doi: 10.15389/agrobiology.2018.4.753eng

UDC 636.2:636.082:618

Acknowledgements:
Authors thank employees of the farm Plemzavod Dimitrovsky (Orenburg region) for their assistance in the research.

Supported financially by Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation for applied projects, Subsidy Agreement ¹ 14.579.21.0147, UID RFMEFI57917X0147

 

FORECASTING THE EMBRYO PRODUCTIVITY OF DONOR COWS ON
THE BASIS OF ECHOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OVARIES

A.V. Brigida1, V.I. Sorokin2, S.N. Kovalchuk1, K.S. Pantiukh3,
I.V. Rukin3,4, K.A. Rozhin2

1Center for Experimental Embryology and Reproductive Biotechnologies, Federal Agency of Scientific Organizations, 12/4, ul. Kostyakova, Moscow, 127422 Russia, e-mail brigida_86@mail.ru, s.n.kovalchuk@mial.ru;
2Orenburg State Agrarian University, 18, ul. Cheluskintsev, Orenburg, 460014, Russia,e-mail vis5256@yandex.ru, info-ceerb@mail.ru;
3ZAO Genoanalitika, 77/vl. 1, ul. Leninskie gori, Moscow, 119991 Russia, e-mail pantiukh@i-gene.ru;
4Lomonosov Moscow State University, 1, ul. Leninskie gori, Moscow, 119991 Russia,e-mail ruki.n.ilya@gmail.com (✉ corresponding author)

ORCID:
Brigida A.V. orcid.org/0000-0002-0139-8087
Pantiukh K.S. orcid.org/0000-0002-2595-0673
Sorokin V.I. orcid.org/0000-0003-0057-2976
Rukin I.V. orcid.org/0000-0003-4093-3254
Kovalchuk S.N. orcid.org/0000-0002-5029-0750
Rozhin K.A. orcid.org/0000-0002-4034-7434
The authors declare no conflict of interests

Received December 25, 2017

 

The main problem restricting the wide use of reproductive biotechnology in animal husbandry is insufficiently developed methods for selection of donor cows for embryo transfer. The objective reason is the variability of the ovarian response to gonadotropins injections. Until now, there is no reliable information about possibility of forecasting the embryo productivity of donor cows before gonadotropin stimulation, which affects substantively the economic feasibility of embryo transfer as a method of accelerated cattle reproduction. We have applied the post-pressing analysis of ovaries echograms for forecasting the embryo productivity of donor cows on the basis of comparisons of quantitative and qualitative indicators of ovaries after induced superovulation and its’ echographic characteristics. We carried out morphofunctional study of ovaries in donor cows (n = 30) on day 10 of estrous cycle, before artificial insemination (estrus) and on day 7 of the inducted estrous cycle, immediately before the extraction of embryos using data on post-pressing ovarian morphometry. Animals were divided into three groups (I, II è III, n = 10 for each group) with yellow body length of 2.5 cm, 1.5-2.5 cm and 1.5 cm, respectively. Echographic visualization of the ovaries was performed using endorectal ultrasonography. Polyovulatory response of ovaries was induced with FSH-super (Russia) injected eight times, with 12 h interval, at decreasing doses. The embryos were recovered on day 7 after artificial insemination. Optimal criteria for predicting the polyovulatory response of ovaries and the quantity of embryos were determined on the basis of the ovarian morphometry. Statistically significant differences with the control were assessed by the Student’s t-test. It was found that the average areas of the ovaries on the echograms were 7.9±0.94, 5.7±0.78 and 3.5±0.06 cm2 for group I, group II and group III, respectively. The area of the yellow body in group I averaged 4.5±1.21 cm2, was 2.08 cm2 higher (P £ 0.05) than in group II, and exceeded the corresponding parameter in group III by 3.43 cm2 (P £ 0.05). A comparative evaluation of the ratio of the yellow body areas to the ovaries area of each animal and on average along the groups showed that in group I with the ratio of 57.1±3.01 % the number of yellow bodies was 11.6±1.26 and the average yield of the embryos was 9.3±1.23 per animal. In group II with the ratio of the areas of yellow bodies and ovaries of 42.1±2.9 % the number of yellow bodies before embryos recovery was 5.7±1.24, and 4.6±1.01 embryos were recovered per procedure. The lowest embryo recovery (less than one embryo per procedure) was observed in group III with the relative area of yellow bodies of 30.2±2.56 % and the average number of the yellow bodies of 1.8±0.18. Comparison of the size of the yellow bodies before the induction of polyovulation and data characterizing the efficiency of induction of superovulation and recovery of embryos showed that in animals with a ratio of the areas of the yellow body and ovary more than 50 %, high response can be obtained resulting in 11.6±1.26 yellow bodies and 9.3±1.23 embryos per extraction.

Keywords: cow, ovaries, estrus, echography, morphometric parameters, polyovulation, embryos, embryo productivity.

 

Full article (Rus)

Full article (Eng)

 

REFERENCES

  1. Anzorov V.A., Shiriev V.M., Sergeev N.I., Titov V.A., Nasibov F.N., Baitlesov E.U. Comparative characteristic and estimation of viability in embryos obtained from healthy and problem cows-donors with various level of dairy productivity. Sel’skokhozyaistvennaya Biologiya [Agricultural Biology], 2005, 6: 37-41 (in Russ.).
  2. Kononov V.P., Chernykh V.Ya. Biotekhnika reproduktsii v molochnom skotovodstve [Biotechnics of reproductions in dairy cattle breeding]. Moscow, 2009 (in Russ.).
  3. Baruselli P.S., Vieira1 L.M., Batista E.O.S., Ferreira R.M., Sales J.N.S., Gimenes L.U., Torres-Junior J.R.S., Martins C.M., SáFilho M.F., Bo G.A. Updates on embryo production strategies. Anim. Reprod., 2015, 12(3): 375-382.
  4. Hopper R.M. Bovine reproduction. Wiley Blackwell, 2015: 696-733.
  5. Kugonza D.R., Kayitesi A., Semahoro F., Ingabire D., Manzi M., Hirwa C.A., Gahakwa D. Factors affecting suitability of surrogate dams for embryo transfer in cattle. Journal of Animal Science Advances, 2013, 3(4): 203-210 CrossRef
  6. Vasconcelos J.L.M., Dementrio D.G.B., Santos R.M., Chiari J.R., Rodrigues C.A., Filho O.G. Factors potentially affecting fertility of lactating dairy cow recipients. Therlogenology, 2006, 65: 192-200 CrossRef
  7. Ptashinskaya M. Kratkoe rukovodstvo po reproduktsii zhivotnykh [A brief guide to animal reproduction]. Intervet International BV, 2009 (in Russ.).
  8. Ernst L.K., Varnavskii A.N. Reproduktsiya zhivotnykh [Animal reproduction]. Moscow, 2007 (in Russ.).
  9. Mapletoft J., Garcia Guerra A., Dias F.C.F., Singh J., Adams G.P. In vitro and in vivo embryo production in cattle superstimulated with FSH for 7 days. Anim. Reprod., 2015, 12 (3): 7-388.
  10. Petroman I., Pacala N., Petroman C., Bencsik I., Orboi M.D., Dronca D., B?ne? A. Utilization of gestagen hormones and pituitary FSH extracts in inducing the superovulation at embryo donor cows. Journal of Food Agriculture & Environment, 2009, 7(2): 193-195.
  11. Voronin E.S., Petrov A.M., Serykh M.M., Devrishov D.A. Immunologiya [Immunology]. Moscow, 2002 (in Russ.).
  12. Kosovskii G.Yu., Popov D.V., Brigida A.V. Veterinariya i kormlenie, 2016, 5: 29-31 (in Russ.).
  13. Kosovskii G.Yu., Popov D.V., Brigida A.V., Volkolupov G.V. Izvestiya Nizhnevolzhskogo agrouniversitetskogo kompleksa: nauka i vysshee professional'noe obrazovanie, 2015, 3(39): 106-108 (in Russ.).
  14. Sanchez Z., Lammoglia M.A., Alarcon M.A., Romero J.J., Galina C.S. Is the production of embryos in small-scale farming an economically feasible enterprise Reprod. Domest. Anim., 2015, 50(4): 574-579 CrossRef
  15. Kosovskii G.Yu., Popov D.V., Brigida A.V., Volkolupov G.V. Izvestiya Nizhnevolzhskogo agrouniversitetskogo kompleksa: nauka i vysshee professional'noe obrazovanie, 2015, 2(38): 148-152 (in Russ.).
  16. Liang A., Salzano A., D’Esposito M., Comin A., Montillo M., Yang L., Campanile G., Gasparrini B. Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) concentration in follicular fluid and mRNA expression of AMH receptor in granulose cell as predictive markers of good buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) donors. Theriogenology, 2016, 86(4): 963-970 CrossRef
  17. Rao M.M., Uma Mahesh Y., Misra A.K. Evaluation of ovarian response and embryo production pattern in Ongole cows. Indian Journal of Animal Science, 2010, 80(10): 973-975.
  18. Baruselli P.S., Batista E.O.S., Vieira L.M., Sales J.N.S., Gimenes L.U., Ferreira R.M. Intrinsic and extrinsic factors that influence ovarian environment and efficiency of reproduction in cattle. Anim. Reprod., 2017, 14(1): 48-60 CrossRef
  19. Ali M.S., Khandoker M.A.M.Y., Afroz M.A., Bhuiyan A.K.F.H. Ovarian response to different dose levels of follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) in different genotypes of Bangladeshi cattle. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science, 2012, 25(1): 52-58 CrossRef
  20. Villaseron Gonzaleza F., de la Torre Sanchez J.F., Martinez Velazques G., Gallardo H.A., Reynozo S.P., Fránquez J.A.P., Sojo R.P., Bermúdez M.M. Characterization of the ovarian response to superovulation in Creole Coreno cattle using reduced doses of FSH. Revista Mexicana De Ciencias Pecuarias, 2017, 8(3): 225-232.
  21. Sartori R., Monteiro P.L.J. Jr., Wiltbank M.C. Endocrine and metabolic differences between Bos taurus and Bos indicus cows and implications for reproductive management. Anim. Reprod., 2016, 13(3): 168-181 CrossRef
  22. Aziz R.L.A., Khalil A.A.Y., Abdel-Wahab A., Hassan N.Y., Abdel-Hamied E., Kasimanickam R. Relationship among circulating anti-Mullerian hormone, insulin like growth factor 1, cadmium and superovulatory response in dairy cows. Theriogenology, 2017, 100: 72-79 CrossRef
  23. Baruselli P.S., Batista E.O.S., Vieira L.M., Souza A.H. Relationship between follicle population, AMH concentration and fertility in cattle. Anim. Reprod., 2015, 12(3): 487-497.
  24. Mossa F., Jimenez-Krassel F., Scheetz D., Weber-Nielsen M., Evans A.C.O., Ireland J.J. Anti-Mullerian Hormont (AMH) and fertility management in agricultural species. Reproduction, 2017, 154(1): R1-R11 CrossRef
  25. Redhead A.K., Siew N., Lambie N., Carnarvon D., Ramgattie R., Knights M. The relationship between circulating conception of AMH and LH content in the follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) preparations on follicular growth and ovulatory response to superovulation in water buffaloes. Animal Reproduction Science, 2018, 188: 66-73 CrossRef
  26. Yang W.C., Tang K.Q., Li S.J., Yang L. Association analysis between variants in bovine progesterone receptor gene and superovulation traits in Chinese Holstein cows. Reprod. Domest. Anim., 2011, 46(6): 1029-1034 CrossRef
  27. Yang W.C., Li S.J., Tang K.Q., Hua G.H., Zhang C.Y., Yu J.N., Han L., Yang L.G. Polymorphisms in 5´ upstream region of the FSH receptor gene, and their association with superovulation traits in Chinese Holstein cows. Animal Reproduction Science, 2010, 119(3-4): 172-177 CrossRef
  28. Yang W.C., Tang K.Q., Li S.J., Chao L.M., Yang L.M. Polymorphisms of the bovine luteinizing hormone/choriogonadotropin receptor (LHCGR) gene and its association with superovulation traits. Molecular Biology Reports, 2012, 39(3): 2481-2487 CrossRef
  29. Yang W.C. Li S.J., Xie Y.H., Tang K.Q., Hua G.H., Zhang C., Yang L.G. Two novel SNPs of the type I gonadotropin releasing hormone receptor gene and their associations with superovulation traits in Chinese Holstein cows. Livestock Science, 2011, 136: 164-168 CrossRef
  30. Yu Y., Pang Y., Zhao H., Xu X., Wu Z., An L., Tian J. Association of a missense mutation in the luteinizing hormone/choriogonadotropin receptor gene (LHCGR) with superovulation trains in Chinese Holstein heifers. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2012, 3(1): 35 CrossRef
  31. Bezdicek J., Makarevich A., Stadnik A., Kubovi?ová E., Louda F., Hegedüšová Z., Holásek R., Duchá?ek J., Stupka R. Analysis of factors affecting the quantity and quality of embryo production in superovulated cows. Zuchtungskunde, 2015, 87(4): 249-264.
  32. Mehmood M.U., Mehmood S., Riaz A., Ahmad N., Sattar A. Superovulatory response in Summer anestrus Buffaloes and cattle treated with estrus synchronization protocol. Journal of Animal and Plant Science,2012, 22(4): 888-893.
  33. Glazko T.T., Kosovskii, G.Yu., Popov D.V., Brigida A.V. Veterinariya Kubani, 2015, 6: 9-11 (in Russ.).
  34. Kosovskii, G.Yu., Popov D.V., Brigida A.V. Veterinariya Kubani, 2015, 5: 15-17 (in Russ.).
  35. Tomac J., Cekinovich D., Arapovic J. Biology of the corpus luteum. Periodicum Biologorum, 2011, 113(1): 43-49.
  36. Kayacik V., Salmanoglu M.R., Polat B., Ozluer A. Evaluations of the corpus luteum size throughout the cycle by ultrasonography and progesterone assay in cows. Turk. J. Vet Anim Sci., 2005, 29: 1311-1316.

 

back