10.01.2015 Views

Reproduction in Domestic Animals - Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias

Reproduction in Domestic Animals - Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias

Reproduction in Domestic Animals - Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

16 t h International Congress on Animal <strong>Reproduction</strong><br />

Poster Abstracts 89<br />

LP ewes (1.2 ± 0.3; P < 0.05), but this was not associated with<br />

differences <strong>in</strong> numbers of atretic or healthy follicles, follicular<br />

dynamics or metabolic hormone concentrations. Supplemented ewes<br />

had 2.3 ± 0.6 and 2.2 ± 0.6 healthy follicles on Days 3 and 7, less than<br />

control ewes on Day 3 (4.6 ± 0.6; P < 0.01) but the same as controls<br />

on Day 7 (2.0 ± 0.6). The largest healthy follicle from supplemented<br />

ewes was larger (6.1 ± 0.2 mm) with more granulosa cells (3.7 ± 0.2<br />

million) than <strong>in</strong> non-supplemented ewes (5.4 ± 0.2 mm and 3.0 ± 0.2<br />

million; P < 0.05). Insul<strong>in</strong>, lept<strong>in</strong> and IGF-I concentrations were<br />

higher <strong>in</strong> supplemented than <strong>in</strong> control ewes (P < 0.01). These results<br />

suggest that, while metabolic hormones expla<strong>in</strong> the positive effect of<br />

short-term supplementation on follicular growth, they are not <strong>in</strong>volved<br />

<strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> ovulation rate promoted by nutrition dur<strong>in</strong>g<br />

pregnancy. Meat & Livestock Australia and the University of Western<br />

Australia supported this work.<br />

P184<br />

The use of artificial long days is not effective to <strong>in</strong>duce<br />

reproductive activity <strong>in</strong> Mediterranean goat does without<br />

isolation from males<br />

Zarazaga, LA 1 *, Gatica, MC 2 , Guzmán, JL 1 , Celi, I 1<br />

1Universidad <strong>de</strong> Huelva, Carretera <strong>de</strong> Palos <strong>de</strong> la Frontera s/n, 21819, Huelva,<br />

Spa<strong>in</strong>; 2 Universidad Arturo Prat, Avda. Arturo Prat, 2120, Iquique, Chile<br />

One experiment was <strong>de</strong>signed to <strong>in</strong>vestigate whether the treatment<br />

with artificial long days is effective to <strong>in</strong>duce and synchronize<br />

reproductive activity dur<strong>in</strong>g the normal seasonal anoestrous <strong>in</strong><br />

Mediterranean goat does that were not isolated from males. Two<br />

balanced groups of does accord<strong>in</strong>g to their body weight (BW) and<br />

body condition score (BCS) were used. One group was subjected to<br />

artificial long days treatment (16L:8O) (LD, N=24) from 17 th<br />

November to 5 th February, and the control group was ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

un<strong>de</strong>r natural photoperiod (C, N=23). From November to May BW<br />

and BCS were measured weekly. Oestrous activity was tested daily<br />

us<strong>in</strong>g entire aproned males from the end of the photoperiodic<br />

treatment to the end of the experimental period. Ovulation rate was<br />

evaluated by laparoscopy 7 days after positive i<strong>de</strong>ntification of<br />

oestrous. Effect of LD treatment and month on BW, BCS, was tested.<br />

The effect of treatment was studied on the date of the first <strong>de</strong>tected<br />

oestrous after the end of LD treatment dur<strong>in</strong>g the normal seasonal<br />

anoestrous, on the ovulation rate of the first <strong>de</strong>tected oestrous and on<br />

the percentage of females that showed oestrous. No effect of LD<br />

treatment, month or <strong>in</strong>teraction between both variables on BW was<br />

observed. However, BCS was <strong>in</strong>fluenced by all analyzed factors (at<br />

least P

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!