Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Apr:167:103-8.
doi: 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2016.02.013. Epub 2016 Feb 16.

Influence of semen collection method on sperm cryoresistance in small ruminants

Affiliations

Influence of semen collection method on sperm cryoresistance in small ruminants

P Jiménez-Rabadán et al. Anim Reprod Sci. 2016 Apr.

Abstract

Semen collection for cryopreservation is a key step for small ruminant conservation programs. While in these species semen is mainly collected via artificial vagina (AV), electroejaculation (EE) provides a viable alternative for untrained males. Herein we investigated the effect of semen collection method on post-thaw sperm quality by comparing two small ruminant species, sheep and goats. Semen from Blanca-Celtibérica bucks and Manchega rams was collected by AV and EE on the same day and cryopreserved using a standard protocol. At thawing, sperm motion parameters were evaluated by CASA, whereas membrane stability (YO-PRO-1), sperm viability (propidium iodide, PI) and mitochondrial activity (Mitotracker Deep Red) were analyzed using flow cytometry. The semen collection method negatively affected post-thaw sperm quality in bucks but not in rams. Thus, in bucks, post-thaw sperm motility was higher for samples collected by AV as compared to those obtained via EE. Similarly, post-thaw sperm parameters evaluated by flow cytometry were worse for buck samples collected by EE than those collected by AV in the same species, or than ram samples regardless of collection method. These results suggest that ovine and caprine spermatozoa have a different response to the cryopreservation process depending upon the semen collection method used. We hypothesize that the EE procedure may lead to changes in the composition of the ejaculate in bucks that would make spermatozoa more susceptible to the cryopreservation process, whereas this procedure would have had no effect on ram spermatozoa. This assumption requires further investigation.

Keywords: Artificial vagina; Buck; Electroejaculation; Ram; Sperm cryopreservation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types