Effects of estradiol treatments on PGF2α release in beef heifers submitted to estrous resynchronization 14 days after timed-AI.

The effects of 17ß-estradiol (E2) or estradiol benzoate (EB) on PGF2α release were studied in bred-non-pregnant and pregnant Nelore beef heifers. The day of timed artificial insemination (TAI) was designated day 0 (D0), and a single treatment was given on D14. All heifers also received an intravaginal P4 device on D14, and were randomly assigned to three groups: Control (C, P4 device only, n = 12); E2 (1 mg E2 + 9 mg P4, n = 10); or EB (1 mg, n = 10). Blood samples were collected hourly for 8 hours after treatment (Hours 0-8) to measure plasma concentrations (pg/mL) of a PGF2α metabolite (PGFM). The P4 device was removed on D22 and pregnancy was diagnosed on D28. Pregnancy rate was not different among groups (C, n = 7/12; E2, n = 5/10; EB, n = 5/10). More (P < 0.05) heifers had a CV-identified prominent PGFM pulse (peak of > 100 pg/mL) in E2 group (6/10) than in EB (1/10) and C (0/12) groups. Hourly concentration of PGFM for Hours 0 to 8 showed significant effects of group and hour and an interaction of group by hour but did not show an interaction of group or hour with pregnancy status. In preliminary post-hoc analyses, PGFM concentrations during Hours 0 to 8 and pulse characteristics were analyzed within each pregnancy status. For the non-pregnant heifers, a group-by-hour interaction was detected tentatively indicating an increase (P < 0.005) in PGFM concentrations in E2 group from Hours 4 to 6 and in EB group at Hours 5 and 6. Maximum PGFM concentration during Hours 0 to 8 did not differ (P > 0.1) between E2 (124 ± 23) and EB (110 ± 30) groups, but was greater (P < 0.05) in each group than in C (32 ± 3). Furthermore, PGFM concentrations of pulses at the peak, amplitude, and area under pulse curve (pg/mL/h) were greater (P < 0.05) in E2 group than in C group whereas the EB group did not differ (P > 0.1) from the other groups. For pregnant heifers, no effects of group, hour, or their interaction were detected in PGFM concentrations during the hourly sessions, except that maximum PGFM concentration was greater (P < 0.05) in E2 than in EB and C groups. In addition, the number of prominent pulses was greater in E2 group than in Control or EB groups. In conclusion, PGFM increased earlier and in greater concentration combined for bred-non-pregnant and pregnant heifers treated 14 days after TAI with 1 mg E2 plus 9 mg P4 than with 1 mg EB. Tentatively, a positive effect for each of E2 and EB on PGFM concentrations was attenuated in pregnant heifers.

Molecular and endocrine factors involved in future dominant follicle dynamics during the induction of luteolysis in Bos indicus cows.

The growth profiles of the future dominant follicle (DF) and subordinate follicle (SF) and the gene expression of the granulosa cells during luteolysis induction in Bos indicus cows were evaluated. Forty cows were synchronized with a progesterone and estradiol based protocol. After synchronization, cows with a corpus luteum (CL) were evaluated by ultrasonography every 12 h, beginning at eight days post ovulation. Cows identified with a follicle of at least 6.0 mm in diameter in the second wave were split into two groups (BD-before follicular deviation and AD-after follicular deviation. In the BD group cows received 500 µg of cloprostenol (a synthetic analogue of prostaglandin F2α) when the DF reached a mean diameter of 7.0 mm (6.5-7.5 mm). In the AD group, cows received 500 µg of cloprostenol when the DF reached a mean diameter of 8.0 mm (7.5-8.5 mm). Cows in both groups were submitted to aspiration of the DF at 96 and 72 h after prostaglandin was given. Follicular aspirations were performed to quantify IGF1R, LHR and PAPPA transcripts in the granulosa cells. The diameter of the DF at the moment of prostaglandin administration (P = 0.001) and the growth rate of the SF (P = 0.05) were greater in the AD group. There was greater abundance of LHR transcripts in BD cows (P = 0.04). The remaining variables tested were similar between the experimental groups (P > 0.05). In conclusion, the induction of luteolysis before follicular deviation does not interfere with dominant follicle dynamics. However, it causes granulosa cell LHR down regulation.