This review offers an overview of the basic characteristics of in vivo embryo technologies, their current status, the main findings and the advances gained in recent years, and the outstanding subjects for increasing their efficiency. The use of superovulation and embryo transfer procedures remains affected by a high variability in the ovulatory response to hormonal treatment and by a low and variable number of transferable embryos and offspring obtained. This variability has been classically identified with both extrinsic (source, purity of gonadotrophins and protocol of administration) and intrinsic factors (breed, age, nutrition and reproductive status), which are reviewed in this paper. However, emerging data indicate that the main causes of variability are related to endocrine and ovarian factors, and so the number of studies and procedures addressing a better understanding and control of these factors may be increased in the future. The accomplishment of this objective, the improvement of procedures for embryo conservation and for the selection and management of recipient females, will allow further development and application of this technology.

Iberian ham production includes both purebred (IB) and Duroc-crossbred (IBxDU) Iberian pigs, which show important differences in meat quality and production traits, such as muscle growth and fatness. This experiment was conducted to investigate gene expression differences, transcriptional regulation and genetic polymorphisms that could be associated with the observed phenotypic differences between IB and IBxDU pigs. Nine IB and 10 IBxDU pigs were slaughtered at birth. Morphometric measures and blood samples were obtained and samples from Biceps femoris muscle were employed for compositional and transcriptome analysis by RNA-Seq technology. Phenotypic differences were evident at this early age, including greater body size and weight in IBxDU and greater Biceps femoris intramuscular fat and plasma cholesterol content in IB newborns. We detected 149 differentially expressed genes between IB and IBxDU neonates (p < 0.01 and Fold-Change > 1. 5). Several were related to adipose and muscle tissues development (DLK1, FGF21 or UBC). The functional interpretation of the transcriptomic differences revealed enrichment of functions and pathways related to lipid metabolism in IB and to cellular and muscle growth in IBxDU pigs. Protein catabolism, cholesterol biosynthesis and immune system were functions enriched in both genotypes. We identified transcription factors potentially affecting the observed gene expression differences. Some of them have known functions on adipogenesis (CEBPA, EGRs), lipid metabolism (PPARGC1B) and myogenesis (FOXOs, MEF2D, MYOD1), which suggest a key role in the meat quality differences existing between IB and IBxDU hams. We also identified several polymorphisms showing differential segregation between IB and IBxDU pigs. Among them, non-synonymous variants were detected in several transcription factors as PPARGC1B and TRIM63 genes, which could be associated to altered gene function. Taken together, these results provide information about candidate genes, metabolic pathways and genetic polymorphisms potentially involved in phenotypic differences between IB and IBxDU pigs associated to meat quality and production traits.

Management of the ovine oestrous cycle is mainly based on the use of exogenous hormones to mimic or enhance (progesterone and its analogues) or manipulate (prostaglandin F2α and its analogues) the activity of the corpus luteum, combined with the application of other hormones mimicking the pituitary secretion of gonadotrophins (e.g. equine chorionic gonadotrophin). These protocols have been applied without major change for decades but, now, there are two reasons to reconsider them: (1) our greatly improved knowledge of the dynamics of ovarian physiology, following the application of transrectal ultrasonography, indicates that modification of the protocols may improve fertility yields and (2) increasing concerns about animal health and welfare, food safety and the environmental impact of the treatments, as evidenced by public opinion and therefore market forces. Here, we offer an overview of these issues, introduce an updated protocol and suggest ways for future improvements to the protocols.