Subclinical ketosis in the oocyte donors of Holstein × Gir cows

In Brazil, the prevalence of subclinical ketosis in F1 Holstein × Gir oocyte donors has never been assessed in published literature. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of subclinical ketosis (SK) in F1 Holstein x Gir embryo donors and the effects of this syndrome on reproductive an...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of animal science 2016-10, Vol.94, p.181-181
Hauptverfasser: de Souza, R C, Souza, R C, Reginaldo, B C M V, da Silva, G C M V, Pellegrino, C A G, Melo, M I V, Lustosa, J P, Pereira, A B D
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 181
container_issue
container_start_page 181
container_title Journal of animal science
container_volume 94
creator de Souza, R C
Souza, R C
Reginaldo, B C M V
da Silva, G C M V
Pellegrino, C A G
Melo, M I V
Lustosa, J P
Pereira, A B D
description In Brazil, the prevalence of subclinical ketosis in F1 Holstein × Gir oocyte donors has never been assessed in published literature. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of subclinical ketosis (SK) in F1 Holstein x Gir embryo donors and the effects of this syndrome on reproductive and economic efficiency. Data was collected from several farms in Minas Gerais, Brazil, from May to August 2015. Twenty-eight lactating F1 Holstein x Gir cows were used as oocyte donors. The dosage of ketone bodies was performed using the handset Ketovet (Ketovet Brazil, TaiDoc technology, Taiwan). Cows with blood β-hydroxybutyrate (BHBA) above 1.2 mmol/dL in the blood were considered as with SK. Donor cows were aspirated for follicules, which were then taken to the laboratory and classified into viable, non-viable and irregular, according to the methodology recommended by the International Embryo Transfer Society (IETS, 2010). Economic analysis was performed considering the following: average price of one follicular aspiration ($75.00), in vitro production of one embryo ($17.75) and cost of each embryo transfer ($12.75). The experiment was analyzed as a complete randomized block design, and means were compared by the Tukey test with significance declared as P < 0.05. Results show that each cow produced an average of 20 oocytes, with only 6 oocytes converted into embryos with a final ratio of 3.5: 1 (oocytes:embryos). Two embryos were required to result in 1 pregnancy. Of the 28 donors evaluated, 17 were healthy and 11 had SK, resulting in a disease prevalence of 39.3%. Specifically, the prevalence of SK was higher in primiparous cows (71.4%) compared with multiparous cows (28.6%, P < 0.05). Cows with SK produced less total oocytes (11.5 vs. 26.1; P = 0.014); less non-viable oocytes (2.09 vs. 10.65; P = 0.004), less viable oocytes (6.45 vs. 15.41; P = 0.005) and fewer embryos (1.82 vs. 5.41; P = 0.038) when compared with healthy cows. The total cost of pregnancy in cows with SK was $142.41, whereas, for healthy cows, was $87.25. In summary, oocyte donors with SK were less efficient as embryo donors. High prevalence of SK observed in this study had a negative effect in the economic efficiency of embryo transfer, causing this technology to be 60% more costly when compared with the same technology used in healthy cows.
doi_str_mv 10.2527/jam2016-0374
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2046728366</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2046728366</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_20467283663</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNyjFuwjAUgGELUamBdusBnsQcsJ9jJ2xICMgOOwrBqE7TPMhzhDgJB-JiZOAATP_w_UL8KDlFg-msKv5RKhtLnSYDESmDJtbK6qGIpEQVZ5nCTzFirqRUaOYmEottdyhr3_iyqOHPBWLP4BsIvw6IyltwcKSGWgY6QU41B9fr4w4b30JJV_4SH6eiZvf96lhM1qvdMo_PLV06x2FfUdc2Pe1RJjbFTFur37ueAI8_Lw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2046728366</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Subclinical ketosis in the oocyte donors of Holstein × Gir cows</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><creator>de Souza, R C ; Souza, R C ; Reginaldo, B C M V ; da Silva, G C M V ; Pellegrino, C A G ; Melo, M I V ; Lustosa, J P ; Pereira, A B D</creator><creatorcontrib>de Souza, R C ; Souza, R C ; Reginaldo, B C M V ; da Silva, G C M V ; Pellegrino, C A G ; Melo, M I V ; Lustosa, J P ; Pereira, A B D</creatorcontrib><description>In Brazil, the prevalence of subclinical ketosis in F1 Holstein × Gir oocyte donors has never been assessed in published literature. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of subclinical ketosis (SK) in F1 Holstein x Gir embryo donors and the effects of this syndrome on reproductive and economic efficiency. Data was collected from several farms in Minas Gerais, Brazil, from May to August 2015. Twenty-eight lactating F1 Holstein x Gir cows were used as oocyte donors. The dosage of ketone bodies was performed using the handset Ketovet (Ketovet Brazil, TaiDoc technology, Taiwan). Cows with blood β-hydroxybutyrate (BHBA) above 1.2 mmol/dL in the blood were considered as with SK. Donor cows were aspirated for follicules, which were then taken to the laboratory and classified into viable, non-viable and irregular, according to the methodology recommended by the International Embryo Transfer Society (IETS, 2010). Economic analysis was performed considering the following: average price of one follicular aspiration ($75.00), in vitro production of one embryo ($17.75) and cost of each embryo transfer ($12.75). The experiment was analyzed as a complete randomized block design, and means were compared by the Tukey test with significance declared as P &lt; 0.05. Results show that each cow produced an average of 20 oocytes, with only 6 oocytes converted into embryos with a final ratio of 3.5: 1 (oocytes:embryos). Two embryos were required to result in 1 pregnancy. Of the 28 donors evaluated, 17 were healthy and 11 had SK, resulting in a disease prevalence of 39.3%. Specifically, the prevalence of SK was higher in primiparous cows (71.4%) compared with multiparous cows (28.6%, P &lt; 0.05). Cows with SK produced less total oocytes (11.5 vs. 26.1; P = 0.014); less non-viable oocytes (2.09 vs. 10.65; P = 0.004), less viable oocytes (6.45 vs. 15.41; P = 0.005) and fewer embryos (1.82 vs. 5.41; P = 0.038) when compared with healthy cows. The total cost of pregnancy in cows with SK was $142.41, whereas, for healthy cows, was $87.25. In summary, oocyte donors with SK were less efficient as embryo donors. High prevalence of SK observed in this study had a negative effect in the economic efficiency of embryo transfer, causing this technology to be 60% more costly when compared with the same technology used in healthy cows.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8812</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-3163</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2527/jam2016-0374</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Champaign: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Agricultural economics ; Animal reproduction ; Blood ; Cattle ; Cost analysis ; Economic analysis ; Embryo transfer ; Embryos ; Farms ; Ketones ; Ketosis ; Metabolism ; Oocytes ; Pregnancy ; Technology transfer</subject><ispartof>Journal of animal science, 2016-10, Vol.94, p.181-181</ispartof><rights>Copyright Oxford University Press, UK Oct 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>de Souza, R C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Souza, R C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reginaldo, B C M V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>da Silva, G C M V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pellegrino, C A G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melo, M I V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lustosa, J P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pereira, A B D</creatorcontrib><title>Subclinical ketosis in the oocyte donors of Holstein × Gir cows</title><title>Journal of animal science</title><description>In Brazil, the prevalence of subclinical ketosis in F1 Holstein × Gir oocyte donors has never been assessed in published literature. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of subclinical ketosis (SK) in F1 Holstein x Gir embryo donors and the effects of this syndrome on reproductive and economic efficiency. Data was collected from several farms in Minas Gerais, Brazil, from May to August 2015. Twenty-eight lactating F1 Holstein x Gir cows were used as oocyte donors. The dosage of ketone bodies was performed using the handset Ketovet (Ketovet Brazil, TaiDoc technology, Taiwan). Cows with blood β-hydroxybutyrate (BHBA) above 1.2 mmol/dL in the blood were considered as with SK. Donor cows were aspirated for follicules, which were then taken to the laboratory and classified into viable, non-viable and irregular, according to the methodology recommended by the International Embryo Transfer Society (IETS, 2010). Economic analysis was performed considering the following: average price of one follicular aspiration ($75.00), in vitro production of one embryo ($17.75) and cost of each embryo transfer ($12.75). The experiment was analyzed as a complete randomized block design, and means were compared by the Tukey test with significance declared as P &lt; 0.05. Results show that each cow produced an average of 20 oocytes, with only 6 oocytes converted into embryos with a final ratio of 3.5: 1 (oocytes:embryos). Two embryos were required to result in 1 pregnancy. Of the 28 donors evaluated, 17 were healthy and 11 had SK, resulting in a disease prevalence of 39.3%. Specifically, the prevalence of SK was higher in primiparous cows (71.4%) compared with multiparous cows (28.6%, P &lt; 0.05). Cows with SK produced less total oocytes (11.5 vs. 26.1; P = 0.014); less non-viable oocytes (2.09 vs. 10.65; P = 0.004), less viable oocytes (6.45 vs. 15.41; P = 0.005) and fewer embryos (1.82 vs. 5.41; P = 0.038) when compared with healthy cows. The total cost of pregnancy in cows with SK was $142.41, whereas, for healthy cows, was $87.25. In summary, oocyte donors with SK were less efficient as embryo donors. High prevalence of SK observed in this study had a negative effect in the economic efficiency of embryo transfer, causing this technology to be 60% more costly when compared with the same technology used in healthy cows.</description><subject>Agricultural economics</subject><subject>Animal reproduction</subject><subject>Blood</subject><subject>Cattle</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>Economic analysis</subject><subject>Embryo transfer</subject><subject>Embryos</subject><subject>Farms</subject><subject>Ketones</subject><subject>Ketosis</subject><subject>Metabolism</subject><subject>Oocytes</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Technology transfer</subject><issn>0021-8812</issn><issn>1525-3163</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNyjFuwjAUgGELUamBdusBnsQcsJ9jJ2xICMgOOwrBqE7TPMhzhDgJB-JiZOAATP_w_UL8KDlFg-msKv5RKhtLnSYDESmDJtbK6qGIpEQVZ5nCTzFirqRUaOYmEottdyhr3_iyqOHPBWLP4BsIvw6IyltwcKSGWgY6QU41B9fr4w4b30JJV_4SH6eiZvf96lhM1qvdMo_PLV06x2FfUdc2Pe1RJjbFTFur37ueAI8_Lw</recordid><startdate>20161001</startdate><enddate>20161001</enddate><creator>de Souza, R C</creator><creator>Souza, R C</creator><creator>Reginaldo, B C M V</creator><creator>da Silva, G C M V</creator><creator>Pellegrino, C A G</creator><creator>Melo, M I V</creator><creator>Lustosa, J P</creator><creator>Pereira, A B D</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RQ</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>U9A</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20161001</creationdate><title>Subclinical ketosis in the oocyte donors of Holstein × Gir cows</title><author>de Souza, R C ; Souza, R C ; Reginaldo, B C M V ; da Silva, G C M V ; Pellegrino, C A G ; Melo, M I V ; Lustosa, J P ; Pereira, A B D</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_20467283663</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Agricultural economics</topic><topic>Animal reproduction</topic><topic>Blood</topic><topic>Cattle</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>Economic analysis</topic><topic>Embryo transfer</topic><topic>Embryos</topic><topic>Farms</topic><topic>Ketones</topic><topic>Ketosis</topic><topic>Metabolism</topic><topic>Oocytes</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Technology transfer</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>de Souza, R C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Souza, R C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reginaldo, B C M V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>da Silva, G C M V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pellegrino, C A G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melo, M I V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lustosa, J P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pereira, A B D</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Career &amp; Technical Education Database</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Journal of animal science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>de Souza, R C</au><au>Souza, R C</au><au>Reginaldo, B C M V</au><au>da Silva, G C M V</au><au>Pellegrino, C A G</au><au>Melo, M I V</au><au>Lustosa, J P</au><au>Pereira, A B D</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Subclinical ketosis in the oocyte donors of Holstein × Gir cows</atitle><jtitle>Journal of animal science</jtitle><date>2016-10-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>94</volume><spage>181</spage><epage>181</epage><pages>181-181</pages><issn>0021-8812</issn><eissn>1525-3163</eissn><abstract>In Brazil, the prevalence of subclinical ketosis in F1 Holstein × Gir oocyte donors has never been assessed in published literature. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of subclinical ketosis (SK) in F1 Holstein x Gir embryo donors and the effects of this syndrome on reproductive and economic efficiency. Data was collected from several farms in Minas Gerais, Brazil, from May to August 2015. Twenty-eight lactating F1 Holstein x Gir cows were used as oocyte donors. The dosage of ketone bodies was performed using the handset Ketovet (Ketovet Brazil, TaiDoc technology, Taiwan). Cows with blood β-hydroxybutyrate (BHBA) above 1.2 mmol/dL in the blood were considered as with SK. Donor cows were aspirated for follicules, which were then taken to the laboratory and classified into viable, non-viable and irregular, according to the methodology recommended by the International Embryo Transfer Society (IETS, 2010). Economic analysis was performed considering the following: average price of one follicular aspiration ($75.00), in vitro production of one embryo ($17.75) and cost of each embryo transfer ($12.75). The experiment was analyzed as a complete randomized block design, and means were compared by the Tukey test with significance declared as P &lt; 0.05. Results show that each cow produced an average of 20 oocytes, with only 6 oocytes converted into embryos with a final ratio of 3.5: 1 (oocytes:embryos). Two embryos were required to result in 1 pregnancy. Of the 28 donors evaluated, 17 were healthy and 11 had SK, resulting in a disease prevalence of 39.3%. Specifically, the prevalence of SK was higher in primiparous cows (71.4%) compared with multiparous cows (28.6%, P &lt; 0.05). Cows with SK produced less total oocytes (11.5 vs. 26.1; P = 0.014); less non-viable oocytes (2.09 vs. 10.65; P = 0.004), less viable oocytes (6.45 vs. 15.41; P = 0.005) and fewer embryos (1.82 vs. 5.41; P = 0.038) when compared with healthy cows. The total cost of pregnancy in cows with SK was $142.41, whereas, for healthy cows, was $87.25. In summary, oocyte donors with SK were less efficient as embryo donors. High prevalence of SK observed in this study had a negative effect in the economic efficiency of embryo transfer, causing this technology to be 60% more costly when compared with the same technology used in healthy cows.</abstract><cop>Champaign</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.2527/jam2016-0374</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0021-8812
ispartof Journal of animal science, 2016-10, Vol.94, p.181-181
issn 0021-8812
1525-3163
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2046728366
source Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)
subjects Agricultural economics
Animal reproduction
Blood
Cattle
Cost analysis
Economic analysis
Embryo transfer
Embryos
Farms
Ketones
Ketosis
Metabolism
Oocytes
Pregnancy
Technology transfer
title Subclinical ketosis in the oocyte donors of Holstein × Gir cows
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T23%3A48%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Subclinical%20ketosis%20in%20the%20oocyte%20donors%20of%20Holstein%20%C3%97%20Gir%20cows&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20animal%20science&rft.au=de%20Souza,%20R%20C&rft.date=2016-10-01&rft.volume=94&rft.spage=181&rft.epage=181&rft.pages=181-181&rft.issn=0021-8812&rft.eissn=1525-3163&rft_id=info:doi/10.2527/jam2016-0374&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2046728366%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2046728366&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true