Changes in the secretion of LH pulses, FSH and prolactin during the preovulatory phase of the oestrous cycle of the ewe and the influence of treatment with bovine follicular fluid during the luteal phase
Authors: Wallace J. M. , Martin G. B. , McNeilly A. S. 
Published: December 2008

ABSTRACT
It has previously been shown that treatment of ewes with bovine follicular fluid (bFF) throughout the luteal phase of the oestrous cycle lowers plasma levels of FSH but increases the frequency and amplitude of the pulses of LH. Under these conditions, ovarian follicles grow to a maximum diameter of 2·7 mm and have a reduced capacity to release oestradiol. We have examined the nature of the gonadotrophin signals controlling follicular development in the normally cycling ewe and have investigated the effects of previous exposure to bFF on these signals and the follicular responses to them. Control ewes (n = l) were injected i.v. with 9 ml bovine serum and treated ewes were injected with 9 ml bFF, twice daily from days 1 to 10 of the luteal phase (day 0 = oestrus). The ewes were injected with prostaglandin analogue on day 11 of the cycle to induce luteolysis and the gonadotrophin patterns were studied in blood sampled from these animals every 10 min for up to 72 h during the subsequent follicular phase. Following luteolysis (and the end of bFF treatment), LH pulse frequency increased rapidly in both groups and reached 1 pulse/h within 6 h. Thereafter, pulse frequency increased marginally and reached 1 pulse/50 min by the onset of the LH surge. This pattern was not affected by previous treatment with bFF. In the control ewes, the amplitude of the LH pulses did not change significantly following luteolysis or at any time during the follicular phase, while the levels of FSH declined slowly until the onset of the surge. In the treated ewes, on the other hand, there was an immediate increase in both LH pulse amplitude and the concentration of FSH immediately after the end of bFF treatment at luteolysis, and they remained above control levels for 24 and 16 h respectively. Plasma prolactin levels did not appear to change around the time of luteolysis but showed a marked and significant diurnal rhythm (nadir around noon and peak around midnight) in both groups. The concentrations of prolactin were significantly (P<0·001) lower and the preovulatory peak was delayed and reduced in the bFF-treated ewes relative to controls. The onset of oestrus was also significantly (P<0·01) delayed by bFF treatment, but the ovulation rates did not differ between the groups. Furthermore, comparisons within or between groups revealed no significant relationships between any of the variables of plasma LH secretion during the follicular phase and the subsequent ovulation rate.
These observations provide a complete description of gonadotrophin patterns during the follicular phase of the ewe and confirm the suggestion that an increase in LH pulse frequency is the major driving force behind the follicular growth that ultimately leads to ovulation. On the other hand, it appears most unlikely that the pattern of LH secretion during the follicular phase has any influence on ovulation rate. The levels of FSH declined in the period leading up to the preovulatory surge, presumably as a consequence of rising peripheral levels of oestrogen (and/or inhibin). We also expected LH pulse amplitude to decline during the follicular phase because it has been proposed that pulse amplitude is also controlled by oestrogen. The absence of any significant fall in amplitude suggests that hypotheses about the control of LH secretion drawn from studies with ovariectomized ewes require further verification in the intact ewe. The effect of bFF on prolactin levels probably reflects the low rates of secretion of oestradiol by the small ovarian follicles in these ewes.
J. Endocr. (1988) 116, 123–135