Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T12:44:45.470Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of pre-ovulatory nutrition on the subsequent development of superovulated sheep ova in an in vitro culture system.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 November 2017

J. Creed ,
T.G. McEvoy ,
J.J. Robinson ,
R.P. Aitken ,
R.M. Palmer  and
I. Robertson
Get access

Extract

Superovulatory treatments for ewes are normally preceded by a period of priming. In a recent study involving two contrasting levels of feeding (0.6 versus 2.4 x maintenance), McEvoy et al (1993) observed that the higher level of feeding suppressed pre-ovulatory plasma progesterone concentrations and the subsequent early development and viability of fertilized ova. This finding suggests that there is a need to reconsider the recommendation, based on data for spontaneously-ovulating ewes, that ‘superovulated embryo donor ewes’ should be maintained on a high level of feeding during the period of oocyte maturation. It also raises questions regarding the form of the relationship between food intake and plasma progesterone concentrations over the wide range of feeding levels that occur in practice. The aims of the present study were therefore two-fold; firstly, to investigate the relationship between level of feeding and plasma progesterone for feed intakes that ranged from 0.6 x maintenance (M) to 2.4 M and secondly to assess the effect of pre-ovulatory feeding levels on the number, quality and viability of ova produced following superovulation.

Type
Sheep Production
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production (1972) , Volume 1994 , March 1994 , pp. 82
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Production 1994

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

McEvoy, T.G., Robinson, J.J., Aitken, R.P., Kyle, C.E. and Robertson, I. (1993). Animal Production 56,432.Google Scholar
Savio, J.D., Thatcher, W.W., Morris, G.R., Entwistle, K., Drost, M. and Mattiacci, M.R. (1993). Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 98, 77–84.Google Scholar
Wehrman, M.E., Roberson, M.S., Cupp, A.S., Kojima, F.N., Stumpf, T.T., Werth, L.A., Wolfe, M.W., Kittok, R.J. and Kinder, J.E. (1993). Biology of Reproduction 49, 214–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar