Competition between split and nonmanipulated embryos in the production of identical piglets

Kendall Ash, G. B. Anderson, Robert Bondurant, R. L. Pashen, K. M. Parker, Trish Berger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Scopus citations

Abstract

The effect of nonmanipulated embryos on in utero survival of split porcine embryos was examined in this study. Previously, only limited success in the production of identical twin piglets has been reported. Embryos were collected from slaughtered donors (4 to 7 d post estrus) and were either split with the aid of a micromanipulator or left as whole embryos. Monozygotic pairs of split embryos were then surgically transferred to recipients with a complement of either split or nonmanipulated embryos. A total of 217 split embryos and 60 nonmanipulated embryos were transferred to 19 recipients. Nine of these recipients farrowed. In the two recipients that received only split embryos and farrowed, 31% of the split embryos survived to term, including two sets of monozygotic twins. In the remaining seven recipients, only 10% of the split embryos that were transferred along with nonmanipulated embryos survived to farrowing. This difference in split embryo survival (31 vs 10%) was significantly different (P<0.005). Sixty-nine percent of the nonmanipulated embryos survived to term in recipients that maintained pregnancy. Data presented in this study suggest that competition occurs between split and nonmanipulated embryos transferred to the same uterine environment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)903-910
Number of pages8
JournalTheriogenology
Volume31
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1989
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • embryo competition
  • monozygotic twins
  • pig

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Small Animals
  • Food Animals
  • Animal Science and Zoology
  • Equine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Competition between split and nonmanipulated embryos in the production of identical piglets'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this