Identification of nonpregnant beef cows based on CL size vs. luteal blood perfusion at 21 days after timed artificial insemination

IF 2.4 2区 农林科学 Q3 REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY
{"title":"Identification of nonpregnant beef cows based on CL size vs. luteal blood perfusion at 21 days after timed artificial insemination","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.theriogenology.2024.08.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The aim was to evaluate the efficiency of two different ultrasonographic systems, Doppler mode vs. Two-dimensional mode (B mode), to identify the pregnancy status of beef cows and heifers on day 21 (D21) after Timed Artificial Insemination (TAI). The experiment was performed on a commercial beef farm in central-west region of Brazil using 1895 Nelore heifers and cows. All females had ovulation synchronized for a TAI that was performed on D0. Twenty-one days after the TAI, all animals had their ovaries evaluated by ultrasound for pregnancy diagnosis based on the size of the corpus luteum (CL). Using B mode ultrasonography, females without a CL or with a CL ≤ 10 mm in diameter were considered nonpregnant, whereas females with a CL &gt; 10 mm in diameter were considered potentially pregnant. After the B mode examination, the Doppler mode was turned on, and the CL was evaluated by the subjective percentage of blood perfusion in the total area of the CL. Using Doppler mode, females were considered nonpregnant if they had no CL or the CL had ≤25 % of the total area with detectable blood perfusion, whereas animals with &gt;25 % blood perfusion in the CL were considered potentially pregnant. The results for each method (potentially pregnant or nonpregnant) were later compared with the gold standard technique, which was a pregnancy diagnosis on D33 after TAI using ultrasound with visualization of an embryonic heartbeat. The accuracy was determined using the 2 × 2 contingency table approach. The area under the curve using the receiver operating characteristic curve for Doppler mode and B mode were 0.929 and 0.902 (P &lt; 0.01), respectively. There were almost no false negatives (designated non-pregnant but later pregnant at D33) with either technique (0.2 % vs. 0.3 %; P = 0.65 for Doppler mode vs. B mode, respectively). False positives (designated pregnant but non-pregnant on D33) were greater for B mode compared to Doppler (19.1 % vs. 14.0 %; P &lt; 0.01). This resulted in Doppler mode having similar high values as B mode for Negative Predictive Value (99.9 vs. 99.6 %; P = 0.85) and Sensitivity (99.8 vs. 99.7 %; P = 0.86) but there were differences in Specificity (86 vs. 80.9 %; P &lt; 0.01), Positive Predictive Value (88 vs. 84.3 %; P &lt; 0.01), and Accuracy (93.0 vs. 90.4 %; P &lt; 0.01). In conclusion, evaluation of CL blood perfusion by Doppler produced greater accuracy in the early identification of nonpregnant heifers and cows on D21 after TAI than measurement of CL diameter with B mode ultrasound; although both had over 90 % accuracy in identifying pregnant and nonpregnant females.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":23131,"journal":{"name":"Theriogenology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theriogenology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0093691X24003340","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim was to evaluate the efficiency of two different ultrasonographic systems, Doppler mode vs. Two-dimensional mode (B mode), to identify the pregnancy status of beef cows and heifers on day 21 (D21) after Timed Artificial Insemination (TAI). The experiment was performed on a commercial beef farm in central-west region of Brazil using 1895 Nelore heifers and cows. All females had ovulation synchronized for a TAI that was performed on D0. Twenty-one days after the TAI, all animals had their ovaries evaluated by ultrasound for pregnancy diagnosis based on the size of the corpus luteum (CL). Using B mode ultrasonography, females without a CL or with a CL ≤ 10 mm in diameter were considered nonpregnant, whereas females with a CL > 10 mm in diameter were considered potentially pregnant. After the B mode examination, the Doppler mode was turned on, and the CL was evaluated by the subjective percentage of blood perfusion in the total area of the CL. Using Doppler mode, females were considered nonpregnant if they had no CL or the CL had ≤25 % of the total area with detectable blood perfusion, whereas animals with >25 % blood perfusion in the CL were considered potentially pregnant. The results for each method (potentially pregnant or nonpregnant) were later compared with the gold standard technique, which was a pregnancy diagnosis on D33 after TAI using ultrasound with visualization of an embryonic heartbeat. The accuracy was determined using the 2 × 2 contingency table approach. The area under the curve using the receiver operating characteristic curve for Doppler mode and B mode were 0.929 and 0.902 (P < 0.01), respectively. There were almost no false negatives (designated non-pregnant but later pregnant at D33) with either technique (0.2 % vs. 0.3 %; P = 0.65 for Doppler mode vs. B mode, respectively). False positives (designated pregnant but non-pregnant on D33) were greater for B mode compared to Doppler (19.1 % vs. 14.0 %; P < 0.01). This resulted in Doppler mode having similar high values as B mode for Negative Predictive Value (99.9 vs. 99.6 %; P = 0.85) and Sensitivity (99.8 vs. 99.7 %; P = 0.86) but there were differences in Specificity (86 vs. 80.9 %; P < 0.01), Positive Predictive Value (88 vs. 84.3 %; P < 0.01), and Accuracy (93.0 vs. 90.4 %; P < 0.01). In conclusion, evaluation of CL blood perfusion by Doppler produced greater accuracy in the early identification of nonpregnant heifers and cows on D21 after TAI than measurement of CL diameter with B mode ultrasound; although both had over 90 % accuracy in identifying pregnant and nonpregnant females.

根据定时人工授精后 21 天的 CL 大小与黄体血液灌注量识别未孕肉牛
目的是评估两种不同的超声波系统(多普勒模式和二维模式(B 模式))在定时人工授精(TAI)后第 21 天(D21)鉴定肉牛和小母牛妊娠状况的效率。实验在巴西中西部地区的一个商业化肉牛养殖场进行,使用了 1895 头内洛尔母牛和奶牛。所有雌性都在第 0 天进行 TAI,同步排卵。TAI 21 天后,所有动物的卵巢都接受了超声波评估,以便根据黄体(CL)的大小进行妊娠诊断。通过B型超声波检查,没有黄体或黄体直径小于10毫米的雌鼠被视为未孕,而黄体直径大于或等于10毫米的雌鼠被视为可能怀孕。在 B 模式检查后,打开多普勒模式,根据 CL 总面积中血液灌注的主观百分比来评估 CL。使用多普勒模式时,如果雌性动物没有CL或CL总面积中可检测到血液灌注的比例≤25%,则被视为未怀孕;如果CL中血液灌注的比例为25%,则被视为可能怀孕。随后,将每种方法(可能怀孕或未怀孕)的结果与金标准技术进行了比较,后者是在TAI后的D33日,通过超声波观察胚胎心跳来诊断是否怀孕。准确度采用 2 × 2 或然率表法确定。多普勒模式和 B 模式的接收者操作特征曲线下面积分别为 0.929 和 0.902(P < 0.01)。使用这两种技术几乎都没有假阴性(被认为未孕但后来在 D33 时怀孕)(多普勒模式和 B 模式分别为 0.2 % 和 0.3 %;P = 0.65)。与多普勒相比,B 模式的假阳性(指定怀孕但在 D33 时未怀孕)更高(19.1% 对 14.0%;P <0.01)。这导致多普勒模式在阴性预测值(99.9% 对 99.6%;P = 0.85)和敏感性(99.8% 对 99.7%;P = 0.86)方面与 B 模式具有相似的高值,但在特异性(86% 对 80.9%;P <;0.01)、阳性预测值(88% 对 84.3%;P <;0.01)和准确性(93.0% 对 90.4%;P <;0.01)方面存在差异。总之,与用B型超声波测量CL直径相比,用多普勒评估CL血流灌注在TAI后D21日早期识别未孕小母牛和母牛方面的准确性更高;尽管两者在识别怀孕和未孕雌性动物方面的准确性都超过90%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Theriogenology
Theriogenology 农林科学-生殖生物学
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
387
审稿时长
72 days
期刊介绍: Theriogenology provides an international forum for researchers, clinicians, and industry professionals in animal reproductive biology. This acclaimed journal publishes articles on a wide range of topics in reproductive and developmental biology, of domestic mammal, avian, and aquatic species as well as wild species which are the object of veterinary care in research or conservation programs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信