Translator Disclaimer
1 January 2001 Feed Restriction and Insulin Treatment Affect Subsequent Luteal Function in the Immediate Postovulatory Period in Pigs: Progesterone Production In Vitro and Messenger Ribonucleic Acid Expression for Key Steroidogenic Enzymes
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

Progesterone production and release in vitro, and mRNA expression for key steroidogenic enzymes, were studied in luteal tissue recovered in the immediate postovulatory period from cyclic gilts allocated to one of three treatments: moderate feed restriction during the first (RH) or second week of the estrous cycle, with (HR I) or without (HR) concomitant injections of long-acting insulin. Time of feed restriction affected neither progesterone production or release, nor mRNA expression for several key steroidogenic enzymes. However, luteal tissue from RH but not from HR gilts responded to LH stimulation by increasing progesterone production and release (P < 0.05). Insulin treatment increased progesterone production and release, restored luteal tissue responsiveness to LH, up-regulated steroidogenic enzyme mRNA expression, and down-regulated the tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-I mRNA expression in HR I compared with HR gilts (P < 0.05). In vitro progesterone production and gene expression were affected by time of tissue collection after ovulation in RH and HR gilts but not in HR I gilts, and were correlated with temporal changes in oviductal and peripheral plasma progesterone concentrations. Inherent differences in luteal function therefore appear to mediate latent effects of nutrition and insulin treatment on circulating progesterone concentrations in the critical postovulatory period in gilts.

Jiude Mao, Brian K. Treacy, Fernanda R. C. L. Almeida, Susan Novak, Walter T. Dixon, and George R. Foxcroft "Feed Restriction and Insulin Treatment Affect Subsequent Luteal Function in the Immediate Postovulatory Period in Pigs: Progesterone Production In Vitro and Messenger Ribonucleic Acid Expression for Key Steroidogenic Enzymes," Biology of Reproduction 64(1), 359-367, (1 January 2001). https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod64.1.359
Received: 22 March 2000; Accepted: 31 August 2000; Published: 1 January 2001
JOURNAL ARTICLE
9 PAGES

This article is only available to subscribers.
It is not available for individual sale.
+ SAVE TO MY LIBRARY

SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission
Back to Top