Double- ovsynch protocol affected reproductive performance of dairy cows

A recent medical phenomenon extending the natural pregnancy cycle within Primiparous and multiparous dairy cows Souza et al., 2008, who’ve been administrated timed artificial insemination. The double- ovsynch protocol; permit artificial insemination to be implemented at the actuate optimum time without manipulation of ovaries and uterus Giordano et al., 2013. Modifying the reproductive stamina of dairy cows McDougall et al., 2007 from 60 to 88 days. Furthermore, this investigation would also prove to demonstrate, if extending the natural pregnancy cycle from 60 to 88 could minimise or increase milk production. Potentially causing farmers to miss out on profitability Arbel et al., 2001.
Typically, surveillance was the common method for monitoring the oestrus cycle. This task often was a time-consuming procedure. Implications for instance; milk yield, imbalanced feed rations, stress for instance heat stress, and welfare supervisions are critical expertise that influence heat expression Huzzey et al., 2015. On the other hand, farmers/ veterinarians applied equipment in the form of tail painting; gives a visual indication of when a cow has stood to be mounted and consequently rubbed, showing that she is in heat López-Gatius et al., 2006.
Approximately, estrous activity is between 6 to 24 hours, whereas the period a cow stands to be mounted lasts consequently 8 hours Ferguson and Galligan, 1999. A total of 186 dairy cows were used for this research project. Bello et al., 2013.
The cows were separated into two groups both receiving the insemination procedure. one group would undergo a VMP “voluntary waiting period of 60 days; number of participants = 87 whereas the other group had VMP of 88 days number of participants = 99, formed of both Primiparous and multiparous dairy cows. Produced by the two groups was a daily intake of milk production. Results recorded VWP60; 1,352 litters of milk being produced compared to VWP88; 1,359 litres of milk were produced. From these results it is clearly highlighted due to delay on natural oestrus cycle there was an increase in milk production from the lactating cows, although not a massive increase; 0.07%. Nevertheless, still enough of a profit for farmers wanting to subdue their dairy cows towards the double- ovsynch protocol Österman and Bertilsson, 2003.
Pregnancy within cattle especially during the lactation process affects the profitability of dairy herds by defining calving interval, milk production and efficiency (De Vries, 2006; Inchaisri et al., 2011; Giordano et al., 2012).Two major determinants are insemination and conception risk due to the end of “VMP” the duration of VMP can also influence the exact approximation of pregnancy because distinguishes when cows meet the requirements for insemination.
By delaying the duration of the VMP it benefits the reproductive performance of cows through numerous mechanisms. A good illustration is it may provide more time to recover from uterine health (Gilbert et al., 2005; Gautam et al., 2009; Sheldon et al., 2009) Other positives that can be demonstrated from this are, improved immune status, contemplating more time to resolve the inflammatory process, established immediately after calving or in both situations (LeBlanc et al., 2011; LeBlanc, 2014).

Furthermore, an increased VMP could vouchsafe cows increased time to reinstall reproductive hormone secretion patterns, equally increasing metabolic status promoting resumption of ovarian cyclicity (Butler, 2003; Kawashima et al., 2012; Cheong et al., 2016) Earlier ovulation postpartum and supplementary estrous cycles before first service had been found to be connected to linked reduced days to first service and greater pregnancies Thatcher and Wilcox, 1973; Butler and Smith, 1989; Darwash et al., 1997).
This Prevents the negative energy balance; when the energy intake exceeds the energy expenditure, there is a positive energy balance which results in weight gain vice versa negative energy balance results in weight loss Butler and Smith, 1989. because of energy balance it causes early lactation, fundamentally improving the reproductive performance of bovines prolonging additional time for cows to recuperate body tissue reserves. (Souza et al., 2007, 2008; Carvalho et al., 2014).
Advantages Disadvantage
Application suitable in all cows’ breeds Possibility of AI in cows with reproductive problems disorders.
Reduction for heat detection and gynaecological examination. Highest efficiency limited to start of protocol between 5th and 9th days of cycle.
Shortening intercalving and voluntary waiting periods. Increased embryonic mortality rate.
Synchronisation of work in herd Price of hormones.
Possible therapeutic cure effects Different responses to hormonal treatment.
Fertility comparable to other methods Poor fertility in heifers.

In conclusion, lengthening the time frame of VMP from 60 to 88 in dairy cows, was particularly beneficial to primiparous cows. With the extended VMP their physiological status demonstrated to be more conductive to pregnancy. Furthermore, primiparous cows had improved uterine health, increased BCS, and reduced systemic inflammation. Equally, decreasing anovulation before insemination. Although prolonging VMP caused delayed pregnancy particularly lactation, this omnipresent extension towards lactation time frame signified a greater production of total milk yield.
References

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030217309323#fig5
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22394964
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5894419/

Advertisements

Fundamentals In Bio Veterinary Science Lay summary Task B

Love your pet? Read on to understand the upcoming phenomenal towards veterinary medicine.

A recent discovery preventing vomiting towards dogs has been linked to pain, after administration of a formula which embodies benzyl alcohol was consented. The reason for this is because; benzyl alcohol medically contains anaesthetic properties, instantly minimizing injection pain.
Purpose of investigation?
This study has been created to signify a comparison between local anaesthetic and the new formulation that obtains Benzyl alcohol, to evaluate whither or not the chosen animal demonstrates any sort of discomfort when being administrated by either formula.
Control variables?
Within this case study; thirty-two healthy beagle dogs; 15 males and 17 females. Were selected into a blinded, un-biased, cross over study; with estimated age of the dogs; eight months – three years of age approximately weighing between 6.2 and 12.0kg. Animals taking part of the project transpired from the same stock colony and were housed per pair (same gender) living in the same establishment within a climatized facility.
The designated dogs underwent compendious veterinary examination, before the start of the study. Dogs were augmented a daily amount of a pelleted diet. Water was supplied simultaneously with the quaintly and frequency of consumption being the free choice of the animal. After the study had subsided, participants were returned to the stock colony within good health.
The dogs were administrated subcutaneous injections of maropitant injection. The reason for this is because; maropitant is used to help prevent and decrease nausea within dogs; by the centrally acting neurokinin-1 receptor which performs inhibiting of substance P; the crucial neuro-transmitter that implicates vomiting. This revolutionary drug is the first to be accredited for the treatment of vomiting within dogs.
Metacresol is used as a form of preservative alongside maropitant injection embodying benzyl alcohol as another form of preservative. To see if any of the chosen dogs demonstrated any signs of pain.
To continue. These two specific chemical compounds were kept in temperatures precisely; 4°C a refrigerated temperature to 25°C average room temperature. Furthermore, there was a minimal of three days recovery time between treatments. During this time, injection pain was quantified by two distinguished blinded observers who recorded the critical data by using a visual analogue scale, expeditiously after the first injection alongside a simple descriptive scale approximately two minutes after injection.
Why was this research carried out?
It is systematically proven when subjecting healthy beagle dog’s subcutaneous injection of maropitant with preservative benzyl alcohol, the pain threshold is notably less painful when subduing the chosen dog, injection of maropitant with preservative metacresol.
It was identified that injection pain was decreased; whilst the formula was kept at refrigerated temperature 4°C unlike common room temperature 25°C where pain was increased. Until now, a collective form of maropitant injectable formulation was consented acquiring benzyl alcohol preservative (prevomax, Le Vet). Conclusively, a report has been issued; benzyl alcohol counter insurances anaesthetic properties, which is proven to eliminate injection pain.
The formulations were tested at the two optimal temperatures “4°C” “25°C”. A wait of 1.5-2 hours before injecting either MM or MBA had to pass so the formulations could reach their suitable temperatures. A small container of each test item was placed on an ice bath to reach 4°C. On the other hand, the second container was placed onto a preheated water bath to reach 25°C.
It is of critical importance that the same dose volume was dispensed throughout the four treatment periods. An important factor that affected this was bodyweight of candidate, which was measured during acclimatisation. The two formulas were injected deep under the skin; in the scruff of the neck; using a 25-G needle between the shoulder blade precisely 2.5cm from the spine, with a new needle being used each time.
Injection pain was evaluated individually by two veterinarians who were randomized into separate treatment rooms, accordingly after administrator announced the exact time the products had been administrated towards the candidate.
Pain was recorded using a visual analogue scale with numerical keys being used to distinguish pain threshold 0= no pain chronologically 10 being worst possible pain. The selected dog was observed for approximately two minutes. After the two minutes had subsided, a simple visual scale was designated ranging with numbers indicating 0= no pain; 3 = serve reaction.
Scale scores
Total Description
0 No reaction to injection
1 Mild reaction “e.g. twitching of the skin”
2 Moderate reaction “e.g. repeated licking or scratching etc
3 Severe reaction “e.g. prolonged yelping.

Results recorded from the 32 dogs who had completed their trails.

Clinical signs 4 degrees 25 degrees 4 degrees 25 degrees
Hunched or cramped posture 4 2 3 4
Shaking head 6 5 3 3
Scratching injection site 13 17 4 4
Stereotype behaviour 1 4 0 1
Slight aggressive behaviour 3 1 0 1
Slight tremors/ muscle twitching 1 2 1 0
Quick breathing 0 1 0 0
Slight restless behaviour 0 1 0 0
Lateral recumbency 0 0 0 1
Howling 7 12 0 1
Squeaking 7 12 2 5
Total 42 57 13 20
Conclusion
The results demonstrate in accurate detail, that there is a decline towards the amount of pain when the dog is administrated subcutaneous injections at refrigerated temperatures 4°C compared to room temperatures 25°C. This can be observed from the table above that I had made using the results from the article.
It is clearly visible from the table 42 dogs demonstrated a form of discomfort at 4°C, whereas subcutaneous injection administrated at room temperature 25°C shows 57 dogs performed signs of discomfort. Equally, the results from the table clearly highlight when injecting the formulation MBA “Benzyl alcohol- preserved maropitant solution”, at 4°C clinical signs witnessed is 13. On the other hand, when the MBA solution is increased to room temperature 25°C, clinical signs are 20.
From this investigation, it can be concluded when administrating “MM”, “MBA” at a refrigerated temperature of 4°C, there is noticeably less pain performed, whereas keeping temperatures at 25°C more pain was recorded. Furthermore, a justification can be drawn that less pain is seen with injection of MBA formulation compared to formulation MM.
To evaluate. This investigation has clearly identified when administrating subcutaneous injection of MBA kept at refrigerator temperature of 4°C, the results clearly indicate less pain was demonstrated compared to injection of MM where pain witnessed was of higher value.
References
Deckers et al., (2018) Comparison of pain response after subcutaneous injection of two maropitant formulations to beagle dogs. Veterinary Record Open, 5(1), e000262.

My Understanding towards Maths and chemistry

Currently my understanding towards maths and chemistry is one that needs further improvement. Before starting university, I personally believed my knowledge towards maths and chemistry was of strong academic performance; as I was literally obsessed with the quadratic formula within mathematics. Whereas I took a massive interest towards chemical analysis throughout my secondary school life.
Since starting university, it has been highlighted to me the maths/ chemistry skills essential for Bio-veterinary science is a concept that needs to be identified thoroughly, working towards a greater understanding. Currently I am learning the array of scientific numerals fundamental towards maths and chemistry. Furthermore, conversions that are paramount for the advanced course of Bio-veterinary science.
My weaknesses can be demonstrated in a question informing me to work out for instance; “if you dissolve 250mg CaCO3 in 10mL water, what is the concentration in mmol/L? When given this question for the first time, it did personally hit me hard of how much of a dilemma of answering this question would be. Fortunately, my tutor explained meticulously over numerous times of how to work the question out, breaking the menacing question down into feasible solutions, which I was able to relate with making me come to the concluded answer of = 249.7 mmol/L.
To furtherance my maths and chemistry skills, I can seek tuition from a personal tutor who can provide me with one to one support, advancing my intellect towards maths and chemistry. I can also confine within my fellow peers if I’m stuck on a question. Moreover, I can use the library which offers me a verity of books essential for maths and chemistry.
An exemplary example is the book “CHEMISTRY FOR THE BIOSCIENCES” (Jonathan Crowe, 2014) highlighting why biologists need chemistry. Furthermore, topics such as Equilibria, Kinetics. Acid bases and buffer solutions, alongside many other topics are mentioned throughout the entire book.
To continue, “core maths for the biosciences” (Reed, 2011) is a supplementary example of a book that supports my intake of knowledge towards maths in bioscience. Topics explained are Arithmetic, Algebra. Molarity and dilutions, alongside other numerical abbreviations. This exclusive book can be my saviour for when it feels necessary to confine my knowledge towards a bioscience maths subject.
Approximately I will be spending 2-3 hours a day; using a revision timetable that involves around my social life; revising on specific aspects of maths that supplements my course. Moreover, the timetable can prove to be beneficial when planning for assignments. Other varieties of revision can be in the form of; lecture notes- study groups, or even confiding within my tutor. By performing this stimulating task, any future experiences when encountered by maths will simultaneously become more logical, making my plan of spending 2-3 hours a day one of a rewarding value.
On the other hand, the subsequent week can be based on chemistry, persisting with the 2-3 hours a day, corresponding to the same method that is applied towards maths; support from tutor, study groups. And lecture notes. Eventually over prolonged time, maths and chemistry relating to bioscience will become my stronghold that will prove to be advantageous throughout my career path; Veterinary medicine, Animal pharmaceuticals. Or any other animal related career path that I may diverge into.
Three weeks later after beginning my academia journey. I have improved significantly towards maths and chemistry. This can be demonstrated when deciphering a specific question asking me to work out; how much chloroform and BHT do you need to make 25g of a 1% w/v BHT in chloroform solution? When first presented this task, I was a little precipitate as I simply began to overthink the question, creating a complete error towards my calculations.
I was instantly corrected by my tutor who manged to direct me onto the right path. First, I had to find out the density of chloroform; using my trusty mobile phone whereupon giving me the answer of 1.49g/cm3. Secondly, I then had to work out one gram. On the contrary this was quite straightforward, as you must divide 1.49g/cm3 by itself to solve one gram.
To continue, I then divided one by 1.4g producing the answer of 0.671ml. Once I had established the answer, I then had to divide 16.78 by 100 equals 0.168g which was the answer to how much BHT is needed to make 25g of a 1% w/v BHT alongside the answer of 16.78ml of how much chloroform is required.
References
https://www2.open.ac.uk/students/skillsforstudy/making-a-timetable.php
https://global.oup.com/ukhe/product/core-maths-for-the-biosciences-9780199216345?cc=gb&lang=en&
https://global.oup.com/ukhe/product/chemistry-for-the-biosciences-9780199662883?cc=gb&lang=en&
https://www.theprofs.co.uk/biology-bioscience-tutors/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI6d3C8YDr3QIV1OJ3Ch11TQGREAAYASAAEgKZhvD_BwE