Estrus, ovulation, and related phenomena in the ewe

Animal Husbandry Department, University of Missouri, and the Bureau of Animal Industry, United States Department of Agriculture, cooperating.Digitized 2007 AES.Includes bibliographical references (pages 86-88)

The future for sheep

In the 1960\u27s the sheep industry has been described as being at a crossroads. Serious concern has been expressed over the future of the entire industry. Declining numbers, competition from other meats and fabrics and low returns have all been cited as reasons for pessimism. But recent developments in product improvement and industrywide efforts to a~tack problems have given rise to a degree of cautious optimism about the future.https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/card_reports/1022/thumbnail.jp

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

TRENDS OF PREDATOR LOSSES OF SHEEP AND LAMBS FROM 1940 THROUGH 1985

Mortality of sheep and lambs from all causes and from predator losses from 1940 through 1985 for the United States is presented including economic aspects. Lamb losses from all causes were 9% of the lamb crop in 1940 and were generally higher thereafter and reached a peak in 1978 of 14%. Losses of sheep 1 year old and older from all causes were 7.5% in 1940 remained somewhat higher through the \u2760s and then declined to a low of 5.2% in 1985. Calculation of predator losses were based on an upward trend of lamb losses relative to sheep losses with increasing losses to predators. Estimates of predator losses were conservative and probably were underestimated. Predator losses were lowest in 1940 at 2.85%, increased during World War II, remained moderately high through the \u2750s and then increased to a peak of 6.07% of all sheep and lamb in 1977. Losses declined following the advent of the parvovirus in 1978 to a low of 5.24% in 1981 and then increased to 5.69% in 1985. Monetary losses from predators showed a steady increase from $13 million in 1940, to almost$90 million in 1979, and almost $69 million in 1985. Total losses from 1960 through 1985 were$1.2 billion. Predator losses as a percent of net income increased from 23% in 1940 to 26% in 1960, and to 78% in 1979. After reduction in predator losses due to the parvovirus they were still 60% of net income in 1985. Obviously, predator losses have been a dominant factor in the decline of the sheep industry

Trends of predator losses of sheep and lambs from 1940 through 1985

Mortality of sheep and lambs from all causes and from predator losses from 1940 through 1985 for the United States is presented including economic aspects. Lamb losses from all causes were 9% of the lamb crop in 1940 and were generally higher thereafter and reached a peak in 1978 of 14%. Losses of sheep 1 year old and older from all causes were 7.5% in 1940, remained somewhat higher through the '60s, and then declined to a low of 5.2% in 1985. Calculation of predator losses were based on an upward trend of lamb losses relative to sheep losses with increasing losses to predators. Estimates of predator losses were conservative and probably were underestimated. Predator losses were lowest in 1940 at 2.85%, increased during World War II, remained moderately high through the '50s, and then increased to a peak of 6.07% of all sheep and lambs in 1977. Losses declined following the advent of the parvovirus in 1978 to a low of 5.24% in 1981 and then increased to 5.69% in 1985. Monetary losses from predators showed a steady increase from $13 million in 1940, to almost$90 million in 1979, and almost $69 million in 1985. Total losses from 1960 through 1985 were$1.2 billion. Predator losses as a percent of net income increased from 23% in 1940 to 26% in 1960, and to 78% in 1979. After reduction in predator losses due to the parvovirus they were still 60% of net income in 1985. Obviously, predator losses have been a dominant factor in the decline of the sheep industry

Genetic improvement of carcass merit in sheep

Summary (C.E. Terrill); Definition and measurement of carcass merit; Physical evaluation (J.A. Jacobs); Cutability; Chemical evaluation (D.A. Cramer); Nutrient composition (proximate analysis); Flavor analysis; Fat composition; Palatability (E.E. Ray); Eating quality; Warner-Bratzler shear tests; Consumer preference; Phenotypic and genetic relationships among live animal and carcass traits; Phenotypic relationships and prediction equations (W.D. Hohenboken and J.K. Hillers); Phenotypic and genetic correlations (W.D. Hohenboken and J.K. Hillers); Heritability and genetic correlations (M.P. Botkin); Recommended selection standards for carcass merit in lamb (C.E. Terrill); Literature citedBulletin containing information sheep carcass merit and evaluation and using that information for selecting traits for genetic improvement. The inside of the front cover states that the publication, "summarizes the results from 15 years of regional research conducted under Western Regional Research Project W-61 'Development of selection criteria for the genetic improvement of carcass merit in sheep.'

The future for sheep

In the 1960's the sheep industry has been described as being at a crossroads. Serious concern has been expressed over the future of the entire industry. Declining numbers, competition from other meats and fabrics and low returns have all been cited as reasons for pessimism. But recent developments in product improvement and industrywide efforts to a~tack problems have given rise to a degree of cautious optimism about the future.</p

Long-term (180-Day) outcomes in critically Ill patients with COVID-19 in the REMAP-CAP randomized clinical trial

Importance The longer-term effects of therapies for the treatment of critically ill patients with COVID-19 are unknown. Objective To determine the effect of multiple interventions for critically ill adults with COVID-19 on longer-term outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants Prespecified secondary analysis of an ongoing adaptive platform trial (REMAP-CAP) testing interventions within multiple therapeutic domains in which 4869 critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 were enrolled between March 9, 2020, and June 22, 2021, from 197 sites in 14 countries. The final 180-day follow-up was completed on March 2, 2022. Interventions Patients were randomized to receive 1 or more interventions within 6 treatment domains: immune modulators (n = 2274), convalescent plasma (n = 2011), antiplatelet therapy (n = 1557), anticoagulation (n = 1033), antivirals (n = 726), and corticosteroids (n = 401). Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcome was survival through day 180, analyzed using a bayesian piecewise exponential model. A hazard ratio (HR) less than 1 represented improved survival (superiority), while an HR greater than 1 represented worsened survival (harm); futility was represented by a relative improvement less than 20% in outcome, shown by an HR greater than 0.83. Results Among 4869 randomized patients (mean age, 59.3 years; 1537 [32.1%] women), 4107 (84.3%) had known vital status and 2590 (63.1%) were alive at day 180. IL-6 receptor antagonists had a greater than 99.9% probability of improving 6-month survival (adjusted HR, 0.74 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.61-0.90]) and antiplatelet agents had a 95% probability of improving 6-month survival (adjusted HR, 0.85 [95% CrI, 0.71-1.03]) compared with the control, while the probability of trial-defined statistical futility (HR >0.83) was high for therapeutic anticoagulation (99.9%; HR, 1.13 [95% CrI, 0.93-1.42]), convalescent plasma (99.2%; HR, 0.99 [95% CrI, 0.86-1.14]), and lopinavir-ritonavir (96.6%; HR, 1.06 [95% CrI, 0.82-1.38]) and the probabilities of harm from hydroxychloroquine (96.9%; HR, 1.51 [95% CrI, 0.98-2.29]) and the combination of lopinavir-ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine (96.8%; HR, 1.61 [95% CrI, 0.97-2.67]) were high. The corticosteroid domain was stopped early prior to reaching a predefined statistical trigger; there was a 57.1% to 61.6% probability of improving 6-month survival across varying hydrocortisone dosing strategies. Conclusions and Relevance Among critically ill patients with COVID-19 randomized to receive 1 or more therapeutic interventions, treatment with an IL-6 receptor antagonist had a greater than 99.9% probability of improved 180-day mortality compared with patients randomized to the control, and treatment with an antiplatelet had a 95.0% probability of improved 180-day mortality compared with patients randomized to the control. Overall, when considered with previously reported short-term results, the findings indicate that initial in-hospital treatment effects were consistent for most therapies through 6 months