DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of Storage in Different Commercial Semen Extenders on Sperm Motility, Viability and Membrane Integrity of Korean Native Boar Spermatozoa

  • Sa, Soo-Jin (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Kim, In-Cheul (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Choi, Sun-Ho (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Hong, Joon-Ki (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Kim, Du-Wan (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Cho, Kyu-Ho (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Kim, Young-Hwa (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Chung, Ki-Hwa (Gyeongnam National University of Science and Technology) ;
  • Park, Jun-Cheol (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA)
  • Received : 2013.11.02
  • Accepted : 2013.11.18
  • Published : 2013.12.31

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the effect of semen extenders on the sperm motility, viability, acrosome integrity and functional integrity of plasma membrane (HOST: hypo-osmotic swelling test) during liquid preservation of Korean Native boar semen. In this experiment, semen was diluted in Androhep plus, Beltsville Thawing Solution (BTS), ModenaTM, Seminark and Vitasem LD. Sperm-rich fractions were collected from three Korean Native boars and sub-samples were diluted ($30{\times}10^6$ spermatozoa/ml) in different semen extenders. Semen samples were stored at $17^{\circ}C$ for 96 hours. On everyday (0, 24, 48, 72, 96 h) after storage, the sperm characteristics relevant for fertility, such as sperm motility, viability, acrosome integrity and HOST positive were evaluated. The motility of spermatozoa stored in different extenders was no significantly different among other extenders (P>0.05). Also, no difference was observed among samples processed with different extenders in the percentage of sperm viability, acrosome integrity and HOST positive. All extenders maintained a high percentage (70%) of sperm motility, viability and acrosome integrity through 96 h of storage. The result of this study show that there was no significant differences among extenders in their capacity to preserve motility, viability and membrane integrity of spermatozoa from normal, fertile Korean Native boars for 96 h of liquid preservation at $17^{\circ}C$.

References

  1. Chanapiwat P, Kaeoket K and Tummaruk P. 2009. Effects of DHA-enriched hen egg yolk and L-systeine supplementation on quality of cryopreserved boar semen. Asian J. Andrology 11: 600-608. https://doi.org/10.1038/aja.2009.40
  2. De Ambrogi M, Ballester J, Saravia F, Caballero I, Johannisson A, Walleren M, Andersson M and Rodriguez-Martinez H. 2006. Effect of storage in short- and long-term commercial semen extenders on the motility, plasma membrane and chromatin integrity of boar spermatozoa. Int. J. Androl. 29: 543-552. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2605.2006.00694.x
  3. De Lamirande E and Gagnon C. 1995. Impact of reactive oxygen species on spermatozoa: a balancing act between beneficial and detrimental effects. Hum. Reprod. Suppl. 10: 15-21. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/10.suppl_1.15
  4. De Leeuw F, Colenbrander B and Verkleij A. 1990. The role membrane damage plays in cold shock and freezing injury. Reprod. Dom. Anim. Suppl. 1: 95-104.
  5. Estienne M, Harper A and Day J. 2007. Characteristics of sperm motility in boars diluted in different extenders and store for seven days at 18${^{\circ}C}$. Reprod. Biol. 7: 221-231.
  6. Flowers WL. 1997. Management of boars for efficient semen production. J. Reprod. Fertil. 52: 67-78.
  7. Gadea J. 2003. Review: Semen extenders used in artificial insemination of swine. Spanish J. Agri. Res. 1: 17-27. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2003012-17
  8. Haugan T, Gaustad AH, Reksen O, Grohn YT and Hofmo PO. 2007. Fertility results of artificial inseminations performed with liquid boar semen stored in X-Cell vs BTS extender. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 42: 94-99. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.2006.00738.x
  9. Huo LJ, Ma XH and Yang ZM. 2002. Assessment of sperm viability, mitochondrial activity, capacitation and acrosome intactness in extened boar semen during long-term storage. Theriogenology 58: 1349-1360. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(02)00953-6
  10. Johnson LA, Gerrits RJ and Young EP. 1969. The fatty acid composition of porcine spermatozoa phospholipids. Biol. Reprod. 1: 330-334. https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod1.4.330
  11. Johnson LA, Weitze KF, Fiser P and Maxwell WMC. 2000. Storage of boar semen. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 62: 143-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4320(00)00157-3
  12. Laforest JP and Allard D. 1995. Comparison of four extenders for long-term storage of fresh boar semen. Reprod. Dom. Anim. 31: 275-276. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.1995.tb00049.x
  13. Maes D, Nauwynck H, Rijsselaere T, Mateusen B, Vyt Ph, de Kruif A and Van Soom A. 2008. AI transmitted diseases in swine: an overview. Theriogenology 70: 1337-1345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.06.018
  14. Martin-Hidalgo D, Baron FJ, Bragado MJ, Carmona P, Robina A, Garcia-Marin LJ and Gil MC. 2011. The effect of melatonin on the quality of extended boar semen after longterm storage at 17${^{\circ}C}$. Theriogenology 75: 1550-1560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.12.021
  15. Martin-Hidalgo D, Baron FJ, Robina A, Bragado MJ, Hurtado de Liera A, Garcia-Marin LJ and Gil MC. 2013. Inter- and Intra-breed comparative study of sperm motility and viability in Iberian and Duroc boar semen during long-term storage in MR-A and XCell extenders. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 139: 109-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2013.04.001
  16. Parks JE and Lynch DV. 1992. Lipid composition and thermotropic phase behavior of boar, bull, stallion and rooster sperm membranes. Cryobiology 29: 255-266. https://doi.org/10.1016/0011-2240(92)90024-V
  17. Paulenz H, Kommisrud E and Hofmo P. 2000. Effect of longterm storage at different temperatures on the quality of liquid boar semen. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 35: 83-87. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0531.2000.00207.x
  18. Sonderman JP and Luebbe JJ. 2008. Semen production and fertility issues related to differences in genetic lines of boars. Theriogenology 70: 1380-1383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.08.009
  19. Vyt PH, Maes D, Dejonckheere E, Castryck F and Van Soom A. 2004. Comparative study on five different commercial extenders for boar semen. Reprod. Dom. Anim. 39: 8-12. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0531.2003.00468.x
  20. Waberski D, Henning H and Petrunkina AM. 2011. Assessment of storage effects in liquid preserved boar semen. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 46: 45-48.
  21. Waterhouse KE, De Angelis PM, Haugan T, Paulenz H, Hofmo PO and Farstad W. 2004. Effects of in vitro storage time and semen-extender on membrane quality of boar sperm assessed by flow cytometry. Theriogenology 62: 1638-1651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.03.001
  22. White IG. 1993. Lipids and calcium uptake of sperm in relation to cold shock and preservation: a review. Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 5: 539-658.