Somatostatin Immunization and Growth of Lambs

Laarveld, B.; Chaplin, R. K.; Kerr, David E.

doi:10.4141/cjas86-009

Cited by 41 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the present study, immunization alone had little effect on plasma IGF-1 concentrations but in the presence of cimaterol, plasma IGF-1 concentrations were significantly reduced compared with control animals. This was unexpected but Laarveld et al (1986) and Trout and Schanbacher (1990) observed no increase in plasma IGF-1 concentrations in SRIFimmunized steers while Magnan et al (1995) observed a significant (P < 001) reduction in SRIFimmunized sheep and only observed an increase in plasma IGF-1 concentrations in bulls after the fourth immunization (12 weeks after primary immunization). In the present study the blood samples used for IGF-1 determination were taken 14 weeks after the primary immunization and it is possible that the IGF-1 response was more retarded in this study than in that of .…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 48%

The effect of immunization against somatostatin and β-agonist administration alone and in combination on growth and carcass composition in young steers

et al. 1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of active immunization against somatostatin and ^-agonist administration alone and in combination on growth, carcass composition and endocrine responses was investigated in young steers given a pelleted diet of dried grass and barley (0-7: 0-3) ad libitum for 16 weeks. Immunization alone increased growth rate by proportionately 0-10 but had no effect on plasma growth hormone (GH) or insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) concentrations (P > 0-10). Carcass protein content was unchanged but fat content tended to be increased. This was possibly associated with increased (P < 0-10) plasma insulin concentrations observed in these animals. Cimaterol administration significantly increased growth rate (P < 0-05) and carcass weight (P < 0-01). Carcass protein content was significantly (P < 0-01) increased and carcass fat was significantly (P < 0-001) reduced. Administration of cimaterol to immunized animals resulted in an enhancement of the repartitioning effect of the pagonist although growth rates were intermediate between the separate treatments. The mechanism by which this was achieved is unclear. Plasma IGF-1 concentrations tended (P < 0-10) to be lower in these animals compared with controls. Plasma insulin concentrations were also reduced (P < 0-05) in these animals. Both immunized animals and those given cimaterol alone showed an increased GH response to a single intravenous injection of growth hormone releasing factor (GRF) (P < 0-05). Animals given the combined treatment however showed a reduced response suggesting that the effects were not mediated through direct changes in GH secretion. The improved lean :fat ratio in the carcass was observed to be mediated through an enhancement of the lipolytic response to the /Jagonist with only small effects on protein accretion. It is suggested that immunoneutralization of somatostatin may increase the sensitivity of adipose tissue to lipolytic stimuli. This could occur through changes in the secretion of gastrointestinal or pancreatic hormones as a result of neutralization of the inhibitory influences of somatostatin. Further work is required to clarify these effects.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 48%

The effect of immunization against somatostatin and β-agonist administration alone and in combination on growth and carcass composition in young steers

et al. 1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Varner et al (1980) observed higher GH concentrations but a reduced growth rate in SRIF-IMM animals. Others have reported increases in daily gain and IGI-I levels, but no change in GH concentrations (Spencer et al, 1983a;Laarveld et al, 1986), whereas Bass et al (1987) reported increased IGF-1 with no effect on GH and a slight increase in growth rate. Nevertheless, when summarizing data taken from the literature, , using meta-analysis on weighted group averages from several studies, showed that daily gain and feed intake were increased by 11.4 and 4.2%, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…In sheep, Varner et al (1980) observed higher GH concentrations in SRIF immunized (SRIF-IMM) cattle, but a reduced growth rate, whereas others have reported increases in daily gain but no change in GH concentrations (Spencer et al, 1983a;Laarveld et al, 1986;Bass et al, 1987). Sun et al (1990) reported increases in live weight gain, N retention and apparent digestibility of DM and N in SRIF-IMM lambs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Growth, Feed Digestibility and Carcass Characteristics of Male Dairy Calves Infused with Growth Hormone-releasing Factor and/or Actively Immunized against Somatostatin

Roy¹,

Pelletier²,

Bernier³

et al. 1999

Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A - Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

4M1). Growth, feed digestibility and carcass characteristics of male dairy calves infused with growth hormone-releasing factor and/or actively immunized against somatostatin.One week after weaning, 16 animals were immunized (IMM) against human-globulin (hG-IMM) and 16 against SRIF conjugated to hG (SRIF-IMM) in Freund's complete adjuvant. Subsequent boosters in Freund's incomplete adjuvant were made on days 14, 28, 56 and 73 of the experimental period. On day 79, half of the animals within each immunization treatment were infused continuously with human GRF(1-29)NH 2 (3.33 ng min −1 kg −1 BW) and the other half with saline over a 32-day period. GRF increased (P= 0.01) body weight gain by 12%, whereas SRIF immunization decreased (P= 0.01) weight gain by 7.5% during the infusion period (days 79-111). However, the effect of SRIF immunization on growth rate was not significant (P\0.10) when considered over the entire duration of the experiment (days 0-111). Feed intake, feed efficiency, carcass characteristics, nutrient digestibility, nitrogen retention and metabolizability of energy were not affected (P \ 0.10) by SRIF immunization or GRF infusion. However, GRF infusion increased pancreatic activity of amylase (PB 0.05). In conclusion, GRF, unlike SRIF immunization, could be used to improve growth performance of fast-growing corn-fed bull calves.

show abstract

“…A possible practical alternative is the use of immuno-neutralization. To date, passive immunization of SRIF (administration of antibodies into the animal) has not been found to have any growth stimulating effect , but active immunization appears to be a powerful, safe, effective tool to enhance growth (for a review see Spencer, 1986 (Spencer, Hallett, and Fadlalla, 1985 ;Laarveld et al, 1986), cattle (Closset et al, 1986 ;Lawrence et aL, 1986), pigs (Spencer, 1984 ;Laarveld, personal communication) and chickens .…”

Section: Somatostatinmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biotechnology in the potential practical application of somatotrophic hormones for improving animal performance

Spencer¹

1987

Reprod. Nutr. Dévelop.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Somatostatin Immunization and Growth of Lambs

Cited by 41 publications

References 6 publications

The effect of immunization against somatostatin and β-agonist administration alone and in combination on growth and carcass composition in young steers

The effect of immunization against somatostatin and β-agonist administration alone and in combination on growth and carcass composition in young steers

Growth, Feed Digestibility and Carcass Characteristics of Male Dairy Calves Infused with Growth Hormone-releasing Factor and/or Actively Immunized against Somatostatin

Biotechnology in the potential practical application of somatotrophic hormones for improving animal performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About