Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:39:29.243Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A note on the influence of oestradiol-17β implants on serum hormone and metabolite concentrations in response to an epinephrine challenge in lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

S. E. Bachman
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Range Sciences, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003–0003, USA
M. L. Galyean
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Range Sciences, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003–0003, USA
D. M. Hallford
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Range Sciences, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003–0003, USA
C. E. Heird
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Range Sciences, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003–0003, USA
G. C. Duff
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Range Sciences, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003–0003, USA
Get access

Abstract

Eight wether lambs were used to determine effects of an oestradiol-17β (E2β) implant on metabolic responses to an epinephrine challenge. Blood was sampled before and after an epinephrine challenge, on days 0 and 22 of E2p implantation.Oestradiol-17 ft implants increased pre-injection (basal) serum insulin (INS), growth hormone and free fatty acids (FFA), and decreased basal serum urea nitrogen. After 21 days of E2Pimplantation, total concentrations of FFA decreased and INS increased in response to the epinephrine challenge compared with pre-implantation values. It is concluded that E2/3 implants alter metabolic responses to an epinephrine challenge in wether lambs.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baker, P. K., Dalrymple, R. H., Ingle, D. L. and Ricks, C. A. 1984. Use of a p-adrenergic agonist to alter muscle and fat deposition in lambs. Journal of Animal Science 59: 12561261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briggs, M. 1976. Biochemical effects of oral contraceptives. Advances in Steroid Biochemistry. 5: 65160.Google ScholarPubMed
Collins, G. G. S., Pryse-Davis, J., Sandier, M. and Southgate, J. 1970. Effect of pretreatment with oestradiol, progesterone and DOPA on monoamine oxidase activity in the rat. Nature, London 226: 642643.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Galbraith, H., Hatendi, P. R., Alderson, E. M. and Scaife, J. R. 1990. The effect of cimaterol and oestradiol-17β alone or combined on growth and body composition of wether lambs. Animal Production 51: 311319.Google Scholar
Hoefler, W. C. and Hallford, D. M. 1987. Serum hormone profiles and return to estrus in early-postpartum spring-lambing ewes treated with somatostatin. Theriogenology 29: 519524.Google Scholar
McCutcheon, S. N. and Bauman, D. E. 1986. Effect of chronic growth hormone treatment on responses to epinephrine and thyrotropin-releasing hormone in lactating cows. Journal of Dairy Science 69: 4451.Google Scholar
Preston, R. L. 1975. Biological responses to estrogen additives in meat producing cattle and lambs. Journal of Animal Science 41: 14141430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanson, D. W. and Hallford, D. M. 1984. Growth response, carcass characteristics and serum glucose and insulin in Iambs fed tolazamide. Nutrition Reports International 29: 461471.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1984. SAS Users Guide. Statistics. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Youdim, M. B. H., Banerjee, D. K., Keller, K., Offutt, L. and Pollard, H. B. 1989. Steroid regulation of monoamine oxidase activity in the adrenal medulla. FASEB 3: 17531759.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed