Ovarian follicle dynamics in ewes treated with intra-vaginal progesterone pessaries. 2. Factors affecting timing of estrus and reproductive outcomes following artificial insemination.

This study extends observations on the effects of intra-vaginal progesterone treatment on the relationships between the time of luteolysis, emergence of the ovulatory follicle, timing of estrus and ewe fertility. Observations were made in progesterone - treated ewes in autumn, the spring equinox and late spring (Experiment 1, Data set 1) and in progesterone - treated ewes and naturally cycling ewes in autumn and the spring equinox (Experiment 1, Data set 2). In Data set 1, the day of emergence of both the first and second ovulatory follicle was positively related to the day luteal regression within each season. In turn, the day of emergence influenced the timing of estrus by means of a season by day of luteal regression interaction (P < 0.001) indicating that the relationship was positive in autumn and the spring equinox but negative in late spring. In autumn, older ovulatory follicles were associated with an earlier onset of estrus compared with younger ovulatory follicles. In late spring, this relationship was reversed and was influenced by whether or not ewes were cycling at the time of pessary insertion. In Data set 2, the relationship between the day of follicle emergence and luteal regression was influenced by a treatment by day of regression interaction indicating the relationship was positive in treated ewes and negative in naturally cycling ewes. Timing of estrus was positively related (P < 0.001) to both the day of luteal regression and the day of follicle emergence (P < 0.05), with both relationships being stronger in naturally cycling ewes than in treated ewes. In Experiment 2, pregnancy rate following artificial insemination in autumn was highest (90.2%) when luteolysis occurred during Days 7-9 of the pessary period compared with Days 1-6 (77.8%, P = 0.16), 10 to 12 (68.8%, P < 0.05) or Days ≥13 (71.2%, P < 0.05). Timing of estrus was not affected. The mean diameter of ovulatory follicles that emerged during Days 7-9 was larger on Day 12 (5.8 ± 0.13 mm) compared with other periods (range 4.7 ± 0.05 to 5.6 ± 0.14 mm). This study provides two potential strategies to improve the success of AI programs. Firstly, appropriately timed treatment with PGF2α to control the time of emergence of ovulatory follicles and, secondly, earlier treatment with eCG to improve the development of ovulatory follicles that emerge late in the pessary period. Each is likely to be influenced by season and the cyclical status of the ewe.

Ovarian follicle dynamics in ewes treated with intra-vaginal progesterone pessaries. 1. Follicle waves and parameters of the estrous cycle.

Progesterone treatment for synchrony of estrus is standard in sheep artificial insemination (AI) programs but can be associated with poor outcomes. Potential for improvement exists through a better understanding of the interactions between follicle development, luteal regression, emergence of the ovulatory follicle and timing of estrus. These interactions were examined by comparing progesterone-treated (Day 1 = day of pessary insertion) and naturally cycling ewes (Day 1 = day after estrus) at three times of the year (Autumn, Spring equinox and late Spring). Observations were made from Day 1 until the day of ovulation. Compared with the natural cycle, progesterone treatment (300 mg intra-vaginal pessary for 14 d) reduced the number of follicle waves (2.2 ± 0.18 versus 2.8 ± 0.12; P < 0.05) and increased the length of the ovulatory wave (8.6 ± 0.45 versus 6.6 ± 0.42 d; P < 0.05). The number of follicles per wave, the inter-wave interval and ovulation rate were not affected. However, progesterone treatment induced (P < 0.05) an earlier luteolysis (9.7 ± 0.51 versus 15.4 ± 0.49 d after Day 1), an earlier emergence of the ovulatory follicle (7.5 ± 0.48 versus 11.4 ± 0.46 d after Day 1) and an earlier onset of estrus (26.1 ± 2.95 versus 53.3 ± 2.84 h after Day 14). Time of year also influenced the response to progesterone treatment. In Autumn compared with the Spring equinox and late Spring, there was a reduction (P < 0.05) in follicle wave number (2.4 ± 0.21 versus 2.5 ± 0.29 versus 3.0 ± 0.20 respectively), follicles per wave (2.6 ± 0.27 versus 3.5 ± 0.25 versus 3.2 ± 0.20 respectively), ovulation rate (1.6 ± 0.12 versus 1.9 ± 0.12 versus 2.0 ± 0.10 respectively) and the inter-wave interval was longer (5.3 ± 0.40 versus 4.0 ± 0.32 versus 3.8 ± 0.27 d respectively; P < 0.05). Time of year also influenced (P < 0.05) the time of luteolysis (earliest in late Spring), emergence of the ovulatory follicle (earliest in Autumn) and onset of estrus (earliest in Autumn). It is concluded that (1) the effects of progesterone treatment on follicle waves are relatively minor, (2) the effects of treatment on timing of luteolysis, emergence of the ovulatory follicle and onset of estrus are all significant although the effects on AI outcomes remain to be determined and (3) time of year has a minimal effect on follicle waves but a more significant effect on other parameters of the estrous cycle. A better understanding of these complexities will assist in the development of improved protocols for synchrony of estrus.