Genetic Engineering Approaches to Pig Production*

Modern biotechnology promises a number of new applications in animal breeding and production. Although conventional pig breeding has achieved a high level of efficiency and productivity numerous problems have been encountered with animal health and the loss of meat quality. Selection based on phenotypic performance data of individual animals does not take into account the importance of specific genes and their relevance within a complex regulatory system. In most cases it is therefore difficult to trace back the genetic origins of clinically important disorders. The application of genetic engineering techniques in pig production will facilitate diagnosis, improvement of productivity, and animal health by allowing direct genetic manipulation. Attention must be focussed on the physical and genetic analysis of the procine genome. The isolation and characterisation of genes, DNA-markers, polymorphic DNA-fragments, and their chromosomal assignment will be important prerequisites and tools for the elucidation of genetic disorders. Especially the detection of heterozygous carriers of recessive disorders and their elimination from the breeding stock will increase selection accuracy and decrease the generation intervals. But also the rapid and simple detection of infectious diseases, which is sometimes difficult if not impossible at present, will improve animal health and welfare. Although the production of transgenic animals either by DNA-microinjection into zygotes or the use of embryonal stem cells manipulated in vitro is less straightforward than DNA-based diagnosis it will play an important role in the direct manipulation of the porcine genome and genes. Breeding programmes including the use of transgenic livestock have already been developed. There is no doubt that genetic engineering has reached a degree of practical feasibility, allowing it to play an important role in pig breeding in particular and animal production in general.     

Comparison of the Value of Pulsed-field Gel Electrophoresis,Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA and Amplified rDNA Restriction Analysis for Subtyping Taylorella equigenitalis

Eight strains of Taylorella equigenitalis were identified by a polymerase chain reaction using a primer pair specific to the 16S rDNA of T equigenitalis. These eight strains were chosen because they had previously been shown to represent eight distinct genotypes by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis analysis after separate digestion of the genomic DNA with ApaI or NotI. The eight strains could be classified into six or seven types by random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis using different kinds of primers. Amplified rDNA restriction analysis after separate digestion with five restriction enzymes, including AluI and MboI, of the 1,500 bp fragments of rDNA amplified by polymerase chain reaction did not discriminate the genomic variations among the eight strains of T equigenitalis. Thus, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis was shown to discriminate these eight organisms better than random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis, while amplified rDNA restriction analysis was found to be unsuitable for subtyping T equigenitalis.     

Facing the threat of equine influenza

Despite the availability of vaccines, equine influenza virus (EIV) continues to pose a threat to the racing industry. The virus spreads rapidly in unprotected populations and large scale outbreaks, such as those in South Africa in 2003 and Australia in 2007, can cost billions of pounds. Like other influenza viruses, EIV undergoes antigenic variation, enabling it to evade antibodies generated against previous infection or vaccination. The UK has an active surveillance programme to monitor antigenic drift and participates in an international collaboration with other countries in Europe, Japan and the USA to select suitable vaccine strains. Selection is primarily based upon characterisation of the viral haemagglutinin (HA), the surface protein that induces a protective antibody response; this protein is an important component of commercial vaccines. In recent years vaccine technology has improved and diagnostic methods have become increasingly sensitive, both play a crucial part in facilitating the international movement of horses. Mathematical modelling techniques have been applied to study the risk factors involved in outbreaks and provide valuable information about the impact of vaccination. Other factors, such as pathogenicity, are poorly understood for EIV yet may play an important role in the spread of a particular virus. They may also affect the ability of the virus to cross the species barrier, as seen with the transfer to dogs in the USA. Severity of infection is likely to be influenced by more than one gene, but differences in the NS1 protein are believed to influence the cytokine response in the horse and have been manipulated to produce potential vaccine strains.     

Questionnaire on the process of recovering horses from general anesthesia and associated personnel injury in equine practice

ObjectiveTo collect data about the current practice of recovering horses from general anesthesia and recovery personnel safety.Study designOnline survey.MethodsAn online questionnaire, including questions on general demographic data, recovery drugs, modality and characteristics of equine recovery and morbidity and mortality, was designed and distributed via e-mail to equine practitioners worldwide.ResultsPractitioners from 22 countries completed 373 questionnaires; 53% of the participants were board-certified equine surgeons, and the remainder were board-certified anesthesiologists (18%), large animal residents (8%), general practitioners (7%), large animal interns (6%), anesthesia residents (4.5%) and veterinary technicians (1.6%). Respondents were employed by academia (58%) or private practice (42%). Of the respondents employed at a university, 93% had a board-certified anesthesiologist on staff compared with 7% of respondents employed at a private practice. Most of the respondents assist horses during recovery, with 23% assisting every recovery and 44% assisting recovery in the majority of cases. Reasons for choosing to assist horses during recovery were: orthopedic procedures (57%), neurological deficits (49%), bad health (47%), history of poor recovery (44%), foals (42%), draft breeds (30%), magnetic resonance imaging (17%) and computed tomography (16%). Unacceptable recoveries were reported by 77% of participants. Commonly reported complications during recovery with any method were: orthopedic injury (66%), myopathy (54%), skin abrasion (53%) and airway obstruction (37%). The incidences of unacceptable quality of recovery (p = 0.09) or personnel injury (p = 0.56) were not different between assisted and nonassisted recoveries; however, more equine fatalities were reported for assisted recoveries (p < 0.006). Practitioners in academia reported more unacceptable recoveries (p < 0.0007) and personnel injuries (p < 0.002) compared with those in private practice.ConclusionsThe method of recovery differs among hospitals. Recovery personnel injuries associated with assisting horses during recovery are an important and previously unreported finding.