Tahir KARAŞAHİN, Mehmet GÜLER, Fatma SATILMIŞ, Hasan ALKAN, Hüseyin ERDEM, Şükrü DURSUN

Retrospective evaluation of factors affecting superovulatory response in embryo production in Simmental cattle

In the present study, it was aimed to investigate the effect of lactation status, days in milk (DIM), follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) dose, and repeated superstimulations on superovulation response and embryo yield in Simmental cattle. In the present study, 193 Simmental breed cattle (lactating, nonlactating, and heifer) were used as donors, of which 149 were superovulated only once and the other 44 were superovulated for 3 times. Progesterone-based estrus synchronization protocol was applied to the donors. Starting from day 7, FSH was given intramuscularly to donors in decreasing doses twice a day for 4 days. The donors were injected with prostaglandin F2α at the 5th FSH treatment and progesterone source was removed 12 h later. Artificial insemination was performed twice after the removal of progesterone source. In the present study, 134 of the 149 donors who underwent a superovulation protocol for the first time responded to superovulation treatment (≥3 corpus luteum (CL); 89.93%) and the mean count of transferable embryos per donor was 5.58. No statistical difference was observed for the counts of CL, total oocyte/embryo, and transferable embryo among heifers, lactating cows, and nonlactating cows. A positive correlation was noted between DIM and embryo yield (P < 0.05). Superovulation response and embryo yield were increased depending on the dose of FSH in cows undergoing superstimulation treatment (P < 0.05). Although no statistical difference was detected between the embryo yields obtained from the first two applications in repeated superovulation treatments, the embryo yield decreased after the 3rd superstimulation. In conclusion, in Simmental breed cows, the embryo yield in superovulation applications was unaffected by lactation status, but was affected by the applied FSH dose and DIM. It was also concluded that the embryo yield decreased after the 3rd application in repeated superovulation treatments.

PDF

___

1. Hasler JF. Forty years of embryo transfer in cattle: A review focusing on the journal Theriogenology, the growth of the industry in North America, and personal reminisces. Theriogenology 2014; 81: 152-169. doi: 10.1016/j. theriogenology.2013.09.010
2. Baruselli PS, de Sá Filho MF, Martins CM, Nasser LF, Nogueira MFG et al. Superovulation and embryo transfer in Bos indicus cattle. Theriogenology 2006; 65: 77-88. doi: 10.1016/j. theriogenology.2005.10.006
3. Perry G. 2016 statistics of embryo collection and transfer in domestic farm animals. Embryo Technology Newsletter 2017; 35: 8-23. doi: 10.1071/RD11913
4. Kafi M, McGowan MR. Factors associated with variation in the superovulatory response of cattle. Animal Reproduction Science 1997; 48: 137-157. doi: 10.1016/S0378-4320(97)00033-X
5. Bó GA, Guerrero DC, Tríbulo A, Tríbulo H, Tríbulo R et al. New approaches to superovulation in the cow. Reproduction, Fertility and Development 2010; 22: 106-112. doi: 10.1071/ RD09226
6. Baruselli PS, Batista EOS, Vieira LM, Souza AH. Relationship between follicle population, AMH concentration and fertility in cattle. Animal Reproduction 2015; 12: 487-497. doi: 10.1016/ S0045-7949(97)00138-7.
7. Bó GA, Mapletoft RJ. Historical perspectives and recent research on superovulation in cattle. Theriogenology 2014; 81: 38-48. doi: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2013.09.020
8. Silva JCC, Alvarez RH, Zanenga CA, Pereira GT. Factors affecting embryo production in superovulated Nelore cattle. Animal Reproduction 2009; 6: 440-445.
9. Taşdemir U, Karaşahin T, Satılmış M, Kızıl SH, Kaymaz M. Various FSH administration on superovulatory response and embryo yield in Anatolian Black Heifers. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal 2016; 9: 322-326. doi: 10.5578/kvj.35305
10. Hasler JF. Bovine embryo transfer: are efficiencies improving? Proceedings Applied Reproductive Strategies. Bioniche Animal Health 2010; 1: 1-18.
11. Kanitz W, Becker F, Schneider F, Kanitz E, Leiding C et al. Superovulation in cattle: practical aspects of gonadotropin treatment and insemination. Reproduction Nutrition Development 2002; 42: 587-599. doi: 10.1051/rnd
12. Martens G, Nohner HP, Leiding C, Schneider F, Becker F et al. Optimizing frequency of FSH applicatıon for superovulatory treatment in cattle. Reproduction, Fertility and Development 2005; 17: 313-314.
13. Cirit Ü, Özmen MF, Küçükaslan İ, Köse M, Kutsal HG et al. Effect of the interval from follicle aspiration to initiation of lengthened FSH treatment on follicular superstimulatory and superovulatory responses and embryo production in lactating Simmental cows. Theriogenology 2019; 128: 218-224. doi: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2019.02.008
14. Breuel KF, Baker RD, Butcher RL, Townsend EC, Inskeep EK et al. Effects of breed, age of donor and dosage of follicle stimulating hormone on the superovulatory response of beef cows. Theriogenology 1991; 36: 241-255. doi: 10.1016/0093-691X(91)90383-O
15. Karaşahin T, Kızıl SH, Satılmıs M, Akyol N, Dursun Ş et al. Investigation of the response of different breeds to the superovulation treatment. Journal of Advances in VetBio Science and Techniques 2016; 1: 1-5.
16. Donaldson LE. Cattle breed as a source of variation in embryo transfer. Theriogenology 1984; 21: 1013-1018. doi: 10.1016/0093-691X(84)90396-0
17. Bono G, Gabai G, Silvestrelli L, Comin A. Superovulatory and endocrinological responses of simmental cows treated either with PMSG or hMG or in combination. Theriogenology 1991; 35: 1179-1190. doi: 10.1016/0093-691X(91)90364-J
18. Bó GA, Mapletoft RJ. Evaluation and classification of bovine embryos. Animal Reproduction 2013; 10: 344-348.
19. Greenhouse SW, Geisser S. On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika 1959; 24: 95-112.
20. Huynh H, Feldt LS. Estimation of the box correction for degrees of freedom from sample data in randomized block and split-plot designs. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 1976; 1: 69-82. doi: 10.3102/10769986001001069
21. Kelly P, Duffy P, Roche JF, Boland MP. Superovulation in cattle: Effect of FSH type and method of administration on follicular growth, ovulatory response and endocrine patterns. Animal Reproduction Science 1997; 46: 1-14. doi: 10.1016/S0378- 4320(96)01589-8
22. Rico C, Fabre S, Medigue C, Clemente ND, Clement F et al. Anti-mullerian hormone is an endocrine marker of ovarian gonadotropin-responsive follicles and can help to predict superovulatory responses in the cow. Biology of Reproduction 2009; 80: 50-59. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.108.072157
23. Lee W, Song K, Lim K, Lee S, Lee B et al. Influence of factors during superovulation on embryo production in Korean Holstein Cattle. Journal of Veterinary Medical Science 2012; 74: 167-174. doi: 10.1292/jvms.11-0057
24. Moore SG, Hasler JF. A 100-Year Review: Reproductive technologies in dairy science. Journal of Dairy Science 2017; 100: 10314-10331. doi: 10.3168/jds.2017-13138
25. Chebel RC, Demétrio DGB, Metzger J. Factors affecting success of embryo collection and transfer in large dairy herds. Theriogenology 2008; 69: 98-106. doi: 10.1016/j. theriogenology.2007.09.008.
26. Mikkola M, Taponen J. Embryo yield in dairy cattle after superovulation with Folltropin or Pluset. Theriogenology 2017; 88: 84-88. doi: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2016.09.052
27. Stroud B, Hasler JF. Dissecting why superovulation and embryo transfer usually work on some farms but not on others. Theriogenology 2006; 65: 65-76. doi: 10.1016/j. theriogenology.2005.10.007
28. Sartori R, Bastos MR, Wiltbank MC. Factors affecting fertilisation and early embryo quality in single- and superovulated dairy cattle. Reproduction, Fertility and Development 2010; 22: 151-158. doi: 10.1071/RD09221
29. Hyttel P, Callesen H, Greve T, Schmidt M. Oocyte maturation and sperm transport in superovulated cattle. Theriogenelogy 1991; 35: 91-108.
30. Leroy JLMR, Opsomer G, de Vliegher S, Vanholder T, Goossens L et al. Comparison of embryo quality in high-yielding dairy cows, in dairy heifers and in beef cows. Theriogenology 2005; 64: 2022-2036. doi: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2005.05.003.
31. Scenna, FN, Munar CJ, Mujica I, Martin E, Lafarga P et al. Factors affecting pregnancy rate following timed embryo transfer program in cattle under field conditions. Reproduction, Fertility and Development 2007: 168-173.
32. Hussein MM, Abdel Aziz RL, Abdel-Wahab A, El-Said H. Preliminary study of factors affecting the superovulatory response of high producing dairy cows superstimulated regardless of the stage of estrous cycle in Egypt. Beni-Suef University Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences 2014; 3: 286- 292. doi: 10.1016/j.bjbas.2014.11.002
33. Isogai T, Shimohira I, Kimura K. Factors affecting embryo superovulation treatment production following in holstein donors and repeated effects of age at last calving and time after calving at first treatment on embryo production by repeated treatment in the determination of appropriate. Journal of Reproduction and Development 1993; 39: 79-84.
34. Lerner SP, Thayne WV, Baker RD, Henschen T, Meredith S et al. Age, dose of FSH and other factors affecting superovulation in Holstein Cows. J Animal Sci 1986; 63: 176-183.
35. Mapletoft RJ, Steward K, Adams G. Recent advances in the superovulation in cattle. Reproduction Nutrition Development 2002; 42: 601-611. doi: 10.1051/rnd
36. Nilchuen P, Chomchai S, Rattanatabtimtong S. Superovulation with different doses of follicle stimulating hormone in Kamphaeng Saen beef cattle. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 2012; 11: 676-680. doi: 10.3923/javaa.2012.676.680
37. Zižlavský JŽ, Íha JŘ, Rban FU, Áchal LM, Típková MŠ. Production of embryos from repeated superovulations of cows during one calving interval. Europe 2002; 92-97.
38. Tonhati H, Lobo RB, Oliveira H. Repeatability and heritability of response to superovulation in Holstein cow. Theriogenelogy 1998; 51: 1151-1156.