Effect of Kiss Antagonist P271 (10−4 M) on LH Response of Anoestrus Ewes Exposed to Sexually Active Rams
| Group . | Before Antagonist . | After Antagonist . | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Latency Short-Term LH Response (h) . | Amplitude Short-Term Response (ng/mL) . | Ewes With LH Surge (%) . | Surge Latency (h) . | Maximum LH (ng/mL) . | |
| Solvent (n = 7) | 1 ± 0 | 1.20 ± 0.34 | 71.4a | 34.60 ± 5.18 | 16.32 ± 1.55 |
| ARC (n = 6) | 1 ± 0 | 1.08 ± 0.24 | 0a | ||
| POA (n = 5) | 1.4 ± 0.24 | 1.06 ± 0.29 | 80a | 31.25 ± 4.55 | 23.30 ± 5.33 |
| Group . | Before Antagonist . | After Antagonist . | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Latency Short-Term LH Response (h) . | Amplitude Short-Term Response (ng/mL) . | Ewes With LH Surge (%) . | Surge Latency (h) . | Maximum LH (ng/mL) . | |
| Solvent (n = 7) | 1 ± 0 | 1.20 ± 0.34 | 71.4a | 34.60 ± 5.18 | 16.32 ± 1.55 |
| ARC (n = 6) | 1 ± 0 | 1.08 ± 0.24 | 0a | ||
| POA (n = 5) | 1.4 ± 0.24 | 1.06 ± 0.29 | 80a | 31.25 ± 4.55 | 23.30 ± 5.33 |
The antagonist was administered by retrodialysis in the ARC or POA from 6 hours to18 hours after introduction of the male and compared with control ewes that did not receive the antagonist. Before administration of the antagonist, the latency and amplitude of the response did not differ between groups (Mann–Whitney U test). After treatment, the proportion of ewes having an LH surge was lower in the group infused in the ARC than in the others. Values expressed with a plus/minus sign are the mean ± standard error of the mean.
P < 0.016 compared with POA; P < 0.012 compared with χ2 tests.
Effect of Kiss Antagonist P271 (10−4 M) on LH Response of Anoestrus Ewes Exposed to Sexually Active Rams
| Group . | Before Antagonist . | After Antagonist . | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Latency Short-Term LH Response (h) . | Amplitude Short-Term Response (ng/mL) . | Ewes With LH Surge (%) . | Surge Latency (h) . | Maximum LH (ng/mL) . | |
| Solvent (n = 7) | 1 ± 0 | 1.20 ± 0.34 | 71.4a | 34.60 ± 5.18 | 16.32 ± 1.55 |
| ARC (n = 6) | 1 ± 0 | 1.08 ± 0.24 | 0a | ||
| POA (n = 5) | 1.4 ± 0.24 | 1.06 ± 0.29 | 80a | 31.25 ± 4.55 | 23.30 ± 5.33 |
| Group . | Before Antagonist . | After Antagonist . | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Latency Short-Term LH Response (h) . | Amplitude Short-Term Response (ng/mL) . | Ewes With LH Surge (%) . | Surge Latency (h) . | Maximum LH (ng/mL) . | |
| Solvent (n = 7) | 1 ± 0 | 1.20 ± 0.34 | 71.4a | 34.60 ± 5.18 | 16.32 ± 1.55 |
| ARC (n = 6) | 1 ± 0 | 1.08 ± 0.24 | 0a | ||
| POA (n = 5) | 1.4 ± 0.24 | 1.06 ± 0.29 | 80a | 31.25 ± 4.55 | 23.30 ± 5.33 |
The antagonist was administered by retrodialysis in the ARC or POA from 6 hours to18 hours after introduction of the male and compared with control ewes that did not receive the antagonist. Before administration of the antagonist, the latency and amplitude of the response did not differ between groups (Mann–Whitney U test). After treatment, the proportion of ewes having an LH surge was lower in the group infused in the ARC than in the others. Values expressed with a plus/minus sign are the mean ± standard error of the mean.
P < 0.016 compared with POA; P < 0.012 compared with χ2 tests.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
