Review
BibTex RIS Cite

Year 2020, Volume: 3 Issue: 3, 211 - 218, 01.07.2020

Özdal Gökdal

Abstract

Genel olarak keçilerin mevsimsel üreme döngüleri, işletmede planlı ve/veya yoğun üretim için de bir engel teşkil eder. Mevsimsel üreme aktivitesinin bir sonucu olarak keçilerden elde edilen ürünler mevsim ile sınırlıdır. Bununla birlikte, mevsim dışı üretimi teşvik etmek için çeşitli üreme kontrol stratejileri mevcuttur. Bunlardan biri; doğal olmayan ve pahalı, aynı zamanda keçilerde üremenin kontrolü için tekrarlanan uygulamalarda hayvanın endokrin düzenini bozabilen hormonal yöntemlerdir. Hormonal yöntemlerin tüm bu dezavantajları nedeniyle, keçilerin üreme fonksiyonlarını kontrol etmek için “teke etkisi” gibi doğal yöntemlerin kullanılması önerilmektedir. Dişi keçilerden ayrı tutulan tekelerin yeniden sürüye katılması, üreme mevsimi dışında dişilerde kızgınlık ve yumurtlamayı uyarabilmektedir. “Teke etkisi” dişilerin en az bir ay boyunca tekelerden izole edilmesi ve izolasyon periyodu sonunda tekrar bir araya getirilmeleri ile elde edilebilen reaksiyona verilen addır. Her ne kadar “erkek etkisi” 1940’lı yıllardan itibaren tanımlanmış olsa da son yıllarda yapılan çalışmalarda, erkek etkisinin oluşumu ve etkinliğinde farklı yaklaşımların söz konusu olabileceği gösterilmiştir. Bu çalışmada, “teke etkisi”nin “temiz, yeşil ve etik” bir üreme kontrol yöntemi olarak kullanımında yeni yaklaşımlar derlenmiş ve öneriler sunulmuştur.

Keywords

Erkek Etkisi Feromon Keçi Kızgınlık Üreme Mevsimi

References

  • Amarantidis I, Karagiannidis A, Saratsis Ph, Brikas P. 2004. Efficiency of methods used for estrous synchronization in indigenous Greek goats. Small Rumin Res, 52(3): 247-252.
  • Avdi M, Leboeuf B, Terqui M. 2004. Advanced breeding and ‘‘buck effect’’ in indigenous Greek goats. Livest Prod Sci, 87: 251–257.
  • Bedos M, Flores JA, Fritz-Rodriquez G, Keller M, Malpaux B, Poindron P, Delgadillo JA. 2010. Four hours of daily contact with sexually active males is sufficient to induce fertile ovulation in anestrus goats. Horm Behav, 58: 473-477.
  • Carrillo E, Tejada LM, Meza-Herrera CA, Arellano-Rodríguez G, Garcia JE, De Santiago-Miramontes MA, Mellado M.,Véliz FG. 2011. Response of sexually inactive French Alpine bucks to the stimulus of goats in oestrus. Livest Sci, 141: 202–206.
  • Claus R, Over R, Dehnhard M. 1990. Effect of male odour on LH secretion and the induction of ovulation in seasonally anoestrous goats. Anim Reprod Sci, 22: 27–38.
  • Dardente H, Lomet D, Robert V, Decourt C, Beltramo M, Pellicer-Rubio MT. 2016. Seasonal breeding in mammals: From basic science to applications and back Theriogenology, 86: 324–332.
  • Delgadillo JA, Gelez H, Ungerfeld R, Hawkend PAR, Martin GB. 2009. The ‘male effect’ in sheep and goats—Revisiting the dogmas. Behav Brain Res, 200: 304–314.
  • Fernández IG, Medina EF, Flores JA, Hernández H, Vielma J, Fitz-Rodríguez G, Duarte G. 2018. Absence of previous sexual experience did not modify the response of anoestrous goats to photo-stimulated bucks in Spring. Ital J Anim Sci, 17(2): 306-311.
  • Flores JA, Malpaux B, Véliz FG, Pérez-Villanueva JA, Martínez De La Escalera G, Chemineau P, Poindron P, Malpaux B, Delgadillo JA. 2000. Male reproductive condition is the limiting factor of efficiency in the male effect during seasonal anestrus in female goats. Biol Reprod, 64: 1409-1414.
  • Giriboni J, Gökdal Ö, Eren V, Yaralı E, Santiago-Moreno J, Ungerfeld R. 2019. Daily administration of a GnRH analogue enhances sperm quality in bucks during the non-breeding season. Anim Reprod Sci, 200: 43-50.
  • Gökdal Ö. 1996. Koyunlarda koç etkisi ve feromonlar. YYÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Zootekni ABD Yayınlanmamış, Doktora Semineri, Van.
  • Gökdal Ö, Ungerfeld R. 2016. Buck Effect. Agrotime, 4(20): 90-93.
  • Ichimaru T, Takeuchi Y, Mori Y. 1999. Stimulation of the GnRH pulse generator activity by continuous exposure to the male pheromones in the female goat. J Reprod Dev, 45(4): 243–248.
  • Iwata E, Wakabayashi Y, Kakuma Y, Kikusui T, Takeuchi Y, Mori Y. 2000. Testosterone-dependent primer pheromone production in the sebaceous gland of male goat. Biol Reprod, 62: 806-810.
  • Martin GB, Milton JT, Davidson RH, Banchero-Hunzicker GE, Lindsay DR, Blanche D. 2004. Natural methods for increasing reproductive efficiency in small ruminants, Anim Reprod Sci, 82: 231-245.
  • Mayorga I, Mourad R, Mara L, Gallus M, Ulutaş Z, Dattena M. 2019. Organic breeding in Sarda ewes: Utilization of the ram effect in an artificial insemination program. Small Rumin Res, 174: 131–134.
  • Mellado J, Veliz FG, de Santiago A, Meza-Herrera C, Mellado M. 2014. Buck-induced estrus in grazing goats during increasing photoperiod and under cold stress at 25° N. Vet Med Zoot, 66(88): 40-45.
  • Mendieta ES, Delgadillo JA, Flores JA, Flores MJ, Nandayapa E, Vélez LI, Zarazaga LA, Bedos M, Terrazas A, Hernández H. 2018. Subtropical goats ovulate in response to the male effect after a prolonged treatment of artificial long days to stimulate their milk yield. Reprod Dom Anim, 53: 955–962.
  • Murata K, Wakabayashi Y, Kitago M, Ohara H, Watanabe H, Tamogami S, Warita Y, Yamagishi K, Ichikawa M, Takeuchi Y, Okamura H, Mori Y. 2009. Modulation of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone pulse generator activity by the pheromone in small ruminants. J Neuroendocrinol, 21: 346-350.
  • Neto AMV, Salles MGF, de Araújo ÉP, Rodrigues ICS, da Rocha DR, de Araújo AA. 2016. Male effect: sustainability and effectiveness in inducing estrus in goat. Journal of Veterinary Andrology, 1(1): 13-23.
  • Neto AMV, Salles MGF, Rodrigues ICS, Freitas VJF, Moura AAAN, de Araújo AA. 2015. Insemination of dairy goats with estrus induced by the male effect during rainy and dry seasons in Northeastern Brazil. J Adv Agric, 4(1): 350-355.
  • Oliveira LR, Moura MT, Ferreira-Silva JC, Nascimento PS, Almeida-Irmão JM, Neto LMF, Lima PF, Oliveira MAL. 2016. Nulliparous Anglo-Nubian goats submitted to male effect under contrasting climatic conditions. LRRD, 28: 7.
  • Omontese BO, Rekwot PI, Ate IU, Ayo JO, Kawu MU, Rwuaan JS, Nwannenna AI, Mustapha RA, Bello AA. 2016. An update on oestrus synchronisation of goats in Nigeria. Asian Pac J Reprod, 5(2): 96–101.
  • Pellicer-Rubio MT, Boissard K, Forgerit Y, Pougnard JL, Bonn´e JL, Leboeuf B. 2016. Evaluation of hormone-free protocols based on the “male effect” for artificial insemination in lactating goats during seasonal anestrus. Theriogenology, 85: 960–969.
  • Pellicer-Rubio MT, Leboeuf B, Bernelas D, Forgerit Y, Pougnard JL, Bonn´e JL, Senty E, Chemineau P. 2007. Highly synchronous and fertile reproductive activity induced by the male effect during deep anoestrus in lactating goats subjected to treatment with artificially long days followed by a natural photoperiod. Anim Reprod Sci, 98: 241–258.
  • Ramírez S, Bedos M, Chasles M, Hernández H, Flores JA, Vielma J, Duarte G, Retana-Márquez MS, Keller M, Chemineau P, Delgadillo JA. 2017. Fifteen minutes of daily contact with sexually active male induces ovulation but delays its timing in seasonally anestrous goats. Theriogenology, 87: 148–153.
  • Ramos MA, González S, de Castro T, Ungerfeld R. 2005. Efecto Macho: una herramienta que permite un mayor desempeño reproductivo de la majada. Revista del Plan Agropecuario, 116: 25-28.
  • Rekik M, Othmane HB, Lassoued N, Sakly C. 2014. Efficiency of oestrous synchronization by GnRH, prostaglandins and socio-sexual Cces in the North African Maure Goats. Reprod Dom Anim, 49: 499–504.
  • Rekwot PI, Ogwu D, Oyedipe EO, Sekoni VO. 2001. The role of pheromones and biostimulation in animal reproduction. Anim Reprod Sci, 65:157-170.
  • Restall BJ. 1988. The artificial insemination of Australian goats stimulated by the buck effect. Proc Aust Soc Anim Prod, 17: 302-305.
  • Sakamoto K, Wakabayashi Y, Yamamura T, Tanaka T, Takeuchi Y, Mori Y, Okamura, H. 2013. A population of kisspeptin/neurokinin B neurons in the arcuate nucleus may be the central target of the male effect phenomenon in goats. PLoS ONE 8(11): e81017.
  • Sankarganesh D, Ramachandran R, Ashok R, Saravanakumar VR, Sukirtha R, Archunan G, Archiraman S. 2018. Buck odor production in the cornual gkand of the male goat, Capra hircus-Validation with histoarchitecture, volatile and proteomic analysis. ndian J Biochem. Biophys, 55: 183-190.
  • Singh N, Mehrotra S, Maurya V, Balamurugan B, Singh G, Patel BHM, Chaudhary JK, Krishnaswamy N. 2018. Oestrus synchronization in goats using impregnated intravaginal sponge and buck effect. IJSR, 24(2): 248-252.
  • Sugiyama T, Sasada H, Masaki J., Yamashita K. 1981. Unusual fatty acids with specific odor from mature male goat. Agric Biol Chem, 45(11): 2655-2658.
  • Ungerfeld R. 2007. Socio-sexual signalling and gonadal function: Opportunities for reproductive management in domestic ruminants. Soc Reprod Fertil Suppl, 64: 207-221.
  • Ungerfeld R. 2015. Male effect in small ruminants. Lecture notes at Adnan Menderes University, 9-22 October 2015, Aydın, Turkey.
  • Ungerfeld R, Rubianes E. 2001. Corderos tempranos, estrategia reproductiva que genera nuevas alternativas productivas. Revista del Plan Agropecuario, 98: 32-35.
  • Ungerfeld R, Ramos A, González S. 2006. Alternativas productivas manejando el momento de encarnerada: oferta de corderos fuera de época. Cerro Largo Rural, 9: 44-47.
  • Ungerfeld R, Ramos M, Gonzales Pensado S. 2008. Ram effect: Adult rams induce a greater reproductive response in anestrus ewes than yearling rams. Anim Reprod Sci, 103: 271-277.
  • Van Lancker S, Van Den Broeck W, Simoens P. 2005. Morphology of caprine skin glands involved in buck odour production. Vet J, 170: 351–358.
  • Van Rooyen JA. 2013. The Male Effect in sheep and goats. Grootfontein Agric., 13: 1.
  • Vielma J, Chemineau P, Poindron P, Malpaux B, Delgadillo JA. 2009. Male sexual behavior contributes to the maintenance of high LH pulsatility in anestrous female goats. Horm Behav, 56: 444–449.
  • Walkden-Brown SW, Martin GB, Restall BJ. 1999. Role of male-female interaction in regulating reproduction in sheep and goats. J Reprod Fertil Suppl, 52: 243–257.
  • Zarazaga LA, Gatica MC, Gallego-Calvo L, Celi I, Guzman JL. 2013. Short communication. Melatonin improves the reproductive performance of seasonal anoestrus goats exposed to buck effect during early post-partum. Span J Agric Res, 11(4): 997-1003.
  • Zarazaga LA, Gatica MC, Gallego-Calvo LM, Guzman JL. 2018. When using photostimulated bucks to induce the male effect in female goats living at Mediterranean latitudes, a male: female ratio of 1:20 is optimum. J Appl Anim Res, 46(1): 883–887.
  • Zarazaga LA, Gatica MC, Hernández H, Chemineau P, Delgadillo JA, Guzman JL. 2019. Photoperiod-treated bucks are equal to melatonin-treated bucks for inducing reproductive behaviour and physiological functions via the “male effect” in Mediterranean goats. Anim Reprod Sci, 202: 58–64.

New Approaches in the Use of Buck Effect

Year 2020, Volume: 3 Issue: 3, 211 - 218, 01.07.2020

Özdal Gökdal

Abstract

In general, seasonal breeding cycles of goats also lead an obstacle to planned and / or intensive production in goat farming. As a consequence of the seasonal breeding, products derived from goats are seasonal. However, there are various reproductive strategies available to induce out-of season production. One of them is hormonal methods which are unnatural, and expensive, and which can also disrupt the endocrine regulation of animals in repeated treatments for control of reproduction. Because of all these disadvantages of hormonal methods, it is proposed to use natural methods such as “buck effect" in order to control reproductive functions of goats. Buck re-introduction after isolation period can stimulate the oestrus and ovulation in anoestrous does. The “buck effect” refers to the reaction of does to re-introduction of males after complete isolation for at least a month. Although the “male effect" has been defined since the 1940s, in recent studies have been showed that different approaches may be involved in the formation and effectiveness of the male effect. In this study, the new perspectives of using “buck effect” as a ‘clean, green and ethical’ method of controlling reproduction are reviewed and some suggestions are presented.

Keywords

Estrus Goat Male Effect Mating Season Pheromone

References

  • Amarantidis I, Karagiannidis A, Saratsis Ph, Brikas P. 2004. Efficiency of methods used for estrous synchronization in indigenous Greek goats. Small Rumin Res, 52(3): 247-252.
  • Avdi M, Leboeuf B, Terqui M. 2004. Advanced breeding and ‘‘buck effect’’ in indigenous Greek goats. Livest Prod Sci, 87: 251–257.
  • Bedos M, Flores JA, Fritz-Rodriquez G, Keller M, Malpaux B, Poindron P, Delgadillo JA. 2010. Four hours of daily contact with sexually active males is sufficient to induce fertile ovulation in anestrus goats. Horm Behav, 58: 473-477.
  • Carrillo E, Tejada LM, Meza-Herrera CA, Arellano-Rodríguez G, Garcia JE, De Santiago-Miramontes MA, Mellado M.,Véliz FG. 2011. Response of sexually inactive French Alpine bucks to the stimulus of goats in oestrus. Livest Sci, 141: 202–206.
  • Claus R, Over R, Dehnhard M. 1990. Effect of male odour on LH secretion and the induction of ovulation in seasonally anoestrous goats. Anim Reprod Sci, 22: 27–38.
  • Dardente H, Lomet D, Robert V, Decourt C, Beltramo M, Pellicer-Rubio MT. 2016. Seasonal breeding in mammals: From basic science to applications and back Theriogenology, 86: 324–332.
  • Delgadillo JA, Gelez H, Ungerfeld R, Hawkend PAR, Martin GB. 2009. The ‘male effect’ in sheep and goats—Revisiting the dogmas. Behav Brain Res, 200: 304–314.
  • Fernández IG, Medina EF, Flores JA, Hernández H, Vielma J, Fitz-Rodríguez G, Duarte G. 2018. Absence of previous sexual experience did not modify the response of anoestrous goats to photo-stimulated bucks in Spring. Ital J Anim Sci, 17(2): 306-311.
  • Flores JA, Malpaux B, Véliz FG, Pérez-Villanueva JA, Martínez De La Escalera G, Chemineau P, Poindron P, Malpaux B, Delgadillo JA. 2000. Male reproductive condition is the limiting factor of efficiency in the male effect during seasonal anestrus in female goats. Biol Reprod, 64: 1409-1414.
  • Giriboni J, Gökdal Ö, Eren V, Yaralı E, Santiago-Moreno J, Ungerfeld R. 2019. Daily administration of a GnRH analogue enhances sperm quality in bucks during the non-breeding season. Anim Reprod Sci, 200: 43-50.
  • Gökdal Ö. 1996. Koyunlarda koç etkisi ve feromonlar. YYÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Zootekni ABD Yayınlanmamış, Doktora Semineri, Van.
  • Gökdal Ö, Ungerfeld R. 2016. Buck Effect. Agrotime, 4(20): 90-93.
  • Ichimaru T, Takeuchi Y, Mori Y. 1999. Stimulation of the GnRH pulse generator activity by continuous exposure to the male pheromones in the female goat. J Reprod Dev, 45(4): 243–248.
  • Iwata E, Wakabayashi Y, Kakuma Y, Kikusui T, Takeuchi Y, Mori Y. 2000. Testosterone-dependent primer pheromone production in the sebaceous gland of male goat. Biol Reprod, 62: 806-810.
  • Martin GB, Milton JT, Davidson RH, Banchero-Hunzicker GE, Lindsay DR, Blanche D. 2004. Natural methods for increasing reproductive efficiency in small ruminants, Anim Reprod Sci, 82: 231-245.
  • Mayorga I, Mourad R, Mara L, Gallus M, Ulutaş Z, Dattena M. 2019. Organic breeding in Sarda ewes: Utilization of the ram effect in an artificial insemination program. Small Rumin Res, 174: 131–134.
  • Mellado J, Veliz FG, de Santiago A, Meza-Herrera C, Mellado M. 2014. Buck-induced estrus in grazing goats during increasing photoperiod and under cold stress at 25° N. Vet Med Zoot, 66(88): 40-45.
  • Mendieta ES, Delgadillo JA, Flores JA, Flores MJ, Nandayapa E, Vélez LI, Zarazaga LA, Bedos M, Terrazas A, Hernández H. 2018. Subtropical goats ovulate in response to the male effect after a prolonged treatment of artificial long days to stimulate their milk yield. Reprod Dom Anim, 53: 955–962.
  • Murata K, Wakabayashi Y, Kitago M, Ohara H, Watanabe H, Tamogami S, Warita Y, Yamagishi K, Ichikawa M, Takeuchi Y, Okamura H, Mori Y. 2009. Modulation of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone pulse generator activity by the pheromone in small ruminants. J Neuroendocrinol, 21: 346-350.
  • Neto AMV, Salles MGF, de Araújo ÉP, Rodrigues ICS, da Rocha DR, de Araújo AA. 2016. Male effect: sustainability and effectiveness in inducing estrus in goat. Journal of Veterinary Andrology, 1(1): 13-23.
  • Neto AMV, Salles MGF, Rodrigues ICS, Freitas VJF, Moura AAAN, de Araújo AA. 2015. Insemination of dairy goats with estrus induced by the male effect during rainy and dry seasons in Northeastern Brazil. J Adv Agric, 4(1): 350-355.
  • Oliveira LR, Moura MT, Ferreira-Silva JC, Nascimento PS, Almeida-Irmão JM, Neto LMF, Lima PF, Oliveira MAL. 2016. Nulliparous Anglo-Nubian goats submitted to male effect under contrasting climatic conditions. LRRD, 28: 7.
  • Omontese BO, Rekwot PI, Ate IU, Ayo JO, Kawu MU, Rwuaan JS, Nwannenna AI, Mustapha RA, Bello AA. 2016. An update on oestrus synchronisation of goats in Nigeria. Asian Pac J Reprod, 5(2): 96–101.
  • Pellicer-Rubio MT, Boissard K, Forgerit Y, Pougnard JL, Bonn´e JL, Leboeuf B. 2016. Evaluation of hormone-free protocols based on the “male effect” for artificial insemination in lactating goats during seasonal anestrus. Theriogenology, 85: 960–969.
  • Pellicer-Rubio MT, Leboeuf B, Bernelas D, Forgerit Y, Pougnard JL, Bonn´e JL, Senty E, Chemineau P. 2007. Highly synchronous and fertile reproductive activity induced by the male effect during deep anoestrus in lactating goats subjected to treatment with artificially long days followed by a natural photoperiod. Anim Reprod Sci, 98: 241–258.
  • Ramírez S, Bedos M, Chasles M, Hernández H, Flores JA, Vielma J, Duarte G, Retana-Márquez MS, Keller M, Chemineau P, Delgadillo JA. 2017. Fifteen minutes of daily contact with sexually active male induces ovulation but delays its timing in seasonally anestrous goats. Theriogenology, 87: 148–153.
  • Ramos MA, González S, de Castro T, Ungerfeld R. 2005. Efecto Macho: una herramienta que permite un mayor desempeño reproductivo de la majada. Revista del Plan Agropecuario, 116: 25-28.
  • Rekik M, Othmane HB, Lassoued N, Sakly C. 2014. Efficiency of oestrous synchronization by GnRH, prostaglandins and socio-sexual Cces in the North African Maure Goats. Reprod Dom Anim, 49: 499–504.
  • Rekwot PI, Ogwu D, Oyedipe EO, Sekoni VO. 2001. The role of pheromones and biostimulation in animal reproduction. Anim Reprod Sci, 65:157-170.
  • Restall BJ. 1988. The artificial insemination of Australian goats stimulated by the buck effect. Proc Aust Soc Anim Prod, 17: 302-305.
  • Sakamoto K, Wakabayashi Y, Yamamura T, Tanaka T, Takeuchi Y, Mori Y, Okamura, H. 2013. A population of kisspeptin/neurokinin B neurons in the arcuate nucleus may be the central target of the male effect phenomenon in goats. PLoS ONE 8(11): e81017.
  • Sankarganesh D, Ramachandran R, Ashok R, Saravanakumar VR, Sukirtha R, Archunan G, Archiraman S. 2018. Buck odor production in the cornual gkand of the male goat, Capra hircus-Validation with histoarchitecture, volatile and proteomic analysis. ndian J Biochem. Biophys, 55: 183-190.
  • Singh N, Mehrotra S, Maurya V, Balamurugan B, Singh G, Patel BHM, Chaudhary JK, Krishnaswamy N. 2018. Oestrus synchronization in goats using impregnated intravaginal sponge and buck effect. IJSR, 24(2): 248-252.
  • Sugiyama T, Sasada H, Masaki J., Yamashita K. 1981. Unusual fatty acids with specific odor from mature male goat. Agric Biol Chem, 45(11): 2655-2658.
  • Ungerfeld R. 2007. Socio-sexual signalling and gonadal function: Opportunities for reproductive management in domestic ruminants. Soc Reprod Fertil Suppl, 64: 207-221.
  • Ungerfeld R. 2015. Male effect in small ruminants. Lecture notes at Adnan Menderes University, 9-22 October 2015, Aydın, Turkey.
  • Ungerfeld R, Rubianes E. 2001. Corderos tempranos, estrategia reproductiva que genera nuevas alternativas productivas. Revista del Plan Agropecuario, 98: 32-35.
  • Ungerfeld R, Ramos A, González S. 2006. Alternativas productivas manejando el momento de encarnerada: oferta de corderos fuera de época. Cerro Largo Rural, 9: 44-47.
  • Ungerfeld R, Ramos M, Gonzales Pensado S. 2008. Ram effect: Adult rams induce a greater reproductive response in anestrus ewes than yearling rams. Anim Reprod Sci, 103: 271-277.
  • Van Lancker S, Van Den Broeck W, Simoens P. 2005. Morphology of caprine skin glands involved in buck odour production. Vet J, 170: 351–358.
  • Van Rooyen JA. 2013. The Male Effect in sheep and goats. Grootfontein Agric., 13: 1.
  • Vielma J, Chemineau P, Poindron P, Malpaux B, Delgadillo JA. 2009. Male sexual behavior contributes to the maintenance of high LH pulsatility in anestrous female goats. Horm Behav, 56: 444–449.
  • Walkden-Brown SW, Martin GB, Restall BJ. 1999. Role of male-female interaction in regulating reproduction in sheep and goats. J Reprod Fertil Suppl, 52: 243–257.
  • Zarazaga LA, Gatica MC, Gallego-Calvo L, Celi I, Guzman JL. 2013. Short communication. Melatonin improves the reproductive performance of seasonal anoestrus goats exposed to buck effect during early post-partum. Span J Agric Res, 11(4): 997-1003.
  • Zarazaga LA, Gatica MC, Gallego-Calvo LM, Guzman JL. 2018. When using photostimulated bucks to induce the male effect in female goats living at Mediterranean latitudes, a male: female ratio of 1:20 is optimum. J Appl Anim Res, 46(1): 883–887.
  • Zarazaga LA, Gatica MC, Hernández H, Chemineau P, Delgadillo JA, Guzman JL. 2019. Photoperiod-treated bucks are equal to melatonin-treated bucks for inducing reproductive behaviour and physiological functions via the “male effect” in Mediterranean goats. Anim Reprod Sci, 202: 58–64.
There are 46 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Zootechny (Other)
Journal Section Reviews
Authors

Özdal Gökdal 0000-0002-0130-698X

Publication Date July 1, 2020
Submission Date February 4, 2020
Acceptance Date March 9, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2020 Volume: 3 Issue: 3

Cite

APA Gökdal, Ö. (2020). New Approaches in the Use of Buck Effect. Black Sea Journal of Agriculture, 3(3), 211-218.
 Download Cover Image

                                                  24890