Abstract

The aim was to evaluate whether pregnancy rates could be improved by randomly injecting recipient mares with flunixin meglumine (FM; Banamine®, Schering-Plough, São Paulo, Brazil) on the day of embryo transfer combined or not with long-acting progesterone (P4) in commercial embryo transfer programs. One hundred sixty-five Mangalarga Marchador recipient mares from the 2006–2007 breeding season of 4 different commercial programs were used. Ages ranged from 4 to 15 years old. In 86 mares, 1.1 mg kg–1 of BW of FM was given intravenously immediately after embryo transfer, and in 79 mares, only saline was injected. Additionally, 59 mares receiving saline were injected with 1 800.0 mg of progesterone at embryo transfer and every week thereafter until 110 days of gestation. Of the 86 receiving FM, 17 received the same progesterone protocol. Embryos were transferred nonsurgically in Ham’s F-10 or Encare medium. Pregnancy was checked by ultrasonography at 15, 30, and 60 days after transfer, and only a positive diagnosis on the latter was considered pregnancy in the statistical analysis. In a 2 × 2 factorial design (2 levels of FM and P4), pregnancy rates were analysed using the GENMOD procedure considering a binomial distribution (SAS®, Cary NC), and means were compared by orthogonal contrasts. Pregnancy rates were lower (P < 0.0001) in FM-treated (50.2 ± 5.3%) compared with control (88.2 ± 5.1%) mares and in P4-treated (85.9 ± 5.0%) compared with control (52.4 ± 5.5%) mares. An interaction effect between FM and P4 was not observed (P < 0.49). For mares receiving or not receiving FM, the addition of the P4 protocol lowered pregnancy rates. In mares not treated with FM, pregnancy rates were 81.4 ± 5.1% and 95.0 ± 8.8% for P4-treated and nontreated mares, respectively (P < 0.05). In FM-treated mares that did not receive P4, pregnancy rates were 76.8 ± 4.8% compared with 23.5 ± 9.6% of those treated with P4 (P < 0.0001). In conclusion, the indiscriminate use of progesterone and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may actually decrease reproductive efficiency and even act synergistically to potentiate their effect. These results must be interpreted with caution, considering that the data are derived from field observations, although sources are from very reliable and well-controlled operations. Nevertheless, the authors consider it imperative to have a proper diagnosis before generalizing the use of medical tools to improve pregnancy rates in horses. Financial support from CNPQ–Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, CAPES–Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de nível Superior. Schering/Plough, JOFADEL, and ABCCMM–Associação Brasileira dos Criadores do Cavalo Mangalarga Marchador.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.