Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-dc8c957cd-n2smj Total loading time: 0.384 Render date: 2022-01-27T16:25:53.769Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Ovulation of the first dominant follicle arising after day 21 post partum in suckling beef cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

K. D. Sinclair*
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB21 9YA, UK
G. Molle
Affiliation:
Istituto Zootecnico e Caseario per la Sardegna, Olmedo, Sardinia, Italy
R. Revilla
Affiliation:
Servicio de Investigacion Agraria, Unidad de Produccion Animal, Apdo. 727·50080, Zaragoza, Spain
J. F. Roche
Affiliation:
Faculty Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland
G. Quintans
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB21 9YA, UK
L. Marongiu
Affiliation:
Istituto Zootecnico e Caseario per la Sardegna, Olmedo, Sardinia, Italy
A. Sanz
Affiliation:
Servicio de Investigacion Agraria, Unidad de Produccion Animal, Apdo. 727·50080, Zaragoza, Spain
D. R. Mackey
Affiliation:
Faculty Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland Teagasc, Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland
M. G. Diskin
Affiliation:
Teagasc, Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland
*
Get access

Abstract

The effects of body condition score (BCS) of 2·0 or 3·0 units at calving (low v. moderate), post-partum energy intake at 0·6 or 1·0 MJ metabolizable energy (ME) per day per kg M0·75 (low v. high) and unrestricted or restricted (once daily) suckling on the ability of cows to ovulate were studied in a 2 ✕ 2 ✕ 2 factorial design with each treatment replicated eight times. Calf isolation and restricted suckling were imposed shortly after selection of the first dominant follicle (DF) to emerge after day 21 post partum. The episodic release of LH (sampled at 15-min intervals for 10 h) was determined 48 h before and 48 h after the day calf isolation and restricted suckling commenced. Additional blood samples were collected weekly for plasma insulin determination. The mean interval from calving to first ovulation was shorter for cows in moderate than low BCS at calving (47·8 v. 57·1 days, s.e.d. = 4·50, P < 0·05), and for cows suckling once daily than for those with unrestricted suckling (42·9 v. 62·0 days, s.e.d. = 4·50, P < 0·001). Post-partum nutrition did not affect this interval. Mean LH pulse frequency prior to the start of restricted suckling was higher for cows of moderate than low BCS at calving (3·2 v. 1·6 pulses per 10 h, s.e.d. = 0·60, P < 0·05). Subsequently, LH pulse frequency was higher for cows suckling once daily than for those with unrestricted suckling (4·0 v. 2·2 pulses per 10 h, s.e.d. = 0·82, P < 0·05). More cows in moderate than low BCS ovulated the first DF to emerge after day 21 post partum (within 4 to 6 days) in response to restricted suckling (69 v. 25%, P < 0·05). LH pulse frequency prior to restricted suckling increased (P < 0·05) with plasma insulin concentration (categorized as low, < 5; moderate, 5 to 8; and high, >8 mIU per l). There were indications of interactions between suckling treatment and BCS (P < 0·08), and suckling treatment and plasma insulin concentration (P < 0·06), on LH pulse frequency, which suggested that calf restriction could alleviate the suppressive effects of under nutrition on episodic LH release. Amongst cows suckling once daily, the non-ovulating animals had fewer LH pulses prior to restricted suckling and smaller, slower growing DF, indicating an inability of the DF to respond to increased LH pulse frequency following calf restriction. Cows of moderate BCS, particularly those with moderate to high levels of plasma insulin (³ 5 mIU per l), responded favourably to restricted suckling. In contrast, excessively thin cows with low plasma insulin concentrations (<5 mIU per l), that had most to gain from restricted suckling, responded poorly.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acosta, B., Tarnavsky, G. K., Platt, T. E., Hamernik, D. L., Brown, J. L., Schoenemann, H. M. and Reeves, J. J. 1983. Nursing enhances the negative effect of estrogen on LH release in the cow. Journal of Animal Science 57: 15301536.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bao, B. and Garverick, H. A. 1998. Expression of steroidogenic enzyme and gonadotropin receptor genes in bovine follicles during ovarian follicular waves: a review. Journal of Animal Science 76: 19031921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckett, J. L., Sakurai, H., Famula, T. R. and Adams, T. E. 1997. Negative feedback potency of estradiol is increased in orchidectomized sheep during chronic nutrient restriction. Biology of Reproduction 57: 408414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, A. N., Lamming, G. E. and Haynes, N. B. 1986. Endogenous opioid peptides and the control of gonadotrophin secretion. Research in Veterinary Science 41: 285299.Google Scholar
Browning Jr, R., Robert, R. S., Lewis, A. W., Neuendorff, D. A. and Randel, R. D. 1994. Effects of postpartum nutrition and once-daily suckling on reproductive efficiency and preweaning calf performance in fall-calving Brahman (Bos indicus) cows. Journal of Animal Science 72: 984989.Google Scholar
Bruce, J. M., Broadbent, P. J. and Topps, J. H. 1984. A model of the energy system of lactating and pregnant cows. Animal Production 38: 351362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, P. D., Spitzer, J. C. and Henricks, D. M. 1997. Effect of dietary energy restriction on follicular development and luteal function in nonlactating beef cows. Journal of Animal Science 75: 10781086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byerley, D. J., Whisnant, C. S., Dean, R. and Kiser, T. E. 1993. Hypothalamic proopiomelanocortin mRNA levels in suckled or nonsuckled beef cows: a preliminary study. Theriogenology 40: 661668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connor, H. C., Houghton, P. L., Lemenager, R. P., Malven, P. V., Parfet, J. R. and Moss, G. E. 1990. Effect of dietary energy, body condition and calf removal on pituitary gonadotrophins, gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) and hypothalamic opioids in beef cows. Domestic Animal Endocrinology 7: 403411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, D. J., Crowe, M. A. and Roche, J. F. 1997. Circulating FSH isoform patterns during recurrent increases in FSH throughout the oestrous cycle of heifers. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 110: 339345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeRouen, S. M., Franke, D. E., Morrison, D. G., Wyatt, W. E., Coombs, D. F., Whyte, T. W., Humes, P. E. and Greene, B. B. 1994. Prepartum body condition and weight influences on reproductive performance of first-calf beef cows. Journal of Animal Science 72: 11191125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duffy, P., Crowe, M. A., Boland, M. P. and Roche, J. F. 2000. Effect of exogenous LH pulses on the fate of the first dominant follicle in postpartum beef cows nursing calves. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 118: 917.Google Scholar
Fracker, P. J. and Speck, J. C. 1978. Protein and cell membrane iodinations with a sparingly soluble chloramide, 1, 3, 4, 6-tetrochloro-3a, 6a-diphenylglycoluril. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 80: 849857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Genstat 5 Committee. 1993, Genstat 5, release 3 reference manual. Oxford Science Publications, Clarenden Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Ginther, O. J. 1993. A method for characterizing ultrasonically-derived follicular data in heifers. Theriogenology 39: 363371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffith, M. K. and Williams, G. L. 1996. Roles of maternal vision and olfaction in suckling-mediated inhibition of luteinizing hormone secretion, expression of maternal selectivity, and lactational performance of beef cows. Biology of Reproduction 54: 761768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimard, B., Humblot, P., Ponter, A. A., Mialot, J. P., Sauvant, D. and Thibier, M. 1995. Influence of postpartum energy restriction on energy status, plasma LH and oestradiol secretion and follicular development in suckled beef cows. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 104: 173179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutiérrez, C. G., Campbell, B. K. and Webb, R. 1997. Development of a long-term bovine granulosa cell culture system: induction and maintenance of estradiol production, response to follicle-stimulating hormone, and morphological characteristics. Biology of Reproduction 56: 608616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imakawa, K., Day, M. L., Zalesky, D. D., Clutter, A., Kittok, R. J. and Kinder, J. E. 1987. Effects of 17 beta-estradiol and diets varying in energy on secretion of luteinizing hormone in beef heifers. Journal of Animal Science 64: 805815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinsley, C. H., Morse, A. C., Zoumas, C., Corl, S. and Billack, B. 1995. Intracerebroventricular infusions of morphine, and blockade with naloxone, modify the olfactory preferences for pup odors in lactating rats. Brain Research Bulletin 37: 103107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lagrange, A. H., Ronnekleiv, O. K. and Kelly, M. J. 1994. The potency of mu-opioid hyperpolarization of hypothalamic arcuate neurons is rapidly attenuated by 17 beta-estradiol. Journal of Neuroscience 14: 61966204.Google Scholar
Lamb, G. C., Miller, B. L., Lynch, J. M., Thompson, K. E., Heldt, J. S., Loest, C. A., Grieger, D. M. and Stevenson, J. S. 1999. Twice daily suckling but not milking with calf presence prolongs postpartum anovulation. Journal of Animal Science 77: 22072218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lermite, V. and Terqui, M. 1991. Plasma sex steroid-binding protein in mature beef heifers: effects of reproductive status, nutritional level, and porcine growth hormone, and estradiol-17b treatments. Biology of Reproduction 44: 864870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowman, B. G., Scott, N. A. and Somerville, S. H. 1976. Condition scoring of beef cattle, revised edition. East of Scotland College of Agriculture, bulletin no. 6.Google Scholar
Mackey, D. R., Sreenan, J. M., Roche, J. F. and Diskin, M. G. 2000. The effect of progesterone alone or in combination with estradiol on follicular dynamics, gonadotropin profiles, and estrus in beef cows following calf isolation and restricted suckling. Journal of Animal Science 78: 19171929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNeilly, A. S. and Fraser, H. M. 1987. Effect of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist-induced suppression of LH and FSH on follicle growth and corpus luteum function in the ewe. Journal of Endocrinology 115: 273282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merriam, G. R. and Wachter, W. 1982. Algorithms for the study of episodic hormone secretion. American Journal of Physiology 243: (Endocrinology and Metabolism 6:) E310-E318.Google Scholar
Monget, P. and Martin, G. B. 1997. Involvement of insulinlike growth factors in the interactions between nutrition and reproduction in female mammals. Human Reproduction 12: (suppl. 1) 3352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, D. G., Spitzer, J. C. and Perkins, J. L. 1999. Influence of prepartum body condition score change on reproduction in multiparous beef cows calving in moderate body condition. Journal of Animal Science 77: 10481054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, R. C., Corah, L. R., Cochran, R. C., Beal, W. E., Stevenson, J. S., Minton, J. E., Simms, D. D. and Brethour, J. R. 1991. Influence of dietary energy on follicular development, serum gonadotrophins, and first postpartum ovulation in suckled beef cows. Journal of Animal Science 69: 37623773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pleasants, A. B. and Barton, R. A. 1992. Observations on the length of the postpartum estrous cycles and their relationship to other reproductive parameters in mature Angus cows calving in the spring of 2 consecutive years. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 35: 5962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Randel, R. D. 1990. Nutrition and postpartum rebreeding in cattle. Journal of Animal Science 68: 853862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, J. J., Sinclair, K. D., Randel, R. D. and Sykes, A. R. 1999. Nutritional management of the female ruminant: mechanistic approaches and predictive models. In Nutritional ecology of herbivores (ed. Jung, H.-J. G. and JrFahey, G. C.). Proceedings of the fifth international symposium on the nutrition of herbivores, pp. 550608. American Society of Animal Science, Savoy, IL Google Scholar
Sinclair, K. D., Broadbent, P. J. and Hutchinson, J. S. M. 1995. Naloxone evokes a nutritionally dependent LH response in post partum beef cows but not in mid-luteal phase maiden heifers. Animal Science 61: 219230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, K. D., Yildiz, S., Quintans, G., Gebbie, F. E. and Broadbent, P. J. 1998. Annual energy intake and the metabolic and reproductive performance of beef cows differing in body size and milk potential. Animal Science 66: 657666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spicer, L. J. and Chamberlain, C. S. 2000. Production of insulin-like growth factor-I by granulosa cells but not thecal cells is hormonally responsive in cattle. Journal of Animal Science 78: 29192926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stagg, K., Spicer, L. J., Sreenan, J. M., Roche, J. F. and Diskin, M. G. 1998. Effect of calf isolation on follicular wave dynamics, gonadotrophin and metabolic hormone changes, and interval to first ovulation in beef cows fed either of two energy levels postpartum. Biology of Reproduction 59: 777783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starr, J. I., Horwitz, D. L., Rubenstein, A. H. and Mako, M. E. 1979. Insulin, proinsulin and c-peptide, In Methods of hormone radioimmunoassay, second edition (ed. Jaffer, B. M. and Behman, H. R.). Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Stevenson, J. S., Lamb, G. C., Hoffman, D. P. and Minton, J. E. 1997. Interrelationship of lactation and postpartum anovulation in suckled and milked cows. Livestock Production Science 50: 5774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, R. E., Spicer, L. J., Hamilton, T. D. and Keefer, B.E. 1995. Effects of insulin-like growth factor I and insulin on proliferation and on basal and luteinizing hormone-induced steroidogenesis of bovine thecal cells: involvement of glucose and receptors for insulin-like growth factor I and luteinizing hormone. Journal of Animal Science 73: 37193731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viker, S.D., Larson, R. L., Kiracofe, G. H., Stewart, R. E. and Stevenson, J. S. 1993. Prolonged postpartum anovulation in mastectomized cows requires tactile stimulation by the calf. Journal of Animal Science 71: 9991003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vizcarra, J. A., Wettemann, R. P., Spitzer, J. C. and Morrison, D. G. 1998. Body condition at parturition and postpartum weight gain influence luteal activity and concentrations of glucose, insulin, and nonesterified fatty acids in plasma of primiparous beef cows. Journal of Animal Science 76: 927936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, R., Gosden, R. G., Telfer, E. E. and Moor, R. M. 1999. Factors affecting folliculogenesis in ruminants. Animal Science 68: 257284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whisnant, C. S., Kiser, T. E., Thompson, F. N. and Barb, C. R. 1986. Influence of calf removal on the serum luteinizing hormone response to naloxone in the postpartum beef cow. Journal of Animal Science 63: 561564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whisnant, C. S., Kiser, T. E., Thompson, F. N. and Hall, J. B. 1985. Effect of nutrition on the LH response to calf removal and GnRH. Theriogenology 24: 565573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, G. L., Koziorowski, M., Osborn, R. G., Kirsch, J. D. and Slanger, W. D. 1987. The postweaning rise of tonic luteinizing hormone secretion in anestrous cows is not prevented by chronic milking or the physical presence of the calf. Biology of Reproduction 36: 10791084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, G. L., JrMcVey, W. R. and Hunter, J. F. 1993. Mammary somatosensory pathways are not required for suckling-mediated inhibition of luteinizing hormone secretion and delay of ovulation in cows. Biology of Reproduction 49: 13281337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, I. A., Rhind, S. M., Whyte, T. K. and Smith, A. J. 1992. Effects of body condition at calving and feeding level after calving on LH profiles and the duration of the post-partum anoestrous period in beef cows. Animal Science 55: 4146.Google Scholar
33
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Ovulation of the first dominant follicle arising after day 21 post partum in suckling beef cows
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Ovulation of the first dominant follicle arising after day 21 post partum in suckling beef cows
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Ovulation of the first dominant follicle arising after day 21 post partum in suckling beef cows
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *