https://revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/agromesoAgronomía Mesoamericana ISSN electrónico: 2215-3608

Effect of breed composition on sperm quality of boar

Anthony Valverde-Abarca, Mónica Madrigal-Valverde, Marlen Camacho-Calvo, Adones Zambrana-Jiménez, Leonardo López



DOI: https://doi.org/10.15517/ma.v29i3.32445

Abstract


The assessment of the semen quality is an essential tool to improve the reproductive indexes in swine farms. The motility is the most important parameter that used in the sperm quality evaluation because it is associated with the energy of the spermatozoon. The aim of this research was to determine the influence of breed composition on reproductive variables of sperm quality, kinetics and semen motility in boars. During 2016, 240 ejaculates were collected from 63 boars with a mean age of 24.4±10.9 months. Six racial groups were identified: Duroc (D), Yorkshire (Y), Landrace (L), F1 Pietrain*Duroc (PD) and two genetic lines (LA and LB). The breeds with the highest ejaculate volume presented a higher total number of spermatozoa (P<0.05). The effect of the breed was significant (P<0.05) on sperm kinetics variables except for amplitude of lateral head displacement (ALH, μm). The Landrace breed presented the highest (P<0.05) percentage of static sperm (29.30±1.57). The most relevant differences (P<0.05) for total motility (MTOT) and progressive motility (MP), were presented between L and PD with values of 70.71±1.57; 77.48±1.09 and 51.80±1.97; 59.85±1.37% respectively. Adult boars (≥18 months) had higher volumes of ejaculate and total number of sperm than boars in the intermediate and young ages, however, for velocities (μm/s): curvilinear (VCL), straight line (VSL) and average path (VAP), adult boars only were different (P<0.05) of the boars in-between ages. Four sperm subpopulations (SP) were identified, SP1 (46.83%) characterized by a moderate speed, but of very progressive motility, SP2 (14.78%) with active movement, but not progressive, SP3 (8.45%) with low speeds and progressive path and SP4 (29.94%) with quick movement, but without progressivity.


Keywords


swine; spermatozoa; semen; reproduction.

References


Abaigar, T., W.V. Holt, R.A.P. Harrison, and G. del-Barrio. 1999. Sperm subpopulations in boar (Sus scrofa) and gazelle (Gazella dama mhorr) semen as revealed by pattern analysis of computer-assisted motility assessments. Biol. Reprod. 60:32-41. doi:10.1095/biolreprod60.1.32

Adamiak, A., S. Kondracki, and A. Wysokińska. 2010. Influence of season of the year on physical properties of ejaculates from Polish Large White and Polish Landrace boars. Roczniki Naukowe Zootech. 37:159-167.

Amann, R.P., and D.F. Katz. 2004. Reflections on CASA after 25 years. J. Androl. 25:317-324. doi:10.1002/j.1939-4640.2004.tb02793.X

Bompart, D., A. García-Molina, A. Valverde, C. Caldeira, J. Yániz, M. Núñez de Murga, and C. Soler. 2018. CASA-Mot technology: how results are affected by the frame rate and counting chamber. Reprod Fertil Dev. doi:10.1071/RD17551

Braundmeier, A.G., and D.J. Miller. 2001. The search is on: finding accurate molecular markers of male fertility. J. Dairy Sci. 84:1915-1925. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)74633-4

Broekhuijse, M.L., E. Šoštarić, H. Feitsma, and B.M. Gadella. 2012. Application of computer-assisted semen analysis to explain variations in pig fertility. J. Anim. Sci. 90:779-789. doi:10.2527/jas.2011-4311

Burian, F., S. Buchta, V. Řehák, M. Sládek, a I. Schmidt. 1987. Analýza spermatologických ukazatelů kanců plemen bı́lé ušlechtilé, landrase a duroc a hybridnı́ch kanců SL 98 F1, F2 a F3 generace. Živoč. Výr. 32:1097-1103.

Ciereszko, A., J.S. Ottobre, and J. Glogowski. 2000. Effects of season and breed on sperm acrosin activity and semen quality of boars. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 64:89-96. doi:10.1016/S0378-4320(00)00194-9

Conlon, P.D., and B.W. Kennedy. 1978. A comparison of crossbred and purebred boars for semen and reproductive characteristics. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 58:63-70. doi:10.4141/xjas78-009

Cremades, T., J. Roca, H. Rodriguez-Martinez, T. Abaigar, J.M. Vazquez, and E.A. Martinez. 2005. Kinematic changes during the cryopreservation of boar spermatozoa. J. Androl. 26:610-618. doi:10.2164/jandrol.05028

Davila, M.P., P.M. Muñoz, J.M. Bolaños, T.A. Stout, B.M. Gadella, J.A. Tapia, C.B. da-Silvia, C.O. Ferrusola, and F.J. Peña. 2016. Mitochondrial ATP is required for the maintenance of membrane integrity in stallion spermatozoa, whereas motility requires both glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation. Reproduction 152:683-694. doi:10.1530/REP-16-0409

Didion, B.A. 2008. Computer-assisted semen analysis and its utility for profiling boar semen samples. Theriogenology 70:1374-1376. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.07.014

Dyck, M.K., G.R. Foxcroft, S. Novak, A. Ruiz-Sanchez, J. Patterson, and W.T. Dixon. 2011. Biological markers of boar fertility. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 46:55-58. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0531.2011.01837.x

Dziekońska, A., L. Fraser, and J. Strzeżek. 2009. Effect of different storage temperatures on the metabolic activity of spermatozoa following liquid storage of boar semen. J. Anim. Feed. Sci. 18:638-649. doi:100.22358/jafs/66438/2009

Estrada, E., M.M. Rivera-del-Álamo, J.E. Rodríguez-Gil, and M. Yeste. 2017. The addition of reduced glutathione to cryopreservation media induces changes in the structure of motile subpopulations of frozen-thawed boar sperm. Cryobiology 78:56-64. doi:10.1016/j.cryobiol.2017.07.002

Flores, E., J.M. Fernández-Novell, A. Peña, and J.E. Rodríguez-Gil. 2009. The degree of resistance to freezing-thawing is related to specific changes in the structures of motile sperm subpopulations and mitochondrial activity in boar spermatozoa. Theriogenology 72:784-797. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2009.05.013

Flores, E., E. Taberner, M.M. Rivera, A. Peña, T. Rigau, J. Miró, and J.E. Rodríguez-Gil. 2008. Effects of freezing/thawing on motile sperm subpopulations of boar and donkey ejaculates. Theriogenology 70:936-945. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.05.056

Flowers, W.L. 1997. Management of boars for efficient semen production. J. Reprod. Fertil. Suppl. 52:67-78.

Fraser, L., A. Dziekońska, R. Strzezek, and J. Strzezek. 2007. Dialysis of boar semen prior to freezing thawing: its effects on post-thaw sperm characteristics. Theriogenology 67:994-1003. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2006.12.002

Gadea, J. 2005. Sperm factors related to in vitro and in vivo porcine fertility. Theriogenology 63:431-444. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.09.023

Gerfen, R.W., B.R. White, M.A. Cotta, and M.B. Wheeler. 1994. Comparison of the semen characteristics of fengjing, meishan and Yorkshire boars. Theriogenology 41:461-469. doi:10.1016/0093-691X(94)90082-T

Gil, M.C., M. García-Herreros, F.J. Barón, I.M. Aparicio, A.J. Santos, and L.J. García-Marín. 2009. Morphometry of porcine spermatozoa and its functional significance in relation with the motility parameters in fresh semen. Theriogenology 71:254-263. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.07.007

Grieblová, A., E. Pintus, and J. Ros-Santaella. 2017. Integrity of head and tail plasmalemma is associated with different kinetic variables in boar sperm. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 184:218-227. doi:10.1016/j.anireprosci.2017.07.020

Hoflack, G., G. Opsomer, T. Rijsselaere, A. Van-Soom, D. Maes, A. de-Kruif, and L. Duchateau. 2007. Comparison of computer-assisted sperm motility analysis parameters in semen from Belgian blue and Holstein-Friesian bulls. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 42:153-161. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0531.2006.00745.x

Holt, C., W.V. Holt, H.D. Moore, H.C. Reed, and R.M. Curnock. 1997. Objectively measured boar sperm motility parameters correlate with the outcomes of on-farm inseminations: results of two fertility trials. J. Androl. 18:312-323. doi:10.1002/j.1939-4640.1997.tb0195.x

Holt, W.V., and J.W. Van-Look. 2004. Concepts in sperm heterogeneity, sperm selection and sperm competition as biological foundations for laboratory test of semen quality. Reproduction 127:527-535. doi:10.1530/rep.1.00134

Kawęcka, M., A. Pietruszka, E. Jacyno, R. Czarnecki, and M. Kamyczek. 2008. Quality of semen of young boars of the breeds Pietrain and Duroc and their reciprocal crosses. Arch. Tierz. 51:42-54. doi:10.5194/aab-51-42-2008

Kennedy, B.W., and J.N. Wilkins. 1984. Boar, breed and environmental factors influencing semen characteristics of boars used in artificial insemination. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 64:833-843. doi:10.4141/cjas84-097

Knecht, D., S. Środoń, and K. Duziński. 2014. The influence of boar breed and season on semen parameters. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 44:1-9. doi:10.4314/sajas.v44i1.1

Knecht, D., S. Środoń, K. Szulc, and K. Duziński. 2013. The effect of photoperiod on selected parameters of boar semen. Liv. Sci. 157:364-71. doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2013.06.027

Knox, R.V. 2014. Impact of swine reproductive technologies on pig and global food production. In: G.C. Lamb, and N. Di-

Lorenzo, editors, Current and future reproductive technologies and world food production. Springer, NY, USA. p. 131-160.

Kondracki, S., M. Iwanina, A. Wysokińska, and M. Huszno. 2012. Comparative analysis of Duroc and Pietrain boar sperm morphology. Acta Vet. Brno 81:195-199. doi:10.2754/avb201281020195

Kunavongkrit, A., A. Suriyasomboom, N. Lundeheim, T.W. Heard, and S. Einarsson. 2005. Management and sperm production of boars under differing environmental conditions. Theriogenology 63:657-667. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.09.039

Langendijk, P., N.M. Soede, and B. Kemp. 2005. Uterine activity, sperm transport, and the role of boar stimuli around insemination in sows. Theriogenology 63:500-513. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.09.027

Leahy, T., and B.M. Gadella. 2011. Sperm surface changes and physiological consequences induced by sperm handling and storage. Reproduction 142:759-778. doi:10.1530/REPP11-0310

Liu, D.Y., G.N. Clarke, and H.W. Gordon-Baker. 1991. Relationship between sperm motility assessed with the Hamilton-Thorn motility analyzer and fertilization rates in vitro. J. Androl. 12:231-239. doi:10.1002/j.1939-4640.1991.tb00258.x

López-Rodríguez, A., T. Rijsselaere, J. Beek, P. Vyt, A. Van-Soom, and D. Maes. 2013. Boar seminal plasma components and their relation with semen quality. Syst. Biol. Reprod. Med. 59:5-12. doi:10.3109/19396368.2012.725120

Martinez-Alborcia, M.J., A. Valverde, I. Parrilla, J.M. Vazquez, E.A. Martinez, and J. Roca. 2012. Detrimental effects of non-functional spermatozoa on the freezability of functional spermatozoa from boar ejaculate. PLoS ONE 7(5):e36550. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0036550

Martínez-Rodríguez, C., M. Alvarez, L. Ordás, C.A. Chamorro, F. Martinez-Pastor, L. Anel, and P. de-Paz. 2012. Evaluation of ram semen quality using polyacrylamide gel instead of cervical mucus in the sperm penetration test. Theriogenology 77:1575-86. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2011.11.026

Oh, S.A., Y.J. Park, Y.A. You, E.A. Mohamed, and M.G. Pang. 2010. Capacitation status of stored boar spermatozoa is related to litter size of sows. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 121:131-138. doi:10.1016/j.anireprosci.2010.05.019

Oh, S.H., M.T. See, T.E. Long, and J.M. Galvin. 2006. Estimates of genetic correlations between production and semen traits in boar. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 19:160-164. doi:10.5713/ajas.2006.160

Okere, C., A. Joseph, and M. Ezekwe. 2005. Seasonal and genotype variations in libido, semen production and quality in artificial insemination boars. J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 4:885-888.

Quintero-Moreno, A., T. Rigau, and J.E. Rodríguez-Gil. 2004. Regression analyses and motile sperm subpopulation structure study as improving tools in boar semen quality analysis. Theriogenology 61:673-690. doi:10.1016/S0093-691X(03)00248-6

Robinson, J.A.B., and M.M. Buhr. 2005. Impact of genetic selection on management of boar replacement. Theriogenology 63:668-678. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.09.040

Savić, R., M. Petrović, D. Radojković, Č. Radović, and N. Parunović. 2013. The effect of breed, boar and season on some properties of sperm. Biotechnol. Anim. Husb. 29:299-310. doi:10.2298/BAH1302299S

Schinckel, A., R.K. Johnson, R.A. Pumfrey, and D.R. Zimmerman. 1983. Testicular growth in boars of different genetic lines and its relationship to reproductive performance. J. Anim. Sci. 56:1065-1076. doi:10.2527/jas1983.5651065x

Schulze, M., S. Buder, K. Rüdiger, M. Beyerbach, and D. Waberski. 2014. Influences on semen traits used for selection of young AI boars. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 148:164-170. doi:10.1016/j.anireprosci.2014.06.008

Sellés, E., J. Gadea, R. Romar, C. Matás, and S. Ruiz. 2003. Analysis of in vitro fertilizing capacity to evaluate the freezing

procedures of boar semen and to predict the subsequent fertility. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 38:66-72. doi:10.1046/j.1439-0531.2003.00406.x

Smital, J. 2009. Effects influencing boar semen. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 110:335-346. doi:10.1016/j.anireprosci.2008.01.024

Smital, J., L.L. De-Sousa, and A. Mohsen. 2004. Differences among breeds and manifestation of heterosis in AI boar sperm output. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 80:121-130. doi:10.1016/S0378-4320(03)00142-8

Sonderman, J.P., and J.J. Luebbe. 2008. Semen production and fertility issues related to differences in genetic lines of boars. Theriogenology 70:1380-1383. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenoly.2008.08.009

Swierstra, E.E. 1974. A comparison of regular ejaculation with sexual rest on semen characteristics and reproductive organ weights in young boars. J. Anim. Sci. 39:575-581.

Tăpăloagă, P.R., A. Șonea, A. Iancu, and E. Mitrănescu. 2013. Researches regarding age, breed and collecting season influence in quality and quantity boars semen. Sci. Pap. Ser. D. Anim. Sci. 56:161-165.

Tardif, S., J.P. Laforest, N. Cormier, and J.L. Bailey. 1999. The importance of porcine sperm parameters on fertility in vivo. Theriogenology 52:447-459. doi:10.1016/S0093-691X(99)00142-9

Tsakmakidis, I.A., A.G. Lymberopoulos, and T.A. Khalifa. 2010. Relationship between sperm quality traits and field-fertility of porcine semen. J. Vet. Sci. 11:151-154. doi:10.4142/jvs.2010.11.2.151

Verstegen, J., M. Iguer-Ouada, and K. Onclin. 2002. Computer assisted semen analyzers in andrology research and veterinary practice. Theriogenology 57:149-179. doi:10.1016/S0093-691X(01)00664-1

Wasilewska, K., and L. Fraser. 2017. Boar variability in sperm cryo-tolerance after cooling of semen in different long-term extenders at various temperatures. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 185:161-173. doi:10.1016/j.anireprosci.2017.08.016

WHO (World Health Organization). 2010. Laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen. 5th ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, GBR.

Wolf, J., and J. Smital. 2009. Effects in genetic evaluation for semen traits in Czech Large White and Czech Landrace boars. Czech J. Anim. Sci. 54:349-358.

Wysokińska, A., S. Kondracki, D. Kowalewski, A. Adamiak, and E. Muczyńska. 2009. Effect of seasonal factors on the ejaculate properties of crossbred Duroc x Pietrain and Pietrain x Duroc boars as well as purebred Duroc and Pietrain boars. Bull. Vet. Inst. Pulawy 53:677-685.

Yeste, M., and M. Castillo-Martín. 2013. Boar spermatozoa within the Uterus. In: S. Bonet et al., editors, Boar reproduction: Fundamentals and new biotechnological trends. Springer, Berlin, GER. p. 101-168.

Žaja, I.Ž., M. Samardžija, S. Vince, I. Majić-Balić, M. Vilić, D. Đuričić, and S. Milinković-Tur. 2016. Influence of boar breeds or hybrid genetic composition on semen quality and seminal plasma biochemical variables. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 164:169-176. doi:10.1016/j.anireprosci.2015.11.027


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.

Comments on this article

View all comments




Copyright (c) 2018 Mesoamerican Agronomy

© 2017 Universidad de Costa Rica. Para ver más detalles sobre la distribución de los artículos en este sitio visite el aviso legal. Este sitio es desarrollado por UCRIndex y Open Journal Systems. ¿Desea cosechar nuestros metadatos? dirección OAI-PMH: https://revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/index/oai