Combination of the ram effect with PGF2α estrous synchronization treatments in ewes during the breeding season

Factors affecting the success of laparoscopic artificial insemination in sheep

Successful artificial breeding underpins rapid genetic and production gains in animal agriculture. In sheep, artificial insemination with frozen semen is performed via intrauterine laparoscopy as frozen-thawed spermatozoa do not traverse the cervix in sufficient numbers for high fertility and transcervical insemination is anatomically impossible in most ewes. Historically, laparoscopic artificial insemination has always been considered reasonably successful, but recent anecdotal reports of poor fertility place it at risk of warning adoption. Understanding the male, female and environmental factors that influence the fertility of sheep is warranted if the success of artificial insemination is to be improved and genetic progress maximised for the sheep industry. This review details the current practice of laparoscopic AI in sheep. It explores the effects of semen quantity and quality, the ewe, her preparation, and environmental conditions, on the fertility obtained following laparoscopic artificial insemination.

Exploring Endogenous and Exogenous Factors for Successful Artificial Insemination in Sheep: A Global Overview

Artificial insemination (AI) plays a vital role in animal breeding programs. AI is applied to enhance animal genetics and facilitate the widespread integration of desirable characteristics with a high potential for productivity. However, in sheep, this biotechnology is not commonly practicable due to multi-factorial challenges, resulting in inconsistent outcomes and unpredictable results. Thoughtful selection of semen donors and recipients based on genetic merit deeply impacts ovine AI outcomes. Additionally, endogenous factors such as breed, age, fertility traits, genetic disorders, and cervical anatomy in ewes contribute to ovine AI success. Extensive research has studied exogenous influences on sexual behavior, reproductive health, and hormonal regulation, all impacting ovine AI success. These exogenous factors include techniques like estrus induction, synchronization, semen handling methods (fresh/chilled/frozen), and insemination methods (cervical/laparoscopic), as well as nutritional factors and climatic conditions. This overview of the literature highlights the endogenous and exogenous challenges facing successful ovine AI and proposes strategies and best practices for improvement. This paper will serve as a guide for understanding and optimizing the success of ovine AI.

Biostimulation and pheromones in livestock: A review

This review examines aspects of the phenomenon of biostimulation in swine, goats, sheep, cattle and deer, to improve the collective knowledge and exploitation of its relevant mechanisms and effects in animal production. The long-term goal is to implement biostimulation strategies that benefit livestock reproduction and production while being both cost-effective and socially acceptable.

Approaches of estrous synchronization in sheep: developments during the last two decades: a review

The objective of the current review was to summarize the protocols used for estrous synchronization in ewes during the last two decades. Progesterone (P4) is a major hormone used in most protocols. P4 in the form of a controlled internal drug releasing (CIDR) device, medroxyprogesterone acetate (MAP), and fluorogestone acetates (FGA) has been used for estrous synchronization. Also, gonadotropins such as equine chorionic gonadotropin (eCG) and gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) are often administered at the end of P4-based protocols to improve fertility. Moreover, the administration of prostaglandins (PG) and ram effects have been used for estrus induction and synchronization of ewes. The findings of previous studies indicate that the outcome of administering various synthetics P4 analogues (CIDR, MAP, and FGA) in ewes is comparable in terms of estrous synchronization/induction. The supplementation of P4-based protocols with eCG, however, improves the estrus response and pregnancy rate during breeding and non-breeding season. On the other hand, PG is effective for successful estrous synchronization during the breeding season only. Often, two injections of PG are administered either 11 or 14 days apart along with P4-based protocols to lyse ovine corpus luteum (CL) when it is receptive to PG i.e., 3 days post-ovulation. Alternatively, the "ram effect" has been shown to improve the efficacy of P4-based protocols and can be used as an alternative to eCG in ewes. The current review describes the methods of synchronization and their outcomes during breeding and a non-breeding season in ewes.

Estrus Synchronization in the Sheep and Goat

Estrus synchronization and manipulation are a tool that has been used by producers to provide uniform lamb and kid meat production and dairy sheep and goat milk production, to concentrate work and labor cost, and to plan for the lambing and kidding time. Breeders can also use estrus synchronization to stimulate ewes and does to exhibit estrus and ovulate outside of the breeding season, although both the ovulation rate and pregnancy rate may be decreased. To increase the ovulation rate outside of the breeding season, a variety of estrus synchronization methods have been used.

Sexual stimulation as a luteolytic inductor in beef heifers

The objective was to determine if the introduction of androgenized steers or females in oestrus has luteolytic effects during the advanced luteal phase (Day 12-13 of the cycle, Day of ovulation = Day 0) in heifers by analysing the changes in corpus luteum (CL) size and perfused area together with progesterone (P4) secretion. Experiment 1 (EXP1) was carried out in May (autumn) with 12 Angus and Angus X Hereford heifers and experiment 2 (EXP2) in September (spring) with 20 heifers of the same breed. Procedures for both experiments were the same. Firstly, oestrus was synchronized in heifers, then, transrectal colour doppler ultrasonography was performed daily from Day 10 to Day 12 of the cycle in all animals. On Day 12 in the afternoon, animals were allocated to two experimental groups (control and biostimulated) and maintained separated (minimum distance: 1000 m) until the end of each experiment. In EXP1, two androgenized steers were introduced into the biostimulated group (BAS) and compared with unstimulated control group (CON1). In EXP2, 20 animals were separated into control group (CON2) and biostimulated group (BHE), in which 4 oestrous heifers were introduced on Day 12 in the afternoon, and 4 more on day 13. The oestrous heifers were injected with 2 mg i.m. of oestradiol benzoate every 12 h until the end of the experiment to maintain the receptiveness. In both experiments, from Day 13 until the day on which detectable luteal blood flow (irrigation) disappeared, colour doppler ultrasonography was performed every 12 h in both groups. Blood samples were collected from all heifers every 12 h from Day 10 to the day in which irrigation disappeared. In EXP1 there was no effect of treatment on CL volume. The BAS had less CL's perfused area than controls 0.09 ± 0.02 cm² vs 0.16 ± 0.02 cm², respectively (p = 0.015), less percentage of perfused area (2.4 ± 0.4% vs 4.2 ± 0.4%; p = 0,011), and lower progesterone (P4) concentration than CON1 (2.7 ± 1.0 ng/mL vs 5.8 ± 0.9 ng/mL respectively; p = 0.046). On Day 14.5 of the cycle, the BAS tended to have a lower concentration of P4 than the CON1 (p = 0.06) and on Days 15.5, 16, 16.5, 17, 17.5, 19.5 the P4 concentration was lower in BAS than in CON1 (p < 0.05). In EXP2 there were no treatment effects in any of the studied variables. Overall, it was concluded that the introduction of androgenized steers during heifers' advanced luteal phase of heifers advanced the luteolytic process. However, the introduction of oestrous heifers had no effect on luteal activity.

The use of progesterone intravaginal devices is superior to use of the ram effect at hastening the reproductive performance in transitional Targhee ewes

To compare the use of controlled intravaginal drug release (CIDR, EAZI-BREED™ CIDR^® Sheep, USA, Zoetis) with the ram effect, a combination of CIDR and ram effect and the addition of P.G.600^® to each of these scenarios on their contribution to inducing the onset of cyclicity and their ability to improve reproductive efficiency in a commercial sheep flock, a randomized clinical trial was conducted. Multiparous ewes (n = 283) were randomly assigned to one of six treatments prior to intact male introduction on day 0: only CIDR devices (day -5 to day 0) (n = 40), exposure to two vasectomized rams (d-14 to d0) (n = 55), CIDR (d-5 to d0) and an intramuscular injection of P.G.600^® (d0) (n = 40), exposure to two vasectomized rams (d-14 to d0) and treated with CIDR devices (day -5 to day 0) (n = 40). exposure to vasectomized rams (d-14 to d0), CIDR (d-5 to d0) and an intramuscular injection ofP.G.600^®, (d0) (n = 38), and a control group, without exposure to vasectomized rams, CIDRs or P.G.600^® (n = 70). Ewes were exposed to intact males on day 0. Days to lambing from the earliest expected lambing date at 150 days post introduction of rams was compared between groups with survival analysis. The mean survival time was significantly shorter in all groups that used CIDR compared to the control group (P < 0.003, adjusted for multiple comparisons). The addition of a teaser ram or a P.G.600^® injection did not change survival time. In a Cox proportional hazard model for time to lambing, the use of CIDR had a hazard ratio of 1.62 (95% CI: 1.07, 2.45, P = 0.23), while other variables (teaser ram, P.G.600^®) were not significant. In a Poisson regression for the number of lambs born to each ewe, P.G.600^® was not a significant variable, even when adjusted for age of ewe (P = 0.74). The combination of the ram effect and CIDRs did not have an additive effect. The use of CIDR shortened time to cyclicity in study ewes and may provide an attractive option to advance lambing season. Further studies on the economics of this method are warranted.

Effect of the combination of male effect with PGF2α on estrus synchronization of hair sheep in Mexican tropic

The aim of this study was to evaluate the "male effect" at the end of protocol with prostaglandins (PG) on estrus synchronization of hair sheep during breeding season (November-December) in Yucatan, Mexico. Twenty female Pelibuey sheep (weighting 38.2 ± 1.6 kg and body condition score of 2.5 ± 0.5) were randomly distributed in two groups (n = 10). Group T1 (control, PG), two doses of 50 μg of cloprostenol with 12 days between applications were applied; in the second group T2 (PG-ME), ewes received the same PG protocol plus the introduction of a male at the end of treatment. The interval of end treatment-onset of estrus was analyzed using survival test; the number of sheep with presence/absence of estrus was analyzed using Fisher's exact test. Ewes in estrus for groups T1 and T2 were 5 vs. 8, respectively. No significant differences were found as regards the interval end of treatment-onset of estrus (P > 0.05), as well as in total proportion of ewes with estrus and likewise in the duration of it (P > 0.05). We conclude that the protocol based on double dose of PGF2α with interval of 12 days combined with the male effect is efficient to induce luteolysis and estrus synchronization in hair sheep.

The use of prostaglandins in controlling estrous cycle of the ewe: a review

This review considers the use of prostaglandin F(2α) and its synthetic analogues (PG) for controlling the estrous cycle of the ewe. Aspects such as phase of the estrus cycle, PG analogues, PG doses, ovarian follicle development pattern, CL formation, progesterone synthesis, ovulation rate, sperm transport, embryo quality, and fertility rates after PG administration are reviewed. Furthermore, protocols for estrus synchronization and their success in timed AI programs are discussed. Based on available information, the ovine CL is refractory to PG treatment for up to 2 days after ovulation. All PG analogues are effective when an appropriate dose is given; in that regard, there is a positive association between the dose administered and the proportion of ewes detected in estrus. Follicular response after PG is dependent on the phase of the estrous cycle at treatment. Altered sperm transport and low pregnancy rates are generally reported. However, reports on alteration of the steroidogenic capacity of preovulatory follicles, ovulation rate, embryo quality, recovery rates, and prolificacy, are controversial. Although various PG-based protocols can be used for estrus synchronization, a second PG injection improves estrus response when the stage of the estrous cycle at the first injection is unknown. The estrus cycle after PG administration has a normal length. Prostaglandin-based protocols for timed AI achieved poor reproductive outcomes, but increasing the interval between PG injections might increase pregnancy rates. Attempts to improve reproductive outcomes have been directed to provide a synchronized LH surge: use of different routes of AI (cervical or intrauterine), different PG doses, and increased intervals between PG injections. Finally we present our point of view regarding future perspectives on the use of PG in programs of controlled sheep reproduction.