Evidence for placental compensation in cattle

Abstract

Prenatal development is known to be extremely sensitive to maternal and environmental challenges. In this study, we hypothesize that body growth and lactation during gestation in cattle reduce nutrient availability for the pregnant uterus, with consequences for placental development. Fetal membranes of 16 growing heifers and 27 fully grown cows of the Belgian Blue (BB) breed were compared to determine the effect of body growth on placental development. Furthermore, the fetal membranes of 49 lactating Holstein Friesian (HF) cows and 27 HF heifers were compared to study the impact of dam lactation compared to dam body growth. After parturition, calf birth weight and body measurements of dam and calf were recorded, as well as weight of total fetal membranes, cotyledons and intercotyledonary membranes. All cotyledons were individually measured to calculate both the surface of each individual cotyledon and the total cotyledonary surface per placenta. Total cotyledonary surface was unaffected by breed or the breed × parity interaction. Besides a 0.3 kg lower cotyledonary weight ( P = 0.007), heifer placentas had a smaller total cotyledonary surface compared with placentas of cows (0.48 ± 0.017 v. 0.54 ± 0.014 m 2 , respectively, P < 0.001). Within the BB breed, fetal membranes of heifers had a 1.5 kg lower total weight and 1.0 kg lower intercotyledonary membrane weight ( P < 0.005) compared with cows. A cotyledon number of only 91 ± 5.4 was found in multiparous BB dams, while growing BB heifers had a higher cotyledon number (126 ± 6.7, P < 0.001), but a greater proportion of smaller cotyledons (<40 cm 2 ). Within the HF breed, no parity effect on intercotyledonary membrane weight, cotyledon number and individual cotyledonary surface was found. Placental efficiency (calf weight/total cotyledonary surface) was similar in HF and BB heifers but significantly higher in multiparous BB compared with multiparous HF dams (106.0 ± 20.45 v. 74.3 ± 12.27 kg/m 2 , respectively, P < 0.001). Furthermore, a seasonal effect on placental development was found, with winter and spring placentas having smaller cotyledons than summer and fall placentas ( P < 0.001). Main findings of the present study are that lactation and maternal growth during gestation entail a comparable nutrient diverting constraint, which might alter placental development. However, results suggest that the placenta is able to manage this situation through two potential compensation mechanisms. In early pregnancy the placenta might cope by establishing a higher number of cotyledons, while in late gestation a compensatory expansion of the cotyledonary surface is suggested to meet the nutrient demand of the fetus.

Prenatal programming of later performance in dairy cattle

“…Placental development responds to both fetal signals of nutrient demand and maternal signals of nutrient availability and, by adapting its phenotype, can regulate the distribution of available resources (Fowden et al, 2006b;Fowden and Moore, 2012). In a previous study by the authors on fetal membranes in Holstein Friesian (HF) and Belgian Blue (BB) cattle, parity of the dam and birth season were revealed to affect the placental phenotype (Van Eetvelde et al, 2016). More specifically, two adaptive mechanisms are seen, i. e. an increase in number of cotyledons (in growing BB dams) and an increase in cotyledonary surface (in lactating HF cows and summer placentas).…”

Environmental and maternal factors associated with gross placental morphology in dairy cattle

“…As dairy cattle management is characterized by features such as pregnancy at a young age in primiparous animals and lactation during gestation in multiparous animals, we focused on these typical maternal factors. These features are particularly important as both growth and lactation have recently been shown to significantly affect gross placental traits when coinciding with gestation (Van Eetvelde et al., ). As only the foetal portion of the placental tissue was available for examination, the potential impact of certain maternal factors on the maternal placental tissue could not be assessed.…”

“…Recently, we have demonstrated that young age at first gestation and a high level of milk yield during gestation in multiparous dams both reduce intrauterine foetal development, probably by diverting a significant proportion of nutrients to dam growth and milk production (Kamal et al., ). Subsequently, we have demonstrated that both growth and lactation during gestation have a significant impact on gross placental morphology in cattle (Van Eetvelde et al., ).…”

The effect of maternal nutritional restriction on fetal development and performance of offspring in beef cattle

“…Although other factors may also influence the rate of growth, the above listed are the underlying drivers of any animal's growth. Changes in maternal nutrition during early gestation have been found to influence placental development (Funston et al 2010;Van Eetvelde et al 2016), which sets the foundation for further development of the fetus. However, any related impairment of fetal development, including development of the gastrointestinal tract and respiratory system, does not appear to have long-term effects on steer growth and health.…”

“…Therefore, maternal nutrition during this mid-tolate gestation period could potentially have long term effects on the carcass. Recent research, on the other hand, suggests that deleterious effects associated with these processes could be lessened through compensatory growth during the remainder of the prenatal stage (Long et al 2010;Duarte et al 2013a;Van Eetvelde et al 2016). This discord in the literature highlights that the relationship A survey conducted across Canada found that on average, feed costs were the greatest component of expenses sustained by livestock operations (Lachapelle 2014).…”