Reproductive responses to sexually active buck of does treated with melatonin when body weight/body condition is increasing or decreasing

Effect of biostimulation on growth rate and reproductive development of Bos indicus dairy heifers

The present study aimed to compare the growth rate, feeding behavior, reproductive development, and concentrations of GH and leptin in Sahiwal heifers exposed to direct bull contact, bull contact through a fenceline, or isolated from bulls. Overall, 24 heifers were allotted to three treatment groups (n = eight/group) based on birth weight, body weight, and age. Heifers from the non-exposed group (NBE) remained isolated from bulls; heifers stimulated by fenceline bull contact (FBE) remained continuously exposed to bulls through a fenceline, and heifers with direct bull contact (DBE+FBE) had direct contact with a bull during 6 h/day plus continuous fenceline bull exposure for the entire 24 h period. It was considered that heifers attained puberty when progesterone concentration was >1 ng/mL. Biostimulated heifers achieved puberty at both a lower age and body weight (P < 0.05) than NBE heifers. Overall, average daily gain (g/day) was greater in DBE+FBE (516.3 ± 4.5) and FBE (501.6 ± 4.3) than in NBE (441.8 ± 2.9, respectively; P < 0.01). Leptin and growth hormone concentrations were significantly greater in FBE and DBE+FBE than NBE heifers. Both groups of biostimulated heifers devoted more time eating than NBE heifers, P < 0.05). In conclusion, biostimulation of Sahiwal heifers, either by exposing them to bulls through a fenceline or by both fenceline exposure and direct contact, reduced the age of puberty and increased growth performance. Overall, fenceline bull exposure can be recommended as an easy handling management to stimulate reproductive precocity and growth rate in heifers.

The use of photoperiod-treated bucks to induce a "male effect" does not compensate for the negative effects of nutritional restriction of the females in Mediterranean goats

This work examined the effect of acute nutritional restriction or supplementation one week before male introduction on the reproductive performances of the "male effect" when using photostimulated or control males in goats. On 22 March, 84 anoestrous does were placed with photostimulated bucks or with bucks which had received no treatments. One week before male introduction, the females were provided with different nutritional regimes: Supplemented, restricted or control females. The non-esterified fatty acids (NEFAs) and Insulin Growth Factor-1 (IGF-1) concentrations were measured in the same samples. Fecundity, fertility, prolificacy and productivity were also determined. No interaction between both sources of variation was observed in any of the reproductive variables studied. Treatment of the bucks increased the percentage of females expressing behavioural oestrous associated with ovulation (71% vs 90% for Natural and Photo groups, respectively, P < 0.05). The Supplemented females showed higher ovulation rate than Restricted females (1.77 ± 0.13 vs 1.05 ± 0.05, P < 0.001), fecundity (71% vs 43%, P < 0.05); fertility (76% vs 29%, P < 0.05) and productivity (1.00 ± 0.15 vs 0.29 ± 0.11 kids per female, P < 0.01). In the Supplemented females, the higher reproductive results could be due to the lower NEFAs and higher IGF-1 concentrations at ovulation and at the time of oestrus compared to the Restricted females. Thus, the present experiment results demonstrate that nutrition is an important factor in the response to the "male effect" at Mediterranean latitudes, and its negative effect cannot be counterbalanced by using photostimulated bucks.

The reproductive response to the male effect of 7- or 10-month-old female goats is improved when photostimulated males are used

The exposure of adult, female, Mediterranean goats during anoestrus to males with induced sexual activity via photostimulation, induces a very high percentage of ovulations. The present work examines the ability of photostimulated bucks to improve the male effect-induced reproductive response of young does over that induced by non-stimulated bucks. A 2×2 factorial experiment was designed, consisting of doe age and buck photoperiod treatments. During seasonal anoestrus, 41 does aged 7 (n=19) or 10 (n=22) months were subjected to the male effect on 10 April; half of each group was exposed to males rendered sexually active by prior exposure to 3 months of long days (16 h of light/day) from 31 October (PHOTO bucks), and half to males maintained under the natural photoperiod (CONTROL bucks). Oestrous activity was recorded daily by direct visual observation of the marks left by male-worn marking harnesses over the 32 days following the bringing of the sexes together (introduction). Doe body weight and body condition were determined weekly. Ovulation was detected by measuring plasma progesterone concentrations twice per week over the 3 weeks after introduction. The ovulation rate was assessed by transrectal ultrasonography. Fecundity, fertility, prolificacy and productivity were also determined. The interaction doe age × buck photoperiod treatment had no effect on any outcome. The percentage of females showing ovulation or oestrus was higher in the does exposed to PHOTO bucks (85% v. 43% for those exposed to CONTROL bucks) they also showed higher fertility (75% v. 43%) and productivity (1.05±0.17 v. 0.57±0.16 kids born per doe serviced) (all P values at least P<0.05). The 10-month-old group showed higher percentage of females showing ovulation, oestrus, fertility and productivity than the 7-month-old does after the male effect (females showing ovulation: 82% v. 42%; showing oestrus: 73% v. 42%; fertility: 73% v. 42% and productivity: 1.09±0.17 v. 0.47±0.14 goat kids born per doe serviced; respectively, all P values at least P<0.05). The present results show that the use of photostimulated males improves the reproductive performance of 7- and 10-month-old does, and may contribute towards increasing their productivity and lifetime reproductive performance.