No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The cuticle is a unique invisible oviduct secretion that protects avian eggs from bacterial penetration through gas exchange pores. Despite its importance, experimental evidence is lacking for where, when, and what is responsible for its deposition. By using knowledge about the ovulatory cycle and oviposition, we have manipulated cuticle deposition to obtain evidence on these key points. Cuticle deposition was measured using staining and spectrophotometry. Experimental evidence supports the location of cuticle deposition to be the shell gland pouch (uterus), not the vagina, and the time of deposition to be within the final hour before oviposition. Oviposition induced by arginine vasotocin or prostaglandin, the penultimate and ultimate factors for the induction of oviposition, produces an egg with no cuticle; therefore, these factors are not responsible for cuticle secretion. Conversely, oviposition induced by GNRH, which mimics the normal events of ovulation and oviposition, results in a normal cuticle. There is no evidence that cuticle deposition differs at the end of a clutch and, therefore, there is no evidence that the ovulatory surge of progesterone affects cuticle deposition. Overall, the results demonstrate that the cuticle is a specific secretion and is not merely an extension of the organic matrix of the shell. Cuticle deposition was found to be reduced by an environmental stressor, and there is no codependence of the deposition of pigment and cuticle. Defining the basic facts surrounding cuticle deposition will help reduce contamination of hen's eggs and increase understanding of the strategies birds use to protect their eggs.

In a grass-based production system with seasonal calving, fertility is of major economic importance. A delay in conception due to poor fertility prolongs intercalving interval and causes a shift in calving pattern, which can lead to culling. Calving interval (CIV) information is readily available from milk records; analyzing it, however, presents a problem, as it is only available for cows that conceive and calve again. Calving interval should therefore be treated as a censored trait. In this study, survival to the next lactation (SUV) was analyzed jointly with CIV in a multivariate linear model to account for the selection in CIV data. Genetic parameters for first lactation calving interval were estimated with a sire model for Holstein Friesian cows in Ireland. SUV was preadjusted for production within herd-year-season (HYS), while milk yield was included as a third trait in the analysis to account for the large effect it has on both traits. The residual covariance between CIV and SUV was fixed as 3 times the sire covariance within the model, as it was inestimable because of the structure of the data. Breeding values were estimated with various models to test the effect of culling and milk yield. Heritability was 0.04 +/- 0.006 for CIV and 0.01 +/- 0.003 for SUV, while the genetic correlation between them was -0.28 (+/-0.11). The genetic standard deviation was around 4% for SUV and 7 d for CIV. Sire predicted transmitting abilities for progeny tested bulls ranged between -5 and 3% for survival rate and between -4 and 8 d for calving interval. Differences between the best and worst bull varied with model. Including SUV and milk yield as traits in the model reduced the mean and variance of sire predicted transmitting abilities but increased the coefficient of variation by 30% compared with the univariate model. The current model is expected to account for most of the genetic variation in fertility that is possible from calving dates and future extensions, such as the use of linear type trait or additional lactations for predicting survival, appear straightforward. These traits now form part of the national index for selecting dairy bulls in Ireland.