156 Oestrus response, corpus luteum function, and pregnancy rates following aromatase inhibitor treatment in beef heifers

Abstract

In a previous study involving the use of the aromatase inhibitor letrozole to synchronise ovulation, incomplete luteolysis appeared to confound the synchronising effect in letrozole-treated heifers. Experiments were done to determine whether letrozole treatment interferes with luteolysis and affects the timing of oestrus (Experiment 1) and whether pregnancy rate is affected by the stage of the oestrous cycle during which letrozole treatment is initiated (Experiment 2). In Experiment 1, Hereford heifers were fitted with a HeatWatch sensor and given prostaglandin F_2α (PGF_2α). Ovulation (Day 0) was determined by daily ultrasonography, and on Day 3 heifers were given an intravaginal letrozole-releasing device or a sham device for 4 days (n = 16 per group). Half of the heifers in each group were given PGF_2α on Day 7 (PGF 1×) or on Day 7 and 7.5 (PGF 2×). Ultrasonography and blood sampling were done daily from device insertion to removal, every 12 h for 72 h following PGF_2α and daily for 14 days following ovulation. In Experiment 2, heifers were randomly assigned to three groups (n = 10-11 per group) in which a 4-day letrozole-releasing device treatment was initiated during metoestrus (Days 0-2), diestrus (Days 7-9), or pro-oestrus (Days 15-17). Prostaglandin F_2α was given at device removal and again 12 h later. Heifers were inseminated with frozen-thawed semen and given gonadotrophin-releasing hormone 66 h after device removal. Ultrasonography and blood sampling were done twice daily from device removal until ovulation. End points examined included dominant follicle and corpus luteum (CL) diameters, onset of oestrus, and plasma concentrations of oestradiol determined by radioimmunoassay. Nominal data were compared using GENMOD, analysis of variance, or mixed model for repeated-measures and were expressed as means ± s.e.m. Proportional data were analysed using chi-square. In Experiment 1, no main effects or interactions were detected between device or PGF treatment for onset of oestrus following PGF_2α (overall 60.0 ± 2.5 h) or CL diameter profiles during luteolysis. Residual variation was reduced in the timing of the first PGF to ovulation in the PGF 2× group versus the PGF 1× group (5.6 ± 2.2 h vs. 15.2 ± 3.2 h; P < 0.01). The CL diameter following ovulation was greater in the PGF 2× group compared with the PGF 1× group (P = 0.03). Circulating plasma oestradiol during treatment was greater (P = 0.04) in both the PGF 1× and sham groups. In Experiment 2, a greater proportion of heifers in the pro-oestrus group ovulated ≤24 h after device withdrawal compared with the metoestrus and diestrus groups combined (6/11 vs. 0/22, respectively; P < 0.05). Pregnancy rate tended to be greater in the metoestrus group than in the diestrus group (10/11 vs. 6/10; P = 0.08), and pregnancy rate in both groups was greater than that in the pro-oestrus group (0/11; P < 0.05). In conclusion, letrozole treatment did not interfere with luteolysis, and PGF_2α given 2× at a 12-h interval on Day 7 after ovulation decreased variance in the timing to ovulation. Treatment initiated during metoestrus and diestrus yielded greater pregnancy rates than that started during pro-oestrus and warrants efficacy testing in a large fixed-time AI field trial.

This research was supported by Alberta Agriculture and Forestry and by Dechra.