J. Anim Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Smith, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Dial, G. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Smith, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Dial, G. D.

Journal of Animal Science, Vol 69, Issue 12 4907-4913, Copyright © 1991 by American Society of Animal Science


JOURNAL ARTICLE

Effects of season and estradiol-17 beta on luteinizing hormone release in ovariectomized sows

C. A. Smith, G. W. Almond and G. D. Dial
College of Vet. Med., North Carolina State University, Raleigh 27606.

This study examined the ability of estradiol-17 beta (E2) to suppress LH release in the sow during different months of the year. Six chronically ovariectomized sows were fitted with vena caval cannulas (d 0) and blood samples were collected at 6-h intervals for 6 d. Sows were treated s.c. with E2 capsules (24 mg of E2/275 kg of BW) at d 3. Additional blood samples were collected at 15-min intervals for 8 h on d 2 and 5. After each 8-h frequent sampling period, sows were treated i.v. with GnRH at .5 microgram/kg of BW, and blood samples were collected at 10-min intervals for 3 h. The protocol was repeated at monthly intervals for 13 mo. Luteinizing hormone concentrations were determined for all serum samples, and E2 concentrations were quantified in samples collected at 6-h intervals. Data were analyzed by split-block analyses of variance. Serum E2 concentrations increased (P less than .001) from 5.0 +/- .3 pg/ml before E2 treatment to 26.0 +/- .2 pg/ml after E2 treatment. The interval from GnRH administration to peak LH concentration was shorter (P less than .001) before E2 treatment than after E2 treatment (28.7 +/- 2.2 vs 71.0 +/- 2.2 min). It was evident that baseline LH, mean LH, pulse frequency, and pulse amplitude and LH release after GnRH administration failed to demonstrate seasonal changes. In summary, LH release was suppressed after treatment with E2 and was affected minimally by month of the year. In addition, E2 inhibitory effects of LH release included hypothalamic and anterior pituitary sites of action.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1991 by the American Society of Animal Science.