The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of different doses of buserelin acetate and another GnRH agonist, triptorelin acetate, in saline solution in a single subcutaneous injection, to induce ovulation of growing pre‐ovulatory follicle in mare and compare it with the classical treatment of a single injection of hCG. The study is split into 3 experiments over different breeding seasons in the same stud with a random distribution of treatment. The first one was to compare the injection of 6 mg of buserelin with 1,500 IU of hCG; the second one consisted of comparing different doses of buserelin (6 mg and 3 mg); and the third one compared three different doses of buserelin (3, 2 and 1 mg), 0.1 mg of triptorelin with 1,500 IU of hCG as a control group. The results of all experiments showed the same efficacy between all treatments with mares ovulating between 24 and 48 hr after injection: experiment 1: hCG (78% n = 41) and buserelin 6 mg (90% n = 50); experiment 2: buserelin 6 mg (78,1% n = 192) and buserelin 3 mg (78% n = 341); and experiment 3: hCG (87% n = 106), buserelin 3 mg (84,7% n = 137), buserelin 2 mg (82,7% n = 104), buserelin 1 mg (87% n = 54) and triptorelin 0.1 mg (84,7% n = 72). In conclusion, this study contributes to erasing the dogma that has been established since 1975 that a single injection in solution without any long‐acting excipient of a GnRH agonist cannot induce ovulation in the mare. This study also shows that a injection of 0.1 mg of triptorelin in solution is a good alternative for ovulation induction and is comparable to small doses of buserelin acetate in solution (1 mg) and 1,500 IU of the gold standard trigger hCG, mainly in countries where human formulation of buserelin is not available.

No abstract

Two cloned mares, produced from the same sample of skin fibroblasts, were bred during four breeding seasons from their second year of age, as embryo donors, in exactly the same conditions, using the same stallions for both cloned mares. The aim of this study was to test the embryo donor potential of cloned mares and to compare the results obtained from two cloned mares of the same mare with other embryo donor mares (n = 31–39 per breeding season) at the same stud. For both cloned mares, 19 embryos were recovered by 43 collection attempts (44%) (7/22 for one; 12/21 for the other), 16 (84%) pregnancies (5/7 for one, 11/12 for the other) were obtained at day 14 post‐ovulation (D14), and 12 (3/7 for one; 9/12 for the other) foals were born. One cloned mare was a less efficient donor mare than the other (p < .05), In control donor mares, 623 embryo collections were performed, with a recovery rate (80%—496/623) significantly higher than for cloned mares. The recovery rate in the subpopulation of 2–5‐year‐old control donor mares (same age of cloned mares) (89%—127/143) and The recovery rate in the subpopulation of 12 control mares bred with the seven same stallions as clones (55%—17/31), were both higher than for cloned mare (p < .05). The success rate of transfer was not different between embryos produced by cloned mares (84%—16/19) and those produced by control donor mares (79%—392/496). However, the foaling rate per embryo collection was significantly lower for cloned mares (28%—12/43) than for control donor mares (52% ‐ 325/623) (p < .05).

No abstract