Fecal samples were collected daily and metabolites of estradiol (E) and P quantified from > 60 d before inhibition through OVH. Estrus and luteal activity were defined as fecal E and P concentrations greater than two or three times baseline, respectively. Time data were analyzed using repeated measures analysis and remaining data were analyzed using ANOVA. LNG abolished ovarian activity in all cats. No E peaks were observed during LNG inhibition compared with pre-inhibition (mean ± SEM; 1.8 ± 0.3 peaks/37 days). In contrast, number of E peaks pre- v. during inhibition was similar (P > 0.05) in control (pre, 2.2 ± 0.3; during, 2.0 ± 0.0) cats. All LNG cats had baseline E and P concentrations at eCG administration. Conversely, three of six control cats had elevated E and two cats had elevated P concentrations when eCG was given. Ovarian grade was higher (P < 0.05) in LNG (1.3 ± 0.2) v. control (2.9 ± 0.4) cats. All LNG cats had ≤Grade 2 responses, whereas two control cats failed to ovulate (Grade 4) or had mature CL (Grade 3) at laparoscopy. For both LNG and control cats, mean peak E (overall mean, 117.4 ± 14.4 ng g-1 feces) was higher (P < 0.05) and duration of estrus (6.8 ± 0.9 d) was longer (P < 0.05) after eCG/hCG v. pre-inhibition values (81.4 ± 5.3 ng g-1 feces and 3.9 ± 0.3 d, respectively). However, P concentrations/luteal phase were higher (P < 0.05)after eCG/hCG v. pre-treatment CL in control but not LNG cats. In cats with an ovarian grade of ≤2, control cats had more (P < 0.05) CL at Day 23 (14.0 ± 2.9 CL/cat) compared to Day 5 (4.5 ± 0.5).LNG cats showed no (P > 0.05) accessory CL development on Day 23 (9.2 ± 1.9 CL/cat)compared to Day 5 (6.5 ± 1.8). CL P content was not different (P > 0.05) across treatments (overall mean, 90.8 ± 18.7 ng CL). Results show that inhibition of ovarian activity with levonorgestrel before eCG/hCG improves ovarian response and alleviates accessory CL development in the domestic cat.

   
    


 
Top  Email this page
 
Legal & Privacy | Contact Us | Help

CSIRO

© CSIRO 1996-2012