FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Anim Reprod / Morphological characteristics of mule conceptuses during ear...
Animal reproduction2018; 15(4); 1214-1222; doi: 10.21451/1984-3143-AR2017-0035

Morphological characteristics of mule conceptuses during early development.

Abstract: Hybrids between species are often infertile and extremely rare among mammals. Mules, i.e. crossing between the horse and the donkey, on the other hand are very common in agricultural and leisure practices due to their enhanced post-natal physical characteristics that is believed to occur for outbreeding or hybrid vigor. Since no reports are availableon the effects of hybrid vigor during early development, this study focused on characterizing the intrauterine development of mule conceptuses during critical embryo-to-fetus transition period. Nine embryos and fetuses of early gestation, obtained after artificial insemination and transcervical flushing, were evaluated by means of gross anatomy and histology and compared to data available for the equine. We found that some events, such as C-shape turning, apearence of branchial archs, limb and tail buds, formation of primary and secondary brain vesicles, heart compartmentalization, and development of somites, occurred slightly earlier in the mule. Nonetheless, no major differences were observed in other developmental features, suggesting similarities between the mule and the horse development. In conclusion, these data suggest that the effect of hybrid vigor is present during intrauterine development in the mule, at least with regard to its maternal parent.
Copyright © The Author(s). Published by CBRA.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2018-12-05 PubMed ID: 34221135PubMed Central: PMC8203116DOI: 10.21451/1984-3143-AR2017-0035Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

This research studied early development of mule embryos and compared it to that of horses. The researchers found some developmental events happened slightly earlier in mules, suggesting that hybrid vigor, the improvements seen when crossing two different species, is apparent during early development.

Objective and Methods

  • The objective of this research was to examine the effects of hybrid vigor, the idea that the crossing of two different species can lead to offspring with superior traits, during the early development of mule embryos.
  • Nine embryos and foetuses from early gestation were obtained through artificial insemination and transcervical flushing, and were evaluated through gross anatomy and histology.
  • The development of these embryos was then compared to existing data on equine development.

Findings

  • The researchers found that some developmental events, including C-shape turning, appearance of branchial arches, limb and tail buds, formation of primary and secondary brain vesicles, heart compartmentalization, and development of somites, occurred slightly earlier in mules compared to horses.
  • However, no significant differences were found in other developmental features, suggesting that mule development is largely similar to that of horses.

Conclusion

  • The results of the study suggest that the effect of hybrid vigor is present during the early intrauterine development of mules, at least in comparison to their maternal parent, the horse.
  • These findings could increase our understanding of the effects of hybrid vigor and may be particularly relevant in agricultural practices where mules are often preferred due to their enhanced post-natal physical characteristics.

Cite This Article

APA
Rigoglio NN, Matias GSS, Miglino MA, Mess AM, Jacob JCF, Smith LC. (2018). Morphological characteristics of mule conceptuses during early development. Anim Reprod, 15(4), 1214-1222. https://doi.org/10.21451/1984-3143-AR2017-0035

Publication

Animal reproduction
ISSN: 1984-3143
NlmUniqueID: 101272804
Country: Brazil
Language: English
Volume: 15
Issue: 4
Pages: 1214-1222

Researcher Affiliations

Rigoglio, Nathia Nathaly
  • Department of Surgery, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Matias, Gustavo de Sá Schiavo
  • Department of Surgery, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Miglino, Maria Angelica
  • Department of Surgery, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Mess, Andrea Maria
  • Department of Surgery, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Jacob, Julio Cesar Ferraz
  • Department of Reproduction and Animal Evaluation, Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro, Seropedica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Smith, Lawrence Charles
  • Department of Veterinary Biomedicine, Centre de recherche en reproduction et fertilité, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Montreal, QC J2S 2M2, Saint-Hyacinthe, QC, Canada.

References

This article includes 52 references
  1. Allen WR, Short RV. Interspecific and extraspecific pregnancies in equids: anything goes. J Hered 1997;88:384–392.
    pubmed: 9378914
  2. Anderson GB. Interspecific pregnancy: barriers andprospects. Biol Reprod 1988;38:1–15.
    pubmed: 3284594
  3. Betteridge KJ. Comparative aspects of equine embryonic development. Anim Reprod Sci 2000;60-61:691–702.
    pubmed: 10844235
  4. Birchler JA, Yao H, Chudalayandi S, Vaiman D, Veitia RA. Heterosis. Plant Cell 2010;22:2105–2112.
    pmc: PMC2929104pubmed: 20622146
  5. Birchler JA, Auger DL, Riddle NC. In search of themolecular basis of heterosis. Plant Cell 2003;15:2236–2239.
    pmc: PMC540269pubmed: 14523245
  6. Blakley A. Maternal and embryonic gene effects on placental weight in mice. J Reprod Fertil 1978;54:301–307.
    pubmed: 722680
  7. Blasco A, Ouhayoun J, Masoero G. Harmonization of criteria and terminology in rabbit meat research. World Rabbit Sci 1983;1:3–10.
  8. Bradfort GE, Lahlou-Kassi A, Berger YM, Boujenane I, Derqaoui L. Performance of D’man and Sardi breeds of sheep on accelerated lambing. II. Ovulation rate and embryo survival. Small Rumin Res 1989;2:241–252.
  9. Brandt H, Müllenhoff A, Lambertz C, Erhardt G, Gauly M. Estimation of genetic and crossbreeding parameters for prewearing traits in German Angus and Simmental beef cattle and the reciprocal crosses. J Anim Sci 2010;88:80–86.
    pubmed: 19749017
  10. Camillo F, Vannozi I, Rota A, Di Luzio B, Romagnoli S, Aria G, Allen WR. Successful nonsurgical transfer of horse embryos to mule recipients. Reprod Domest Anim 2003;38:380–385.
    pubmed: 12950689
  11. Chen ZJ. Molecular mechanisms of polyploidy and hybrid vigor. Trends Plant Sci 2010;15:57–71.
    pmc: PMC2821985pubmed: 20080432
  12. Chen X. Small RNAs - Secrets and surprises of the genome. Plant J 2010;61:941–958.
    pmc: PMC3062250pubmed: 20409269
  13. Cottrill CM, Ho SY, O'Connor WN. Embryological development of the equine heart. Equine Vet J Suppl 1997;24:14–18.
    pubmed: 9355797
  14. Cubas P, Vincent C, Coen E. An epigenetic mutation responsible for natural variation in floral symmetry. Nature 1999;401:157–161.
    pubmed: 10490023
  15. Cundiff LV, Nuñez-Domingues R, Dickerson GE, Gregory KE, Koch RM. Heterosis for lifetime production in Hereford, Angus, Shorthorn, and crossbred cows. J Anim Sci 1992;70:2397–2410.
    pubmed: 1506303
  16. Di R, Chu MX, Li YL, Zhang L, Fang L, Feng T, Cao GL, Chen HQ, Li XW. Predictive potential of microsatellite markers on heterosis of fecundity in crossbreed sheep. Mol Biol Rep 2012;39:2761–2766.
    pubmed: 21674186
  17. Ferreira VC, Rosa GJM, Berger YM, Thomas DL. Survival in crossbreed lambs: breed and heterosis effects. J Anim Sci 2015;93:912–919.
    pubmed: 26020869
  18. Franciolli ALR, Cordeiro BM, Da Fonseca ET, Rodrigues MN, Sarmento CA, Ambrósio CE, de Carvalho AF, Miglino MA, Silva LA. Characteristics of the equine embryo and fetus from days 15 to 107 of pregnancy. Theriogenology 2011;76:819–832.
    pubmed: 21719090
  19. Galvin JM, Wilmut I, Day BN, Ritchie M, Thomson M, Haley CS. Reproductive performance in relation to uterine and embryonic traits during early gestation inMeishan, large white and crossbred sows. J Reprod Fertil 1993;98:377–384.
    pubmed: 8410801
  20. Giger R, Meier HP, Küpfer U. Length of gestation of Freiberger mares with mule and horse foals. Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd 1997;139:303–307.
    pubmed: 9281060
  21. Giussani DA, Fowden AL. Development of cardiovascular function in the horse fetus. J Physiol 2005;565:1019–1030.
    pmc: PMC1464542pubmed: 15790668
  22. Goodwin D. Equine learning behaviour: what we know, what we don’t and future research priorities. Behav Processes 2007;76:17–19.
    pubmed: 17420103
  23. Gray AP. Mammalian hybrids. 2. Farnham Royal, Slough, United Kingdom: Common wealth Agricultural Bureaux; 1972. pp. 125–128.
  24. Gregory KE, Cundiff LV. Crossbreeding in beef cattle: evaluation of systems. J Anim Sci 1980;51:1224–1242.
  25. Groszmann M, Greaves IK, Fujimoto R, Peacock WJ, Dennis ES. The role of epigenetics in hybrid vigour. Trends Genet 2013;29:684–690.
    pubmed: 23953922
  26. Guerrero-Bosagna C, Skinner MK. Environmentally induced epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of phenotype and disease. Mol Cell Endocrinol 2012;354:3–8.
    pmc: PMC3312615pubmed: 22020198
  27. He G, Zhu X, Elling AA, Chen L, Wang X, Guo L, Liang M, He H, Zhang H, Chen F, Qi Y, Chen R, Deng XW. Global epigenetic and transcriptional trends among two rice subspecies and their reciprocal hybrids. Plant Cell 2010;22:17–33.
    pmc: PMC2828707pubmed: 20086188
  28. Hetherington CM. The absence of any effect of maternal fetal incompatibility at the H-2 and H-3 loci on pregnancy in the mouse. J Reprod Fertil 1973;33:135–139.
    pubmed: 4699439
  29. Hochholdinger F, Hoecker N. Towards the molecularbasis of heterosis. Trends Plant Sci 2007;12:427–432.
    pubmed: 17720610
  30. Jirtle RL, Skinner MK. Environmental epigenomics and disease susceptibility. Nat Rev Genet 2007;8:253–262.
    pmc: PMC5940010pubmed: 17363974
  31. Kress DD, Doornbos DE, Anderson DC, Davis KC. Tarentaise and Hereford breed effects on cow and calf traits and estimates of individual heterosis. J Anim Sci 1995;73:2574–2578.
    pubmed: 8582846
  32. Land RB, Russell WS, Donald HP. The litter size and fertility of Finnish Landrace and Tasmanian Merino sheep and their reciprocal crosses. Anim Sci 1974;18:265–271.
  33. Lippman ZB, Cohen O, Alvarez JP, Abu-Abied M, Pekker I, Paran I, Eshed Y, Zamir D. The making of a compound influorescence in tomato and related nightshades. PLoS Biol 2008;18:e288.
    pmc: PMC2586368pubmed: 19018664
  34. Long CH. Crossbreeding for Beef Production: Experimental Results. J Anim Sci 1980;51:1197–1223.
  35. Manning K, Tör M, Poole M, Hong Y, Thompson AJ, King GJ, Giovannoni JJ, Seymour GB. A naturally occurringepigenetic mutation in a gene encoding an SBP-box transcriptionfactor inhibits tomato fruit ripening. Nat Genet 2006;38:948–952.
    pubmed: 16832354
  36. Matthews J, Peel S. The uterine response in pregnant inbred and non-inbred rats. J Anat 1991;178:101–113.
    pmc: PMC1260538pubmed: 1839792
  37. McGovern PT. The barriers to interspecific hybridization in domestic and laboratory mammals. II. Hybrid sterility. Br Vet J 1976;132:68–75.
    pubmed: 769918
  38. Moore KL, Persaud TVN. EmbriologiaClínica. 7. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier; 2004. 609 [ClinicalEmbryology].
  39. Moore T, Haig D. Genomic imprinting in mammalian development: a parental tug-of-war. Trends Genet 1991;7:45–49.
    pubmed: 2035190
  40. Newman S, MacNeil MD, Reynolds WL, Knapp BW, Urick JJ. Fixed effects in the formation of a composite line of beef cattle. I. Experimental design and reproductive performance. J Anim Sci 1993;71:2026–2032.
    pubmed: 8376225
  41. Ni Z, Kim ED, Ha M, Lackey E, Liu J, Zhang Y, Sun Q, Chen ZJ. Altered circadian rhythms regulate growth vigour inhybrids and allopolyploids. Nature 2009;457:327–331.
    pmc: PMC2679702pubmed: 19029881
  42. Paolucci M, Palombi C, Sylla L, Stradaioli G, Monaci M. Ultrasonographic features of the mule embryo, fetus and fetal-placental unit. Theriogenology 2012;77:240–252.
    pubmed: 21958639
  43. Proops L, Burden F, Osthaus B. Mule cognition: a case of hybrid vigour. Anim Cogn 2009;12:75–84.
    pubmed: 18636282
  44. Retallick KM, Faulkner DB, Rodriguez-Zas SL, Nkrumah JD, Shike DW. The effect of breed and individual heterosis on the feed efficiency, performance and carcass characteristics of feed lot steers. J Anim Sci 2013;91:5161–5166.
    pubmed: 24045475
  45. Rigoglio NN, Barreto RSN, Favaron PO, Jacob JCF, Smith LC, Gastal MO, Gastal EL, Miglino MA. Central Nervous System and Vertebrae Development in Horses: A Chronological Study with Differential Temporal Expression of Nestin and GFAP. J Mol Neurosci 2017;61:61–78.
    pubmed: 27525635
  46. Rodrigues RF, Rodrigues MN, Franciolli ALR, Carvalho RC, Rigoglio NN, Jacob JCF, Gastal EL, Miglino MA. Embryonicand fetal development of the cardiorespiratory apparatus in horses ( EquusCaballus) from 21 to 105 Days of Gestation. J Cytol Histol 2014;5:240.
  47. Shrestha JNB, Rempel WE, Boylan WJ, Miller KP. General, specific, maternal and reciprocal effects for ewe productivity in crossing five breeds of sheep. Can J Anim Sci 1983;63:497–509.
  48. Shindo C, Lister C, Crevillen P, Nordborg M, Dean C. Variation in the epigenetic silencing of FLC contributes to natural variationin Arabidopsis vernalization response. Genes Dev 2006;20:3079–3083.
    pmc: PMC1635143pubmed: 17114581
  49. Simmons D. The behavior of a person's genes doesn't just depend on the genes' DNA sequence - it's also affected by so-called epigenetic factors. Changes in these factors can play a critical role in disease. Epigenetic Influences and Disease NatureEducation Vol. 1; 2008. [ Acessed in: Aug 9th 2016 ]. 6. serial on the Internet. Available in: https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/epigenetic-influences-and-disease-895.
  50. Skinner MK, Manikkam M, Guerrero-Bosagna C. Epigenetic transgenerational actions of environmental factors in disease etiology. Trends Endocrinol Metab 2010;21:214–222.
    pmc: PMC2848884pubmed: 20074974
  51. Travis L. The Mule. 1. London, England: J.A. Allen & Co.; 1990.
  52. Williams JL, Aguilar I, Rekaya R, Bertrand JK. Estimation of breed and heterosis effects for growth and carcass traits in cattle using published crossbreeding studies. J Anim Sci 2010;88:460–466.
    pubmed: 19820043

Citations

This article has been cited 1 times.
  1. Gambini A, Smith JM, Gurkin RJ, Palacios PD. Current and Emerging Advanced Techniques for Breeding Donkeys and Mules. Animals (Basel) 2025 Mar 29;15(7).
    doi: 10.3390/ani15070990pubmed: 40218383google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,357 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.