The effect of injectable progesterone was evaluated along with estradiol benzoate (EB) on the fate of the dominant follicle (DF) present in the ovary at the beginning of low progesterone-based TAI protocol. All cattle were given 500 µg cloprostenol im (PGF; Schering-Plough Animal Health for Estrumate, Pointe-Claire, QC, Canada) twice, 11 d apart, and allocated into two groups: Estradiol group (E group, n = 11) and Estradiol-Progesterone group (EP group, n = 11). Ten days after the second PGF (Day 0), all cattle were given an intravaginal progesterone device with half progesterone concentration (Cue-Mate with a single pod containing 0.78 g progesterone). Concurrently, all cattle were given 1.5 mg im of estradiol benzoate in 3 mL of canola oil and PGF im on Day 0 of the protocol in a crossover design, in which each cow received both treatments. Cows in the EP group also received 100 mg im progesterone (Sigma) in 2 mL of canola oil. On Day 8, progesterone devices were removed and all cattle were given PGF im. All statistical analyses were performed with SAS 9.0. The DF present on Day 0 ovulated in 76% (16/21) of cows from E group and 28.6% (6/21) of cows from EP group (P = 0.002). After progesterone device removal, the size of ovulatory follicle did not differ between groups (E group, 15.5 ± 0.43 mm vs EP group, 15.8 ± 0.98 mm; P = 0.82). These follicles ovulated in 81.3 ± 3.1 h in E group and 71.0 ± 6.1 h in EP group (P = 0.13). In conclusion, injectable progesterone reduced the proportion of cows that ovulate the dominant follicle present in the ovary at the beginning of estradiol-progesterone-based protocols. However, no difference was detected on time of ovulation after progesterone device removal between groups.

Infectious diseases of livestockare a major threat to global animal health and welfare and their effective control is crucialfor agronomic health, for safeguarding and securing national and international food supplies and for alleviating rural povertyin developing countries. Some devastating livestock diseases are endemic in many parts of the world and threats from old and new pathogens continue to emerge, with changes to global climate, agricultural practices and demography presenting conditions that are especially favourable for the spread of arthropod-borne diseases into new geographical areas. Zoonotic infections that are transmissible either directly or indirectly between animals and humans are on the increase and pose significant additional threats to human health and the current pandemic status of new influenza A (H1N1) is a topical example of the challenge presented by zoonotic viruses (Tomley and Shirley, 2009). Malaysia, being one of the members of the World Organisation forAnimal Health (OIE) which is responsible for setting standards for control of animal diseases. For year 2017, the list included 116 animal diseases, infections and infestations, many of which are zoonotic in nature. As such, this paper discusses the commonzoonotic infections diagnosed in the five Regional Veterinary Laboratories which are spread across the country and entrustedto carry out diagnostic tests to aid in the treatment and control of animal diseases. A total of almost half a million samples weretested comprising more than a million tests to help the Department of Veterinary Services control and eradicate economically important diseases to safeguard the animal population. Of these, zoonotic diseases comprise a small but significant entity which needs careful attention (Chandrawathani et al., 2017) Dora Tan (1981) reported that among the many zoonotic diseases prevalent in Malaysia, are leptospirosis, rabies, influenza, Japanese encephalitis, toxoplasmosis,ornithosis, Q fever and monkeypox which have been investigated at the lnstitute for Medical Research, Kuala Lumpur. The regional laboratories have full capability to conduct tests to confirm parasitic, viral and bacterial infections except for rabies andavian influenza, which was diagnosed in the Veterinary Research Institute. However, preliminary tests for avian influenza wascarried out in regional laboratories.

A total of 145,347 samples (4,322 cases) were received for the passive surveillance of melioidosis in the Serology Laboratory of Veterinary Research Institute (VRI) from the year 2012 to 2016. From the samples received, 0.63% were positive and 99.37% were negative. The objective of this study is to determine the seropositive rate and distribution of melioidosis in livestockbased on cases received which comprise of sheep (37.24%, n=54,130), goat (54.01%, n=78,500), cattle (8.12%, n=11,804) andbuffalo (0.63%, n=913) within the period of 5 years. A geographical mapping of seropositive cases was designed using thedata from the passive surveillance and the results were visualized in a geographical mapping which provides a clear visual description on the distribution of the diseases. By 2016, positive cases were found to be concentrated in the states on the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia and Sabah. To sum up, the percentage of seropositive cases of melioidosis in 5 years has increased from 1.79% in 2012 to 12.17% in 2015 and decreased to 1.04% in 2016. From the findings, this study can provide the dataneeded as the indicator for the evaluation of surveillance and vaccination programmes, disease eradication planning and to monitor the distribution of seropositive cases of melioidosis in Malaysia.