GnRH34 with or without estradiol cypionate in timed AI in Bos indicus beef cows.

Two experiments were performed to evaluate the effects of GnRH treatment on the fertility of suckled Nelore beef cows treated with an estradiol/progesterone (E2/P4)-based protocol for timed artificial insemination (TAI). Experiment 1 focused on determining the effects of estradiol cypionate (EC) on ovulation in TAI cows treated with GnRH 34 h after removal of the intravaginal P4 device (IPD). Suckled cows (n = 26) were treated with 2 mg estradiol benzoate (EB) and IPD containing 1 g P4. After 8 days, IPDs were removed, and all cows were treated with 150 µg of d-cloprostenol (prostaglandin F2 alpha analog) and 300 IU of equine chorionic gonadotropin (eCG), then separated into two treatment groups consisting of cows who received 1) saline 0.9% i.m. (GnRH34 group) or 2) 0.6 mg i.m. of EC (EC-GnRH34 group). On day 9 (05:00 p.m.), all cows were given GnRH (10.5 µg of buserelin acetate) i.m. No differences were observed between the groups (P > 0.05) in the time of ovulation after IPD removal or in the proportion of cows ovulating. Experiment 2 focused on determining the effects of GnRH34 along with or in the absence of EC on day 8 on pregnancy per AI (P/AI) in postpartum beef cows. Cows (n = 981) were treated similarly to those in Experiment 1, but an additional group, the EC-GnRH48 group, was included, in which cows received EC on day 8 whereas those that did not show estrus received GnRH at TAI. Thus, in this experiment, groups consisted of GnRH34 (n = 322), EC-GnRH34 (n = 335), and EC-GnRH48 (n = 324). A higher rate of estrus expression was observed in cows treated with EC following IPD removal (EC-GnRH34: 69%, EC-GnRH48: 64.8%) than in cows in the GnRH34 group (45.6%). No difference in P/AI was observed between the treatment groups (P = 0.45), but P/AI in cows in the EC-GnRH34 group (64.2%) tended to be greater (P = 0.1) than in cows in the GnRH34 group (58%). In summary, although ovulation synchrony did not differ among the groups, P/AI in cows treated with EC and GnRH 34 h after IPD removal tended to be greater than in cows treated solely with GnRH; this was most likely due to a shorter proestrus/estrus period, considering the lower proportion of cows that displayed estrus in the GnRH34 group. Finally, given that P/AI did not differ between the EC-GnRH34 and EC-GnRH48 groups, our results suggest that, for cows not displaying estrus, administration of EC at the time of IPD removal followed by treatment with GnRH 48 h afterward represents the most cost-efficient TAI strategy for South American Zebu-based beef operations.

GnRH34: An alternative for increasing pregnancy in timed AI beef cows.

Two experiments evaluated the effects of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) treatment on fertility of suckled Nelore beef cows treated with an estradiol/progesterone (P4)-based protocol for timed artificial insemination (TAI). Experiment 1 was designed to determine the effect of GnRH administered 34 h after P4 insert removal (GnRH34) on time of ovulation. Suckled cows (n = 34) were treated with 2 mg estradiol benzoate (EB) and an intravaginal insert containing 1.9 g of P4. Eight days later, P4 inserts were removed, and all cows received 150 µg of d-cloprostenol (prostaglandin F2 alpha analogue), 300 IU of eCG, and 1 mg of estradiol cypionate (ECP). On Day 9 (05:00 p.m.), cows were randomly distributed, according to the diameter of the pre-ovulatory follicle, in two treatments: 1) GnRH (n = 17) cows that received 10.5 µg of buserelin acetate, or 2) no further treatment (control, n = 17). Cows treated with GnRH 34 h after P4 insert removal ovulated earlier (P = 0.02) than control cows (66 ± 0.0 and 77.2 ± 4.3 h). Experiment 2 was designed to determine the effect of GnRH34 on the fertility of suckled beef cows. Nelore cows (n = 506) were treated as Experiment 1. On Day 8, cows were painted in the sacrocaudal region to identify cows that displayed estrus. On Day 9 (05:00 p.m.), cows were randomized to receive same treatment as Experiment 1, control (n = 252), or GnRH (n = 254). All cows were TAI 48 h after P4 insert removal. At TAI, estrus was evaluated, and deemed to have occurred in cows without a tail-head chalk mark (>75% paint loss). Cows treated with GnRH 34 h after P4 insert removal had greater (P = 0.01) pregnancy per AI (P/AI) than cows that only received ECP (63.0% and 50.4%). No difference (P = 0.5) was observed in the proportion of cows that displayed estrus between treatments. Furthermore, cows that displayed estrus had greater (P < 0.01) P/AI than cows that did not. Treatment with GnRH, given at 34 h after P4 insert removal, increased (P < 0.05) P/AI in cows that did not show estrus at TAI. In summary, treatment with GnRH 34 h after P4 insert removal was associated with earlier ovulation and resulted in greater P/AI in suckled Nelore cows treated with an estradiol/P4-based protocol for TAI.

HLA-DR and HLA-DQ alleles in patients from the south of Brazil: markers for leprosy susceptibility and resistance.

BACKGROUND: Many epidemiological studies have shown that the genetic factors of the host play a role in the variability of clinical response to infection caused by M. leprae. With the purpose of identifying genes of susceptibility, the present study investigated the possible role of HLA-DRB1 and DQA1/DQB1 alleles in susceptibility to leprosy, and whether they account for the heterogeneity in immune responses observed following infection in a Southern Brazilian population. METHODS: One hundred and sixty-nine leprosy patients and 217 healthy controls were analyzed by polymerase chain reaction amplification and reverse hybridization with sequence-specific oligonucleotide probes and sequence-specific primers (One Lambda, CA, USA). RESULTS: There was a positive association of HLA-DRB1*16 (*1601 and *1602) with leprosy per se (7.3% vs. 3.2%, P = 0.01, OR = 2.52, CI = 1.26-5.01), in accord with previous serological studies, which showed DR2 as a marker of leprosy. Although, HLA-DQA1*05 frequency (29.8% vs. 20.9%, P = 0.0424, OR = 1.61, CI = 1.09-2.39) was higher in patients, and HLA-DQA1*02 (3.0% vs. 7.5%, P = 0.0392, OR = 0.39, CI = 0.16 - 0.95) and HLA-DQA1*04 (4.0% vs. 9.1%, P = 0.0314, OR = 0.42, CI = 0.19 - 0.93) frequencies lower, P-values were not significant after the Bonferroni's correction. Furthermore, HLA-DRB1*1601 (9.0% vs. 1.8%; P = 0.0016; OR = 5.81; CI = 2.05-16.46) was associated with susceptibility to borderline leprosy compared to control group, and while HLA-DRB1*08 (11.2% vs. 1.2%; P = 0.0037; OR = 12.00; CI = 1.51 - 95.12) was associated with susceptibility to lepromatous leprosy, when compared to tuberculoid leprosy, DRB1*04 was associated to protection. CONCLUSION: These data confirm the positive association of HLA-DR2 (DRB1*16) with leprosy per se, and the protector effect of DRB1*04 against lepromatous leprosy in Brazilian patients.