Challenges in Application of New Reproductive Biotechnologies in Domestic Animals

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Professor of Tarbiaat Modarres University

Abstract

Some of the reproductive technologies have greatly improved the productivity of livestock in the developed countries. Many factors, which are often not optimal in every herd, affect the cost-benefit of such technologies, including the management, knowledge, expertise and attitude of the involved personnel, farmer’s economic and social conditions, to name a few. Artificial insemination (AI) is the most important biotechnology that its application, along with other technologies such as germ cell cryopreservation especially sperm freezing, can result in considerable improvement in genetics of animal production and distribution of the elite genotypes. Estrous synchronization and sex-sorted sperm technologies increase the efficiency of AI. Embryo transfer technology can improve the female reproduction; however, its application is much more costly, and it is not as effective as AI. In most developing countries, AI is often used for upgrading the native animals with imported semen, and less often for breeding of the native dams with the sperm of native males. Due to lack of effective and reliable methods of animal identification, recording systems, and defined animal breeding schemes, the more advanced technologies cannot be efficiently applied in these animals. The use of molecular markers is generally limited to the genetic identification studies which are often carried out with international collaboration. This paper describes the challenges of the application of assisted reproductive technologies and biotechnologies, with emphasis on the developing countries. When available, the information on Iran will also be presented.

Keywords

References

  1. 1- آفتاب نیوز. 1395. مروری بر دستاوردهای 25 ساله پژوهشگاه رویان (کد خبر ۳۸۳۷۲۳). دوم مردادماه 1395. برگرفته از https://www.royaninstitute.org/cmsfa/

    2- پیترز، آ.ر. و پی.جی. بال. 1387. تولید مثل در گاو (برگرداننده: م.ج. ضمیری). چاپ پنجم. انتشارات دانشگاه شیراز.

    3- دفتر آمار و فناوری اطلاعات وزارت جهاد کشاورزی. 1387 . آمار نامه کشاورزی 93-2:91.

    4- دواساز تبریزی، ا.، س. بی‌گناه، ص. مسافری، ع. رضایی، ج. بهنام‌پور. ١٣٨٨. بررسی نتایج برنامه سوپر اوولاسیون و انتقال جنین در گاوداری‌های شیری منطقه تبریز. مجله دامپزشکی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تبریز ٧8-3:71.

    5- ضمیری ، م.ج. 1372. جنبه های اخلاقی- معنوی و کارآیی بیوتکنولوژی . دومین سمپوزیوم سیاست کشاورزی ایران، 16 تا 18 آبان 1372، دانشکده کشاورزی، شیراز، 399 تا 409 -  .

    6- ضمیری، م.ج. 1386. تکنولوژی های رویان، از انتقال رویان تا کلونینگ با تاکید بر کاربرد در گاو. دومین کنگره علوم دامی و آبزیان کشور، 26 تا 27 اردیبهشت 1386، موسسه تحقیقات علوم دامی،کرج، صفحه های 1472 تا 1476.

    7-  ضمیری، م.ج. 1391. فیزیولوژی تولید مثل. چاپ سوم. انتشارات حق شناس، رشت.

    8- ضمیری، م.ج. 1397. دشواری‌های تولیدمثلی گاوهای شیری (مدیریت تولیدمثل). مجموعه مقالات اولین همایش ملی ناهنجاری­های متابولیکی دام و طیور. آذرماه 1397، دانشگاه زنجان، زنجان.  صفحه های 43 تا 50.

    9- ضمیری، م.ج، ب. عارف نژاد و م.س. صالحی. 1389. پژوهش‌های تولیدمثلی گاوهای هولشتن در ایران و چشم‌انداز آینده. دومین همایش ملی انجمن هولشتن ایران. 5 و 6 خردادماه 1389. سازمان پژوهش­های علمی و صنعتی ایران- تهران.

    1. Anonymous. 2011. Biotechnology in Animal Agriculture: Status and Current Issues. Congressional Research Service, USA Congress. CRS Report for Congress (name redacted) - Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress. 24.

    11. Butler, L.J. and M. McGarry Wolf. 2010. Economic analysis of the impact of cloning on improving dairy herd composition. AgBioForum 13:194-207.

    12. Carlson, D.F., C.A. Lancto, B. Zang, E. S. Kim, M. Walton, D. Oldeschulte, C. Seabury, T.S. Sonstegard and S.C. Fahrenkrug. 2016. Production of hornless dairy cattle from genome-edited cell lines. Nature Biotechnol. 34:479-481.

    13. Choudhary, K.K., K.M. Karya, A. Gerome and R.K. Sharma. 2016. Advances in reproductive biotechnologies. Veter. World 9:388-395.

    14. Council for Agricultural Science and Technology (CAST). 2010. Ethical Implications of Animal Biotechnology: Considerations for Animal Welfare Decision Making. No. 46. CAST, Ames, Iowa, USA.

    15. FAO. 2006. Livestock’s long shadow: Environmental issues and options, by H. Steinfeld, P. Gerber, T. Wassenaar, V. Castel, M. Rosales  and C. de Haan. 390 p. Rome, Italy (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM).

    16. FAO. 2007. The State of the World’s Animal Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. B. Rischkowsky and D. Pilling (eds.). FAO, Rome, Italy.

    17. FAO. 2011. Current status and options for livestock biotechnologies in developing countries.  In: Proceed. FAO Internat. Tech. Conf. Agr. Biotechnol. Develop. Count.  pp. 123-190.

    18. Gaskell, G. 2000. Agricultural biotechnology and public attitudes in the European Union. AgBioForum 3:87-96.

    19. Gengler, N. and T. Druett. 2001. Impact of biotechnology on animal breeding and genetic progress. In: R. Renaville and A. Burny (eds.), Biotechnology in Animal Husbandry. Kluwer Academic Publishers. The Netherlands, pp. 33-45.

    20. Georges, M. 2006. Application of biotechnologies for the genetic improvement of livestock: Status and prospects.  Retrieved from www.oie.int › doc › ged

    21. Georges, M., D. Nielsen, M. Mackinnon, A. Mishra, R. Okimoto, A.T. Pasquino, L.S. Sargeant, A. Sorenson, A. Steele, X. Zhao, J.E. Womack  and I. Hoeschele. 1995. Mapping quantitative trait loci controlling milk production in dairy cattle by exploiting progeny testing. Genetics 139: 907-920.

    22. Hou, Z., L. An, J. Han, Y. Yuan, D. Chen and J. Tian. 2018. Revolutionize livestock breeding in the future: an animal embryo-stem cell breeding system in a dish. Rev. J. Anim.. Sci. Biotechnol. (online 11 p.).

    23. Kosgey, I.S., R.L. Baker, H.M.G. Udo and J.A.M. van Arendonk. 2006. Successes and failures of small ruminant breeding programs in the tropics: a review. Small Rumin. Res. 61:13-28.

    24. Malkan, S. 2019. Gene editing mishaps highlight need for FDA oversight. Retrieved from https://usrtk.org/tag/gmo/

    25. Nimbkar, C. and N. Kandasamy. 2011. Animal breeding in India – a time for reflection, and action. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 128:161-162.

    26. Proudfoot, C., D.F. Carlson, R. Huddart, C.R. Long, J.H. Pryor, T.J. King, S.G. Lillico, A.J. Mileham, D.G. McLaren, C.B.A. Whitelaw and S.C. Fahrenkrug. 2015. Genome edited sheep and cattle. Transgenic Res. 24:147-153.

    27. Rana, P. and L. Craymer. 2108. Big tongues and extra vertebrae: The unintended consequences of animal gene editing.  Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/deformities-alarm-scientists-racing-to-rewrite-animal-dna-11544808779

    28. Razmkabir, M. 2018. A field study on the reproductive efficiency of sex-sorted semen in Holstein heifers. J. Lives. Sci. Technol. 6:41-46.

    29. Renaville, R., N. Gengler, E. Vrech, A. Prandi, S. Massart, C. Corradini, C. Bertozzi, F. Mortiaux, A. Burny  and D. Portetelle. 1997.  Pit-I Gene polymorphism, milk yield, and conformation traits for Italian Holstein-Friesian bulls. J. Dairy Sci. 80:3431-3438.

    30. Rodrigez-Martinez, H. 2012. Assisted reproductive techniques for cattle in developing countries: A critical appraisal of their values and limitations. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 47SI:21-26.

    31. Ruane, J. and A. Sonnino. 2011. Agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries and their possible contribution to food security. J. Biotechnol. 156:356-363.

    32. Ruane, J. and R. Thompson. 1991. Comparison of simulated and theoretical results in adult MOET nucleus schemes for dairy cattle, Livest. Prod. Sci. 28:1-20.

    33. Schuppli, C. A. and D.M. Weary. 2010. Attitudes towards the use of genetically modified animals in research. Public Underst. Sci. 19:686-697.

    34. Sejian, V., T.V. Meenanbigai, M. Chandirasegaran and S.M.K. Naqvi.  2010. Reproductive technology in farm animals: New facets and findings. J. Biol. Sci. 10:686-700.

    35. Senger, P.L. 2002. Fertility factors- Which ones are really important? Proceed. Amer. Asso. Bovine Pract. 35:112-123.

    36. Solter, D. 1981. Gene transfer in mammalian cells. In: B.G. Brackett, G.E. Seidel and S.M. Seidel (eds.), New Technologies in Animal Breeding. Academic Press, London, UK, pp. 201 -220.

    37. Van Arendonk, J.A.M. 2011. The role of reproductive technologies in breeding schemes for livestock population in developing countries. Livest. Sci. 136:29-37.

    38. Van Eenennaam A.L. and A.E. Young. 2018. Public perception of animal biotechnology. In: H. Niemann and C. Wrenzycki (eds.), Animal Biotechnology 2. Springer Nature, Cham, Switzerland, 275-303.

    39. van Vleck, L.D. 1981. Potential genetic impact of artificial insemination, sex selection, embryo transfer, cloning, and selfing in dairy cattle. In: B.G. Brackett, G.E. Seidel and S.M. Seidel (eds.), New Technologies in Animal Breeding. Academic Press, London, UK, pp.  221-242.

    40. Weldon, S. and D. Laycock. 2009. Public opinion and biotechnological innovation. Policy Soc. 28:315-325.

    41. Yitayih, T.T., T.M. Moges and U.L. Kebeto. 2017. Review on status and constraints of artificial insemination in developing countries, the case of Ethiopia. J. Biol. Agric. Healthcare 7:79-87. 

    42. Young, A.E., T.A. Mansour, B.R. McNabb, J.R. Owen, J. F. Trott, C.T. Brown and A.L. Van Eenennaam. 2019. Genomic and phenotypic analyses of six offspring of a genome-edited hornless bull. Nature Biotechnol. 38(2):225-232

Strategic Research Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources
Volume 5, Issue 2
December 2020
Pages 166-177

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics