Register      Login
Reproduction, Fertility and Development Reproduction, Fertility and Development Society
Vertebrate reproductive science and technology
RESEARCH ARTICLE

298 COMPARISON OF THREE DIFFERENT PROTOCOLS FOR SUPERSTIMULATION OF DAIRY CATTLE

R. G. Steel A and J. F. Hasler B
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Evergreen Veterinary Reproductive Services, Tillamook, OR;

B Bioniche Animal Health, Inc., Pullman, WA

Reproduction, Fertility and Development 21(1) 246-246 https://doi.org/10.1071/RDv21n1Ab298
Published: 9 December 2008

Abstract

Traditionally, successful superstimulation of cattle depended on initiating injections of gonadotrophin at mid-cycle, approximately at second follicular wave emergence. This approach limited the convenience of scheduling donors for superstimulation. With the use of intravaginal progesterone-releasing devices and estradiol 17β, superstimulation can be initiated successfully at any time of the estrous cycle. However, because estradiol cannot be legally injected into cattle in an increasing number of countries, the efficacy of GnRH as an estradiol substitute was investigated. A retrospective analysis was performed on data collected in a commercial bovine embryo transfer program over a period of several years. All donors were lactating dairy cows at least two years of age; approximately 75% were comprised of Holstein and the remainder of Jersey, Guernsey, or Brown Swiss breeds. The three treatments employed were (1) Controls injected twice daily for 4 days with a total of 240 to 400 mg of porcine FSH (Folltropin-V, Bioniche Animal Health, Inc.) in decreasing doses starting between day 7 and day 14 of diestrus, with PG (Lutalyse, Pfizer Animal Health) given at the time of FSH injections no. 5 (35 mg) and 6 (25 mg); (2) Estradiol females received a CIDR (Pfizer Animal Health), 5.0 mg estradiol 17β and 100 mg progesterone in oil on random days of the estrous cycle; FSH was initiated 4 days later as described for controls with CIDR removal at the time of FSH injection no. 6; (3) GnRH females received a CIDR on random days of the estrous cycle and 100 μg GnRH on day 1.5 following CIDR insertion; FSH was initiated 60 h after GnRH injection as described for controls with CIDR removal at the time of FSH injection no. 6. All donors were inseminated with one straw of frozen semen 12 and 24 h after the onset of estrus. Embryos were nonsurgically recovered 7 to 8 days after onset of estrus. Only embryos of grades 1 to 3 (IETS classification) were included in the data. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey’s hsd test was used to distinguish significance among means as shown in Table 1. Estradiol females produced approximately 2 more ova/embryos per procedure than Control and GnRH groups and an average of 0.8 more embryos per female than did the Control group, but there was no difference compared to the GnRH group. Similar to what has been shown in other commercial embryo transfer data sets, nearly 25% of the donors in each group failed to produce at least one good embryo. Clearly, all three treatments resulted in efficacious superstimulation. In light of the legality issues surrounding the use of estradiol, this study shows that GnRH can be used quite successfully to superstimulate dairy cattle at random times of the estrous cycle.


Table 1.  Average numbers of ova and embryos recovered from dairy cows superstimulated with three different protocols
T1

We thank G.E. Seidel, Jr. and S.C. Purcell for assistance with statistical analysis.