Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters

Country/Region as subject
Language
Affiliation country
Publication year range
1.
J Dairy Sci ; 98(12): 8775-87, 2015 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26387019

ABSTRACT

It has been previously shown that the long-term inhibition of milking-induced prolactin (PRL) release by quinagolide (QN), a dopamine agonist, reduces milk yield in dairy cows. To further demonstrate that PRL is galactopoietic in cows, we performed a short-term experiment that used PRL injections to restore the release of PRL at milking in QN-treated cows. Nine Holstein cows were assigned to treatments during three 5-d periods in a 3×3 Latin square design: 1) QN: twice-daily i.m. injections of 1mg of QN; 2) QN-PRL: twice-daily i.m. injections of 1mg of QN and twice-daily (at milking time) i.v. injections of PRL (2µg/kg body weight); and 3) control: twice-daily injections of the vehicles. Mammary epithelial cells (MEC) were purified from milk so that their viability could be assessed, and mammary biopsies were harvested for immunohistological analyses of cell proliferation using PCNA and STAT5 staining. In both milk-purified MEC and mammary tissue, the mRNA levels of milk proteins and BAX were determined using real-time reverse-transcription PCR. Daily QN injections reduced milking-induced PRL release. The area under the PRL curve was similar in the control and PRL injection treatments, but the shape was different. The QN treatment decreased milk, lactose, protein, and casein production. Injections of PRL did not restore milk yield but tended to increase milk protein yield. In mammary tissue, the percentage of STAT5-positive cells was reduced during QN but not during QN-PRL in comparison with the control treatment. The percentage of PCNA-positive cells was greater during QN-PRL injections than during the control or QN treatment and tended to be lower during QN than during the control treatment. In milk-purified MEC, κ-casein and α-lactalbumin mRNA levels were lower during QN than during the control treatment, but during QN-PRL, they were not different from the control treatment. In mammary tissue, the BAX mRNA level was lower during QN-PRL than during QN. The number of MEC exfoliated into milk was increased by QN injections but tended to be decreased by PRL injections. Injections of PRL also increased the viability of MEC harvested from milk. Although PRL injections at milking could not reverse the effect of QN treatment on milk production, their effects on cell survival and exfoliation and on gene expression suggest that the effect of QN treatment on the mammary gland is due to QN's inhibition of PRL secretion.


Subject(s)
Aminoquinolines/administration & dosage , Cattle/metabolism , Lactation/drug effects , Mammary Glands, Animal/drug effects , Prolactin/administration & dosage , Prolactin/antagonists & inhibitors , Animals , Caseins/metabolism , Cell Proliferation/drug effects , Dietary Supplements , Dopamine Agonists/pharmacology , Epithelial Cells/chemistry , Epithelial Cells/cytology , Female , Lactalbumin/metabolism , Lactose/analysis , Mammary Glands, Animal/chemistry , Mammary Glands, Animal/cytology , Milk/cytology , Milk Proteins/genetics , Proliferating Cell Nuclear Antigen/analysis , RNA, Messenger/analysis , STAT5 Transcription Factor/analysis
2.
Rev. med. vet. zoot ; 66(1): 43-52, ene.-abr. 2019. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1014236

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to classify and characterize the compositional quality of milk from river buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis) and cows (Bos spp.) in Colombia based on the fat, protein, and total solid (TS) contents. Using a hierarchical procedure, data on milk from river buffaloes (n = 7,726) and cows (n = 49,330) were filtered and subjected to cluster analysis in order to generate three groups: Normal (N), High quality (HQ) and Poor Quality (PQ). The categorized database was then randomly separated into two sets (training and validation) and a discriminant analysis was applied. In total, 37.3% of river buffalo milk samples were classified as N (6.80% fat, 4.34% protein, and 16.80% TS), 13% as HQ (9.41% fat, 4.93% protein, and 19.50% TS), and 43.7% as PQ (3.95% fat, 3.92% protein, and 13.7% TS). In contrast, 41.8% of cow milk samples were classified as N (3.64% fat, 3.37% protein, 12.42% TS), 41.2% as PQ (2.71% fat, 3.08% protein, and 10.6% TS), and 16.9% as HQ (5.46% fat, 4.01% protein, and 14.82% TS). The discriminant models for both river buffalo and cow milk were able to classify milk in the N and PQ groups with >90% accuracy, and that in the HQ group with >85% accuracy.


RESUMEN El objetivo de este estudio fue caracterizar y clasificar la calidad composicional de la leche de búfala (Bubalus bubalis) y de vaca (Bos spp.) en Colombia con base en los contenidos de grasa, proteína y sólidos totales. Mediante un procedimiento jerárquico los datos de leche de búfalos de agua (n = 7,726) y vacas (n = 49,330) se filtraron y se sometieron a análisis de conglomerados para generar tres grupos: Normal (N), Alta calidad (HQ) y Calidad deficiente (PQ). La base de datos categorizada se separó aleatoriamente en dos conjuntos (entrenamiento y validación) y se aplicó un análisis discriminante. En total, 37,3% de las muestras de leche de búfalo de agua se clasificaron como N (6,80% de grasa, 4,34% de proteína y 16,80% de TS); 13% como HQ (9,41% de grasa, 4,93% de proteína y 19,50% de TS) y 43,7 % como PQ (3,95% de grasa, 3,92% de proteína y 13,7% de TS). En contraste, el 41,8% de las muestras de leche de vaca se clasificaron como N (3,64% grasa, 3,37% proteína, 12,42% TS); 16,9% como HQ (5,46% de grasa, 4,01% de proteína y 14,82% de TS) y 41,2% como PQ (2,71% grasa, 3,08% proteína y 10,6% TS). Los modelos discriminantes para el búfalo de agua y la leche de vaca fueron capaces de clasificar la leche en los grupos N y PQ con una precisión >90% y en el grupo HQ con >85% de precisión.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL