Optimal conditions for the kinematic analysis in fresh semen of Brahman bulls with a CASA-Mot system
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15517/am.v32i3.42768Keywords:
spermatozoa, livestock, counting chamber, bull, animal reproductionAbstract
Introduction. The optimal conditions for semen analysis enable us to standardize the evaluation protocols. Objective. To evaluate the effect of external factors related to the semen analysis on the sperm subpopulations of the Brahman cattle. Materials and Methods. The study was conducted with animals from two cattle farms in Alajuela, Costa Rica, from September to December 2019. Ten Brahman bulls were used that were electroejaculated and the semen was diluted with three commercial diluents: Andromed®, Androstar®, and BTS, at two temperatures (37 and 29 °C). The samples were analyzed using a CASA-Mot ISAS®v1 system and ISAS®D4C counting chambers (10, 16 and 20 µm) and Spermtrack® were used at different analysis times (0, 3, 6 and 12 h). Results. The Spermtrack® presented higher curvilinear velocity but lower linearity compared to the other counting chambers (p<0.05). The samples durability was lower for all the sperm kinematic variables (p<0.05), except for the straightness index (STR). Curvilinear velocity was higher when Andromed® was used, but there was greater progressivity with Androstar® (p<0.05). Five sperm subpopulations were identified from three main components: velocity, progressiveness, and undulation. The distribution of spermatozoa in the subpopulations varied (p<0.05) according to sample durability and counting chamber. Conclusion. The type of diluent, dilution temperature, counting chamber, and time elapsed after initial semen loading conditioned ejaculate kinematic variables. Semen motility and kinematics improved when chamber heights of 20 µm and Androstar® diluent were used. The existence of sperm subpopulations in the ejaculate was affected by the type of extender used, which conditioned the presence of different motility patterns, progressiveness and cell undulation in the different subpopulations within the ejaculate.
Downloads
References
Arslan, H. O., Herrera, C., Malama, E., Siuda, M., Leiding, C., & Bollwein, H. (2019). Effect of the addition of different catalase concentrations to a TRIS-egg yolk extender on quality and in vitro fertilization rate of frozen-thawed bull sperm. Cryobiology, 91, 40–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cryobiol.2019.10.200
Ávalos, A., González, J., Vargas, A., & Herrera, J. (2018). Recolección y manipulación seminal in vitro (1a Ed.). Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana.
Awad, M. M. (2011). Effect of some permeating cryoprotectants on CASA motility results in cryopreserved bull spermatozoa. Animal Reproduction Science, 123(3–4), 157–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2011.01.003
Barquero, V., Víquez, L., Calderón-Calderón, J., & Valverde, A. (2021). Frecuencia de fotogramas óptima para evaluar la cinética espermática de verracos con un sistema CASA-Mot. Agronomía Mesoamericana, 32(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.15517/am.v32i1.41928
Barszcz, K., Wiesetek, D., Wasowicz, M., & Kupczynska, M. (2012). Bull Semen Collection and Analysis for Artificial Insemination. Journal of Agricultural Science, 4(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.5539/jas.v4n3p1
Bompart, D., García-Molina, A., Valverde, A., Caldeira, C., Yániz, J., Núñez de Murga, M., & Soler, C. (2018). CASA-Mot technology: how results are affected by the frame rate and counting chamber. Reproduction, Fertility and Development, 30(6), 810–819. https://doi.org/10.1071/RD17551
Bompart, D., Vázquez, R., Gómez, R., Valverde, A., Roldán, E., García-Molina, A., & Soler, C. (2019). Combined effects of type and depth of counting chamber, and rate of image frame capture, on bull sperm motility and kinematics. Animal Reproduction Science, 209, Article 106169. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ANIREPROSCI.2019.106169
Boryshpolets, S., Kowalski, R. K., Dietrich, G. J., Dzyuba, B., & Ciereszko, A. (2013). Different computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA) systems highly influence sperm motility parameters. Theriogenology, 80(7), 758–765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2013.06.019
Bravo, J. A., Montanero, J., Calero, R., & Roy, T. J. (2011). Identification of sperm subpopulations with defined motility characteristics in ejaculates from Ile de France rams. Animal Reproduction Science, 129(1), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2011.10.005
Broekhuijse, M. L. W. J., Šoštarić, E., Feitsma, H., & Gadella, B. M. (2011). Additional value of computer assisted semen analysis (CASA) compared to conventional motility assessments in pig artificial insemination. Theriogenology, 76(8), 1473–1486.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2011.05.040
Büyükleblebici, S., Tuncer, P. B., Bucak, M. N., Eken, A., Sariözkan, S., Taşdemir, U., & Endirlik, B. Ü. (2014). Cryopreservation of bull sperm: Effects of extender supplemented with different cryoprotectants and antioxidants on sperm motility, antioxidant capacity and fertility results. Animal Reproduction Science, 150(3–4), 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2014.09.006
Castellini, C., Dal Bosco, A., Ruggeri, S., & Collodel, G. (2011). What is the best frame rate for evaluation of sperm motility in different species by computer-assisted sperm analysis? Fertility and Sterility, 96(1), 24–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.04.096
Contri, A., Valorz, C., Faustini, M., Wegher, L., & Carluccio, A. (2010). Effect of semen preparation on casa motility results in cryopreserved bull spermatozoa. Theriogenology, 74(3), 424–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.THERIOGENOLOGY.2010.02.025
Del-Gallego, R., Sadeghi, S., Blasco, E., Soler, C., Yániz, J., & Silvestre, M. (2017). Effect of chamber characteristics, loading and analysis time on motility and kinetic variables analysed with the CASA-mot system in goat sperm. Animal Reproduction Science, 177, 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ANIREPROSCI.2016.12.010
Douglas-Hamilton, D. H., Smith, N. G., Kuster, C. E., Vermeiden, J. P. W., & Althouse, G. C. (2005). Capillary-loaded particle fluid dynamics: effect on estimation of sperm concentration. Journal of Andrology, 26(1), 115–122. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15611575
Farrell, P., Trouern-Trend, V., Foote, R. H., & Douglas-Hamilton, D. (1995). Repeatability of measurements on human, rabbit, and bull sperm by computer-assisted sperm analysis when comparing individual fields and means of 12 fields. Fertility and Sterility, 64(1), 208–210. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7789564
Gloria, A., Carluccio, A., Contri, A., Wegher, L., Valorz, C., & Robbe, D. (2013). The effect of the chamber on kinetic results in cryopreserved bull spermatozoa. Andrology, 1(6), 879–885. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2047-2927.2013.00121.x
Hahn, K., Failing, K., & Wehrend, A. (2019). Effect of temperature and time after collection on buck sperm quality. BMC Veterinary Research, 15(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-019-2135-y
Holt, C., Holt, R., Moore, H., Reed, H., & Curnock, R. (1997). Objectively correlate results measured boar sperm motility with the outcomes of two fertility trials. Journal of Andrology, 18(3), 312–323. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1939-4640.1997.tb01925.x
Holt, W V, & Palomo, M. (1996). Optimization of a continuous real-time computerized semen analysis system for ram sperm motility assessment, and evaluation of four methods of semen preparation. Reproduction, Fertility and Development, 8(2), 219. https://doi.org/10.1071/RD9960219
Holt, WV, O’Brien, J., & Abaigar, T. (2007). Applications and interpretation of computer-assisted sperm analyses and sperm sorting methods in assisted breeding and comparative research. Reproduction, Fertility, and Development, 19(6), 709–718. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17714625
Hoogewijs, M. K., De Vliegher, S. P., Govaere, J. L., De-Schauwer, C., De Kruif, A., & Van Soom, A. (2012). Influence of counting chamber type on CASA outcomes of equine semen analysis. Equine Veterinary Journal, 44(5), 542–549. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-3306.2011.00523.x
Hyakutake, T., Mori, K., & Sato, K. (2018). Effects of surrounding fluid on motility of hyperactivated bovine sperm. Journal of Biomechanics, 71(February), 183–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2018.02.009
Ibanescu, I., Siuda, M., & Bollwein, H. (2020). Motile sperm subpopulations in bull semen using different clustering approaches – Associations with flow cytometric sperm characteristics and fertility. Animal Reproduction Science, 215, 106329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2020.106329
Isengildina-Massa, O., Cao, X., Karali, B., Irwin, S. H., Adjemian, M., & Johansson, R. C. (2020). When does USDA information have the most impact on crop and livestock markets? Journal of Commodity Markets, 22, Article 100137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomm.2020.100137
Kaiser, H. F. (1958). The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 23, 187–200.
Kathiravan, P., Kalatharan, J., Karthikeya, G., Rengarajan, K., & Kadirvel, G. (2011). Objective sperm motion analysis to assess dairy bull fertility using computer-aided system - A review. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 46(1), 165–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.2010.01603.x
Kaufman, L., & Rousseeuw, P. (2005). Finding groups in data: an introduction to cluster analysis. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470316801
Lenz, R. W., Kjelland, M. E., VonderHaar, K., Swannack, T. M., & Moreno, J. F. (2011). A comparison of bovine seminal quality assessments using different viewing chambers with a computer-assisted semen analyzer. Journal of Animal Science, 89(2), 383–388. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2010-3056
Menegatti, S., Shafii, B., Price, W., Utt, M., Harstine, B., McDonald, K., Cruppe, L., DeJarnette, M., Peters, L., Moraes Vasconcelos, J. L., & Dalton, J. (2020). Angus sire field fertility and in vitro sperm characteristics following use of different sperm insemination doses in Brazilian beef cattle. Theriogenology, 147, 146–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2019.11.021
Morillo, M., Salazar, S., & Castillo, E. (2012). Evaluación del potencial reproductivo del macho bovino. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Agrícolas.
Mortimer, S. T., Van Der Horst, G., & Mortimer, D. (2015). The future of computer-aided sperm analysis. Asian Journal of Andrology, 17(4), 545–553. https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682X.154312
Muiño, R., Peña, A. I., Rodríguez, A., Tamargo, C., & Hidalgo, C. O. (2009). Effects of cryopreservation on the motile sperm subpopulations in semen from Asturiana de los Valles bulls. Theriogenology, 72(6), 860–868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2009.06.009
Muiño, R., Rivera, M. M., Rigau, T., Rodriguez-Gil, J. E., & Peña, A. (2008). Effect of different thawing rates on post-thaw sperm viability, kinematic parameters and motile sperm subpopulations structure of bull semen. Animal Reproduction Science, 109(1–4), 50–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2007.11.028
Murphy, C., Holden, S., Murphy, E., Cromie, A., Lonergan, P., & Fair, S. (2016). The impact of storage temperature and sperm number on the fertility of liquid-stored bull semen. Reproduction, Fertility and Development, 28(9), 1349–1359. https://doi.org/10.1071/RD14369
Murphy, E., Eivers, B., O’Meara, C., Lonergan, P., & Fair, S. (2018). Effect of increasing equilibration time of diluted bull semen up to 72 h prior to freezing on sperm quality parameters and calving rate following artificial insemination. Theriogenology, 108, 217–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2017.11.034
Murtagh, F., & Legendre, P. (2014). Ward’s Hierarchical Agglomerative Clustering Method: Which Algorithms Implement Ward’s Criterion? Journal of Classification, 31(3), 274–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00357-014-9161-z
Núñez-Martínez, I., Moran, J., & Peña, F. (2006). A three-step statistical procedure to identify sperm kinematic subpopulations in canine ejaculates: Changes after cryopreservation. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 41(5), 408–415. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.2006.00685.x
O’Hara, L., Hanrahan, J. P., Richardson, L., Donovan, A., Fair, S., Evans, A. C. O., & Lonergan, P. (2010). Effect of storage duration, storage temperature, and diluent on the viability and fertility of fresh ram sperm. Theriogenology, 73(4), 541–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2009.10.009
Páez, E., & Corredor, E. (2014). Evaluación de la aptitud reproductiva del toro. Ciencias y Agricultura, 11(2), 49–59.
Patil, S., Kumar, P., Singh, G., Bala, R., Jerome, A., Patil, C. S., Kumar, D., Singh, S., & Sharma, R. K. (2020). ‘Semen dilution effect’ on sperm variables and conception rate in buffalo. Animal Reproduction Science, 214, Article 106304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2020.106304
Peña, A., Adán, S., Quintela, L., Becerra, J., & Herradón, P. (2018). Relationship between motile sperm subpopulations identified in frozen-thawed dog semen samples and their ability to bind to the zona pellucida of canine oocytes. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 53, 14–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/rda.13349
Peng, N., Zou, X., & Li, L. (2015). Comparison of different counting chambers using a computer-assisted semen analyzer. Systems Biology in Reproductive Medicine, 61(5), 307–313. https://doi.org/10.3109/19396368.2015.1063175
Quintero-Moreno, A., Mayorga-torres, B. J. M., & Maya, W. D. C. (2017). Semen Analysis As a Tool To Predict the Reproductive Potential in Bulls. Journal of Veterinary Andrology, 2(1), 30-37. http://cesica.org/publicaciones/index.php/journal_veterinary_andrology/article/view/24
Segré, G., & Silberberg, A. (1962). Behavior of macroscopic rigid spheres in Poiseuille flow. Part 2: experiment and intepretation. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 14(1958), 136–157. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Soler, C., Fuentes, M., Sancho, M., García, A., Núñez de Murga, M., & Núñez de Murga, J. (2012). Effect of counting chamber on seminal parameters, analyzing with the ISASv1®. Revista Internacional de Andrología, 10(4), 132–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1698-031X(12)70069-9
Soler, C., Valverde, A., Bompart, D., Fereidounfar, S., Sancho, M., Yániz, J., Garcia-Molina, A., & Korneenko-Zhilyaev, Y. . (2017). New methods of semen analysis by casa. Sel’skokhozyaistvennaya Biologiya, 52(2). https://doi.org/10.15389/agrobiology.2017.2.232eng
Spencer, N. (2013). Essentials of multivariate data analysis. Chapman and Hall/CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b16344
Storey, B. T. (2008). Mammalian sperm metabolism: Oxygen and sugar, friend and foe. International Journal of Developmental Biology, 52(5–6), 427–437. https://doi.org/10.1387/ijdb.072522bs
Sun, Z., Scherer, L., Tukker, A., & Behrens, P. (2019). Linking global crop and livestock consumption to local production hotspots. Global Food Security, 25, Article 100323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2019.09.008
Thijssen, A., Klerkx, E., Huyser, C., Bosmans, E., Campo, R., & Ombelet, W. (2014). Influence of temperature and sperm preparation on the quality of spermatozoa. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 28(4), 436–442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.12.005
Valverde, A., Castro-Morales, O., Madrigal-Valverde, M., & Soler, C. (2019a). Sperm kinematics and morphometric subpopulations analysis with CASA systems: A review. Revista de Biologia Tropical, 67(6), 1473–1487. https://doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v67i6.35151
Valverde, A., & Madrigal-Valverde, M. (2018). Computer-assisted semen analysis systems in animal reproduction. Agronomía Mesoamericana, 29(2), 469–484. https://doi.org/10.15517/ma.v29i2.29852
Valverde, A., & Madrigal-Valverde, M. (2019). Evaluación de cámaras de recuento sobre parámetros espermáticos de verracos analizados con un sistema CASA-Mot. Agronomía Mesoamericana, 30(2), 447–458. https://doi.org/10.15517/am.v30i1.34145
Valverde, A., Madrigal-Valverde, M., Caldeira, C., Bompart, D., Núñez de Murga, J., Arnau, S., & Soler, C. (2019b). Effect of frame rate capture frequency on sperm kinematic parameters and subpopulation structure definition in boars, analyzed with a CASA-Mot system. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 54(2), 167–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/rda.13320
Valverde, A., Madrigal-Valverde, M., Lotz, J., Bompart, D., & Soler, C. (2019c). Effect of video capture time on sperm kinematic parameters in breeding boars. Livestock Science, 220, 52–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2018.12.008
Vicente-Fiel, S., Palacín, I., Santolaria, P., & Yániz, J. L. (2013). A comparative study of sperm morphometric subpopulations in cattle, goat, sheep and pigs using a computer-assisted fluorescence method (CASMA-F). Animal Reproduction Science, 139(1–4), 182–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2013.04.002
Víquez, L., Barquero, V., Soler, C., Roldan, E.R.S., & Valverde, A. (2020). Kinematic sub-populations in bull spermatozoa: A comparison of classical and bayesian approaches. Biology (Basel), 9, Article 138. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology9060138
Yániz, J., Silvestre, M., Santolaria, P., & Soler, C. (2018). CASA-Mot in mammals: an update. Reproduction, Fertility, and Development, 30(6), 799–809. https://doi.org/10.1071/RD17432
Yániz, J., Soler, C., Alquézar-Baeta, C., & Santolaria, P. (2017). Toward an integrative and predictive sperm quality analysis in Bos taurus. Animal Reproduction Science, 181, 108–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2017.03.022
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Luis Víquez, Vinicio Barquero, Anthony Valverde (Autor/a)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
1. Proposed policy for open access journals
Authors who publish in this journal accept the following conditions:
a. Authors retain the copyright and assign to the journal the right to the first publication, with the work registered under the attribution, non-commercial and no-derivative license from Creative Commons, which allows third parties to use what has been published as long as they mention the authorship of the work and upon first publication in this journal, the work may not be used for commercial purposes and the publications may not be used to remix, transform or create another work.
b. Authors may enter into additional independent contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the article published in this journal (e.g., including it in an institutional repository or publishing it in a book) provided that they clearly indicate that the work was first published in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to publish their work on the Internet (e.g. on institutional or personal pages) before and during the review and publication process, as it may lead to productive exchanges and faster and wider dissemination of published work (see The Effect of Open Access).
How to Cite
