The results of consecutive superovulations in cows by induction with various exogenous progesterone routes

Abstract

Nafion, a sulfonated tetrafluoroethylene copolymer, consists of a hydrophobic fluorocarbon backbone (-CF2-CF2-) to which hydrophilic sulfonate groups ( SO −3 ) are attached. The presence of negatively charged sulfonate groups in a nanomembrane brings about a high level of proton conductivity. In this study, Saccharomyces cerevisiae was used for production of bioelectricity in a 2-chambered microbial fuel cell (MFC). We selected 9-cm 2 Nafion 117 and Nafion 112 as nanomembranes to transport the produced proton from the anode chamber to the cathode compartment at ambient temperature and pressure. Initial glucose concentration was 30 g/L. The maximum obtained voltage, current, and power density for Nafion 117 were 668 mV, 60.28 mA/m 2 , and 9.95 mW/m 2 , respectively. For Nafion 112, those results were 670 mV, 150.6 mA/m 2 , and 31.32 mW/m 2 , respectively.

Embryo Transfer in Fleckvieh Simmental Cows: A Preliminary Study

“…Betterridge (1997) reported that the unusual endocrine conditions after superovulation adversely affect embryo recovery and viability, and embryo recovery rates would decrease over time after ovulation. The embryo recovery rates achieved in the present study were lower than those reported in some other studies (Bülbül et al 2010;Akyol et al 2014;Hussein et al 2014;Karaşahin et al 2016). Kanagawa et al (1995) reported that the differences in embryo recovery rates between studies were related to factors such as washing time, washing media and washing number, catheter type and positioning of the catheter, technician experiences, etc.…”

“…The main factor, which limits the extensive use of embryo transfer in cattle, is the unpredictability and variability of the superovulatory response (Kafi and McGowan 1997;Vieira et al 2014). Several factors, including among others, age, breed, season, nutrition, individual response, type of gonadotropin used, subclinical infection and lactation, affect the response of cows to superovulation (Kafi and McGowan 1997;Akyol et al 2014;Mikkola et al 2019). In their study, in which they compared different progesterone treatment regimens in Holstein Friesian cows and applied a 4 day-superovulation scheme based on the administration of decreasing FSH doses given twice a day, Akyol et al (2014) determined the mean CL number as 4.82±0.29 in the group that was applied progesterone-releasing intravaginal devices (PRID) and as 6.71±0.29 in the group that was applied ear implants.…”

“…Several factors, including among others, age, breed, season, nutrition, individual response, type of gonadotropin used, subclinical infection and lactation, affect the response of cows to superovulation (Kafi and McGowan 1997;Akyol et al 2014;Mikkola et al 2019). In their study, in which they compared different progesterone treatment regimens in Holstein Friesian cows and applied a 4 day-superovulation scheme based on the administration of decreasing FSH doses given twice a day, Akyol et al (2014) determined the mean CL number as 4.82±0.29 in the group that was applied progesterone-releasing intravaginal devices (PRID) and as 6.71±0.29 in the group that was applied ear implants. In Brown Swiss cows, which were synchronized with progesterone and estradiol valerate, Bülbül et al (2010) determined the mean number of CL postsuperovulation as 8.4±1.4 in the control group, and as 9.2±1.6 in the treatment group.…”