Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T02:21:15.935Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The possible use of superovulation and embryo transfer in cattle to increase response to selection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. B. Land  and
W. G. Hill
R. B. Land
Affiliation:
ARC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
W. G. Hill
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh EH9 3JN
Get access

Summary

The possible use of superovulation and embryo transfer in selection programmes in cattle is investigated theoretically, in terms of both rates of response and inbreeding.

In a selection programme for growth rate, it should be possible to achieve about twice the response of a conventional performance testing programme, so that 400-day weight, for example, could be increased by 16 rather than 9 kg per year.

The improvement of reproductive performance by the use of laparoscopy to measure the natural ovulation rate of animals over several oestrous cycles followed by superovulation of selected animals is investigated. The rate of progress is dependent upon the incidence of twin ovulations in the base population and is unlikely to exceed 0·6% per year unless the initial frequency is 8% or more.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , August 1975 , pp. 1 - 12
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bar-Anan, R. and Bowman, J. C. 1974. Twinning in Israeli-Friesian dairy herds. Anim. Prod. 18: 109–115.Google Scholar
Bowman, J. C. and Hendy, C. R. C. 1970. The incidence, repeatability and effect on dam performance of twinning in British Friesian cattle. Anim. Prod. 12: 55–62.Google Scholar
Donald, H. P. 1974. Twinning in cattle. A.B.R.O. Annual Report, pp. 27–32. H. M. Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. 1960. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. 1963. Quantitatively different responses to selection in opposite directions. In Statistical Genetics and Plant Breeding (ed. Hanson, W. D. and Robinson, H. E.). National Academy Sciences—National Research Council, Washington. Publ. No. 982, pp. 487–490.Google Scholar
Foote, R. H. and Onuma, H. 1970. Superovulation, ovum collection, culture and transfer. A review. J. Dairy Sci. 53: 1681–1692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanrahan, J. P. 1974. Ovulation rate as a selection criterion for fecundity in sheep. Proc. 1st Wld Congr. Genet, appl. Anim. Prod., Vol. 3, pp. 1033–1038. Madrid.Google Scholar
Hendy, C. R. C. and Bowman, J. C. 1970. Twinning in cattle. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 38: 22–37.Google Scholar
Hill, W. G. 1971. Investment appraisal for national breeding programmes. Anim. Prod. 13: 37–50.Google Scholar
Hill, W. G. 1972. Estimation of genetic change. I. General theory and design of control populations. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 40: 1–15.Google Scholar
Johansson, I., Lindhé, B. and Pirchner, F. 1974. Causes of variation in the frequency of monozygous and dizygous twinning in various breeds of cattle. Hereditas 78: 201–234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kidder, H. E., Barrett, G. R. and Casida, L. E. 1952. A study of ovulations in six families of Holstein-Friesians. J. Dairy Sci. 35: 436–444.Google Scholar
Labhsetwar, A. P., Tyler, W. J. and Casida, L. E. 1963. Analysis of variation in some factors affecting multiple ovulation in Holstein cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 46: 840–845.Google Scholar
Land, R. B. 1974. Physiological studies and genetic selection for sheep fertility. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 42: 155–158.Google Scholar
Land, R. B. and Falconer, D. S. 1969. Genetic studies of ovulation rate in the mouse. Genet. Res. Camb. 13: 25–46.Google Scholar
Mariana, J. C. 1969. A technique for the in-vivo examination of ovaries in the cow. Annls Biol. anim. Biochim. Biophys. 9: 657–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1971. Beef Improvement. Scientific Study Group Report. Meat and Livestock Commission, Bletchley, Bucks.Google Scholar
Ortavant, R. and Thibault, C. 1970. Reasons for obtaining twin births in cattle and procedures followed. Annls Biol. anim. Biochim. Biophys, 10: Supplement 1, 1–19.Google Scholar
Robertson, A. and Lerner, I. M. 1949. The heritability of all-or-none traits: viability of poultry. Genetics 34: 395–411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowson, L. E. A. 1971. The role of reproductive research in animal production. J. Reprod. Fert. 26: 113–126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowson, L. E. A., Lawson, R. A. S. and Moor, R. M. 1971. Production of twins in cattle by egg transfer. J. Reprod. Fert. 25: 261–268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowson, L. E. A., Moor, R. M. and Lawson, R. A. S. 1969. Fertility following egg transfer in the cow: effect of method, medium and synchronisation of oestrus. J. Reprod. Fert. 18: 517–523.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scanlon, P., Sreenan, J. and Gordon, I. 1968. Hormonal induction of superovulation in cattle. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 70: 179–185.Google Scholar
Wijeratne, W. V. S. and Stewart, D. L. 1971. Population study of abortion in cattle with special reference to genetic factors. Anim. Prod. 13: 229–235.Google Scholar