4.2 Article

Estrogenicity of captive southern white rhinoceros diets and their association with fertility

期刊

GENERAL AND COMPARATIVE ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 238, 期 -, 页码 32-38

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygcen.2016.05.004

关键词

Phytoestrogens; Estrogen receptors; Rhinoceros

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The captive southern white rhinoceros (SWR) population is not currently self-sustaining, primarily due to poor or absent reproduction of captive-born (F1+) females. In this study, we investigate the role of dietary phytoestrogens in this reproductive phenomenon by characterizing activation of SWR estrogen receptors (ESRs)1 and 2 by diet items from nine North American institutions and comparing female SWR fertility to total diet estrogenicity. Of the diet items tested, alfalfa hay and soy and alfalfa-based commercial pellets were found to be the most potent activators of SWR ESRs. In contrast, most grass hays tested were not estrogenic. The estrogenicity of total diets varied across the institutions surveyed and the degree of diet estrogenicity was positively associated with the percentage of the total diet comprised by pellets. Comparisons of fertility records of the institutions surveyed showed no significant relationship between diet estrogenicity and fertility for female SWR conceived or born in the wild (F-0). However, for F1+ females, there was a significant negative relationship between institutional diet estrogenicity and fertility. Taken together, these data suggest that developmental exposure to phytoestrogens may be the cause of poor fertility in captive-born female SWR. Whether the low fertility of the current population of captive-born female SWR is permanent or can be reversed by removing phytoestrogens from the diet remains unclear. However, our findings suggest that in order for the SWR population to become self-sustaining, the development and feeding of low phytoestrogen diets should be strongly considered. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据