Tomislav BARNA, Aleksandar MAŠIĆ, Miloš PAVLOVIĆ, Nevena MAKSIMOVIĆ, Marina LAZAREVIĆ, Jelena APIĆ, Aleksandar MILOVANOVIĆ

Quality and fertility of extended boar semen after prolonged transport

The aim of this study was to analyse semen quality parameters of fresh-extended porcine semen imported from Denmark through prolonged importing regulations and transport and to analyse fertility performance in sows inseminated four days post semen collection. Semen was analysed immediately upon the arrival (4 days post collection) using computer-assisted sperm analyses (CASA), cytomorphology and flow cytometry, and sows were inseminated later the same day. The mean sperm concentration was 1718.09 ± 100.11 × 106 , with average of 1193.40 ± 90.58 × 106 motile cells (69%) and 756.04 ± 70.57 × 106 progressive motile spermatozoa (43.58%) in a dose, which was almost twice lower in value than producer certified-declared number of 2 billion of motile cells. Acrosome and sperm membrane integrity test indicated high percentage of total damaged acrosome. Mean values of semen samples analysed by sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA) showed relatively high degree of chromatin damage. Membrane permeability test showed high percentage of sperm with damaged membrane. Prolonged transport negatively affected the sperm quality in terms of both motility and chromatin structure stability. Fertility of sows was affected by semen quality in terms of concentration and sperm motility parameters, as well as ratio of live sperm cells population with damaged acrosome.

PDF

___

1. Avakumović Đ, Primena savremenih naučnih i praktičnih dostignuća u zdravstvenoj zaštiti i reprodukciji svinja. 6th ed. Srbija: Sd Publik; 2006. (In Serbian)
2. Gerrits R, Lunney J, Pursel V, Kraeling R, Gary R et al. Perspectives for artificial insemination and genomics to improve global swine populations. Theriogenology 2005; 63 (2): 283-299.
3. Gadea J. Review: Semen extenders used in the artificial insemination of swine. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research 2003; 1 (2): 17-27.
4. Boe-Hansen GB, Christensen P, Vibjerg D. Sperm chromatin structure integrity in liquid stored boar semen and its relationships with field fertility. Theriogenology 2008; 69: 728- 736.
5. Milovanović A, Barna T, Vasiljević T, Milanov D, Bošković N. Boar import - semen quality control and complaint. In: Proceedings of X Symposium on Health Care, Selection and Reproduction of Pigs; Srebrno jezero, Republic of Sebia; 2012. pp. 79-87 (In Serbian with an abstract in English).
6. Hossain MS, Johannisson A, Wallgren M, Nagy S, Siqueira AP et al. Flow cytometry for the assessment of animal sperm integrity and functionality: state of the art. Asian Journal of Andrology 2011; 13 (3): 406-419.
7. Evenson DP, Larson KL, Jost LK. Sperm chromatin structure assay: its clinical use for detecting sperm DNA fragmentation in male infertility and comparisons with other techniques. Journal of Andrology 2002; 23 (1): 25-43.
8. Tsakmakidis IA, Lymberopoulos AG, Khalifa TAA. Relationship between sperm quality traits and field-fertility of porcine semen. Journal of Veterinary Science 2010; 11 (2): 151-154. 24.
9. Björndahl L, Söderlund I, Kvist U. Evaluation of the one-step eosin-nigrosin staining technique for human sperm vitality assessment. Human Reproduction 2003; 18 (4): 813-6.
10. Graham JK, Kunze E, Hammerstedt RH. Analysis of sperm cell viability, acrosomal integrity and mitochondrial function using flow cytometry. Biology of Reproduction 1990; 43: 55-64.
11. Apić J, Milovanović A, Barna T, Jovičin M. Sperm pathological forms and acrosomal membrane integrity in boar AI dose on pig farms in AP Vojvodina (Serbia). In: Proceedings of 1st International Symposium of Veterinary Medicine “One Healt - New Challenges”; Vrdnik, Republic of Serbia; 2015; pp. 87-91 (In Serbian with an abstract in English).
12. Gadea J. Sperm factors related to in vitro and in vivo porcine fertility. Theriogenology 2005; 63 (2): 431-444.
13. Milovanović A, Barna T, Milanov D, Lazarević M. Model for cooperation between boar studs and laboratories for reproduction in boars’ semen quality control. Archives of Veterinary Medicine 2013; 6 (1): 57-70. (Article in Serbian with an abstract in English)
14. Sellem E, Broekhuijse ML, Chevrier L, Camugli S, Schmitt E et al. Use of combinations of in vitro quality assessments to predict fertility of bovine semen. Theriolenology 2015; 84 (9): 1447-1454.
15. Feitsma H. Artificial insemination in pigs, research and developments in the Netherlands, a review. Acta Scientiae Veterinariae 2009; 37 (1): 61-71.
16. Broekhuijse MLWJ, Sostaric E, Feitsma H, Gadella BM. Application of computer-assisted semen analysis to explain variations in pig fertility. Animal Reproduction Science 2015; 90: 779-789.
17. Waberski D, Meding S, Dirksen G, Weitze KF, Leiding C et al. Fertility of long-term-stored boar semen: Influence of extender (Androhep and Kiev), storage time and plasma droplets in the semen. Animal Reproduction Science 1994; 36 (1-2): 145-151.
18. Ferrara F, Daverio R, Mazzini G, Bonini P, Banfi G. Automation of human sperm cell analysis by flow cytometry. Clinical Chemistry 1997; 43 (5): 801-807.
19. Hafez E, Hafez B. Reproduction in Farm Animals Somerset. 7th ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013.
20. Canvin AT, Buhr MM. Effect of temperature on the fluidity of boar sperm membranes. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 1989; 85: 553-540.
21. Johnson LA, Weitze KF, Fiser P, Maxwell WMC. Storage of boar semen. Animal Reproduction Science 2000; 62: 143-172.
22. Purdy PH, Tharp N, Stewart T, Spiller SF, Blackburn HD. Implications of the pH and temperature of diluted, cooled boar semen on fresh and frozen-thawed sperm motility characteristics. Theriogenology 2010; 74: 1304-1310.
23. Kim S, Lee YJ, Kim YJ. Changes in sperm membrane and ROS following cryopreservation of liquid boar semen stored at 15 °C. Animal Reproduction Science 2011; 124: 118-124.
24. Schmid S, Henning H, Oldenhof H, Wolkers WF, Petrunkina AM et al. The specific response to capacitating stimuli is a sensitive indicator of chilling injury in hypothermically stored boar spermatozoa. Andrology 2013; 1: 376-386.
25. Schulze M, Henning H, Rüdiger K, Wallner U, Waberski D. Temperature management during semen processing: Impact on boar sperm quality under laboratory and field conditions. Theriogenology 2013; 80: 990-998.
26. Gaczarzewicz D, Udala J, Piasecka M, Blaszczyk B, Stankiewicz T. Storage temperature of boar semen and its relationship to changes in sperm plasma membrane integrity, mitochondrial membrane potential, and oxidoreductive capability. Turkish Journal of Biology 2015; 39: 582-594.
27. Paulenz H, Kommisurd E, Hofmo PO. Effect of long-term storage at different temperatures on the quality of liquid boar semen. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 2000; 35: 83-87.
28. Althouse GC., Wilson ME, Kuster C, Parsley M. Characterization of lower temperature storage limitations of fresh-extended porcine semen. Theriogenology 1998; 50: 535- 543.
29. Zheng P, Wang Z, Li X, Huang F, Ma M, Huang H. DMEM and FBS as thawing solutions for frozen semen of pigs can improve sperm motility and sow reproductive performance. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences 2020; 44: 220-226.
30. Martinez AF. Studies on the interaction of chromatin-unstable boar sperm with the female reproductive tract. PhD, University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover, Germany, 2005.
31. Didion AB, Kasperson MK, Wixon LR, Evenson PD. Boar fertility and sperm chromatin structure status: a retrospective report. Journal of Andrology 2009; 30 (6): 655-660.
32. Ardón F, Döhring A, Le Thi X, Waberski D, Weitze KF. Assessing in vivo fertilizing capacity of liquidpreserved boar semen according to the Hanover Gilt Model. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 2003; 38 (2): 161-165.
33. Duzinski K, Knecht D, Gajewczyk P. Effect of oxytocin treatment on the reproductive performance of sows after artificial insemination with liquid semen. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences 2013; 37: 575-581.