Display options
Cite
Tanaka Y, Americano AP, Galindo DJ, et al. Low invasive estrous synchronization protocol for wild animals: an example with melengestrol acetate in brown brocket deer . Anim Reprod. 2021;17(4):e20200526doi: 10.1590/1984-3143-AR2020-0526.
Tanaka, Y., Americano, A. P., Galindo, D. J., & Duarte, J. M. B. (2021). Low invasive estrous synchronization protocol for wild animals: an example with melengestrol acetate in brown brocket deer . Animal reproduction, 17(4), e20200526. https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-3143-AR2020-0526
Tanaka, Yuki, et al. "Low invasive estrous synchronization protocol for wild animals: an example with melengestrol acetate in brown brocket deer ." Animal reproduction vol. 17,4 (2021): e20200526. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-3143-AR2020-0526
Tanaka Y, Americano AP, Galindo DJ, Duarte JMB. Low invasive estrous synchronization protocol for wild animals: an example with melengestrol acetate in brown brocket deer . Anim Reprod. 2021 Jan 06;17(4):e20200526. doi: 10.1590/1984-3143-AR2020-0526. PMID: 33791030; PMCID: PMC7995258.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Anim Reprod. 2021 Jan 06;17(4):e20200526. doi: 10.1590/1984-3143-AR2020-0526.

Low invasive estrous synchronization protocol for wild animals: an example with melengestrol acetate in brown brocket deer .

Animal reproduction

Yuki Tanaka, Alice Pereira Americano, David Javier Galindo, José Maurício Barbanti Duarte

Affiliations

  1. Núcleo de Pesquisa e Conservação de Cervídeos (NUPECCE), Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias e Veterinárias, Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Jaboticabal, SP, Brasil.

PMID: 33791030 PMCID: PMC7995258 DOI: 10.1590/1984-3143-AR2020-0526

Abstract

Deer are sensitive to stressful stimuli by handling and their reproductive physiology could be altered by these procedures, making it necessary to develop less invasive protocols for ART. Melengestrol acetate (MGA), a synthetic progestin administered orally, appears as an alternative for estrous synchronization protocols (ESP), such as reported in cattle. Firstly, we compared two MGA doses (0.5 and 1.0 mg/day/animal), which would have suppression effect in estrous behavior (EB). Eight females were randomly and equally distributed in Group 1 (G1) and Group 2 (G2), which received 0.5 and 1.0 mg/day/animal respectively for 15 days (D1 to D15). Two cloprostenol (CP) applications were performed on D0 and D11. Estrus detection (ED) was performed every day. All females from G1 displayed estrus during treatment period, whereas all females from G2 displayed estrus after treatment, suggesting a suppressive effect of 1.0 mg in the EB. Once the suppressive MGA dose (1.0 mg) was defined, we used this dose for assessing ESP. The same eight females received 1.0 mg/animal for eight days (D-8 to D-1), followed by 0.25 mg of estradiol benzoate on D-8 and 265 μg of CP on D0. Feces for fecal progesterone metabolites (FPM) measurement were collected from D0 until seven days after the last day of estrus. Seven females displayed estrus between 12 and 72 h after CP application, which was followed by a significant increase in FPM levels (except female MG6), suggesting the formation of corpus luteum. After ED, females were placed with a fertile male to assess the fertility of the protocol. Pregnancy was confirmed by ultrasound 30 days after mating in 3/6 individuals. Although the low effectiveness of MGA protocol, it should be considered as a promising alternative in deer ESP since this protocol has less stressful effect on the animal during reproductive management when compared to other ESP.

Copyright © The Author(s).

Keywords: Assisted reproductive technologies; corpus luteum; estrus; fecal progesterone metabolites; neotropical deer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest: The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

References

  1. J Reprod Fertil. 1994 Mar;100(2):629-36 - PubMed
  2. Reprod Nutr Dev. 2000 Sep-Oct;40(5):493-504 - PubMed
  3. J Reprod Fertil. 1992 Sep;96(1):261-73 - PubMed
  4. Theriogenology. 2002 Mar 15;57(5):1485-91 - PubMed
  5. Conserv Physiol. 2018 Jan 25;6(1):cox073 - PubMed
  6. Gen Comp Endocrinol. 2019 Oct 1;282:113206 - PubMed
  7. Zoo Biol. 2007 Jul;26(4):311-26 - PubMed
  8. Theriogenology. 1999 May;51(7):1333-42 - PubMed
  9. Theriogenology. 2009 Jan 1;71(1):149-65 - PubMed
  10. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2014 Mar 19;12:24 - PubMed
  11. Biol Reprod. 2019 May 1;100(5):1158-1170 - PubMed
  12. Theriogenology. 2006 Jan 20;65(2):387-99 - PubMed
  13. BMC Evol Biol. 2014 Mar 04;14(1):40 - PubMed
  14. Gen Comp Endocrinol. 1998 Oct;112(1):129-37 - PubMed
  15. Theriogenology. 2008 Jul 15;70(2):227-32 - PubMed
  16. J Anim Sci. 1992 Oct;70(10):2935-41 - PubMed
  17. Anim Reprod Sci. 2000 Jul 2;60-61:743-52 - PubMed
  18. Anim Reprod Sci. 2010 Feb;117(3-4):266-74 - PubMed
  19. J Anim Sci. 2000 Aug;78(8):2186-91 - PubMed
  20. Anim Reprod. 2020 Jun 29;17(2):e20200021 - PubMed
  21. J Anim Sci. 1994 Dec;72(12):3049-54 - PubMed
  22. Anim Reprod Sci. 2000 Aug 18;62(1-3):195-211 - PubMed
  23. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2005 Jun;1046:75-80 - PubMed
  24. J Anim Sci. 1996 Oct;74(10):2292-302 - PubMed
  25. J Reprod Fertil. 1990 Jan;88(1):271-81 - PubMed
  26. Vet World. 2018 Nov;11(10):1466-1472 - PubMed
  27. Zoo Biol. 2012 Nov-Dec;31(6):642-55 - PubMed
  28. J Anim Sci. 1989 Aug;67(8):1895-906 - PubMed

Publication Types