Cargando…

Comparison of sperm selection techniques in donkeys: motile subpopulations from a practical point of view

The aim of this study was to compare the post-thaw distribution of motile sperm subpopulations, following simple or colloid centrifugation. A new analysis was used to evaluate the available number of sperm from each subpopulation after each centrifugation protocol. Frozen/thawed semen samples were d...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ortiz, Isabel, Dorado, Jesús, Morrell, Jane M., Diaz-Jimenez, Maria Angeles, Pereira, Blasa, Consuegra, César, Hidalgo, Manuel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Colégio Brasileiro de Reprodução Animal - CBRA 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7673585/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33224288
http://dx.doi.org/10.21451/1984-3143-AR2018-0133
_version_ 1783611350201663488
author Ortiz, Isabel
Dorado, Jesús
Morrell, Jane M.
Diaz-Jimenez, Maria Angeles
Pereira, Blasa
Consuegra, César
Hidalgo, Manuel
author_facet Ortiz, Isabel
Dorado, Jesús
Morrell, Jane M.
Diaz-Jimenez, Maria Angeles
Pereira, Blasa
Consuegra, César
Hidalgo, Manuel
author_sort Ortiz, Isabel
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study was to compare the post-thaw distribution of motile sperm subpopulations, following simple or colloid centrifugation. A new analysis was used to evaluate the available number of sperm from each subpopulation after each centrifugation protocol. Frozen/thawed semen samples were divided into the following after-thawing treatments: uncentrifuged control (UDC), sperm washing (SW) and two colloid centrifugation procedures (Equipure, SLC-E, and Androcoll, SLC-A). Percentage of total and progressive motility (TM and PM), as well as sperm motility kinematics, distribution of motile sperm subpopulations, and recovery rates, were statistically compared among treatments. The SLC treatments showed higher (P < 0.001) TM and PM than UDC and SW. Following each SLC procedure, different percentages of the subpopulation with the most vigorous and progressive sperm (sP4) were obtained. SLC-A recovered a larger number of sperm belonging to sP4 than SLC-E, but not significantly higher than SW. From a practical point of view, sperm washing, the standard centrifugation procedure for equine semen processing, recovered the same amount of fast and progressive sperm as colloid centrifugation, apparently the best treatment according to traditional analysis. In conclusion, samples processed by SLC have higher motility percentages than SW and UDC but, after combining the available number of sperm, SLC and SW techniques are equally efficient in recovering sperm from the most vigorous, fast and progressive motile subpopulation (sP4).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7673585
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Colégio Brasileiro de Reprodução Animal - CBRA
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76735852020-11-20 Comparison of sperm selection techniques in donkeys: motile subpopulations from a practical point of view Ortiz, Isabel Dorado, Jesús Morrell, Jane M. Diaz-Jimenez, Maria Angeles Pereira, Blasa Consuegra, César Hidalgo, Manuel Anim Reprod Original Article The aim of this study was to compare the post-thaw distribution of motile sperm subpopulations, following simple or colloid centrifugation. A new analysis was used to evaluate the available number of sperm from each subpopulation after each centrifugation protocol. Frozen/thawed semen samples were divided into the following after-thawing treatments: uncentrifuged control (UDC), sperm washing (SW) and two colloid centrifugation procedures (Equipure, SLC-E, and Androcoll, SLC-A). Percentage of total and progressive motility (TM and PM), as well as sperm motility kinematics, distribution of motile sperm subpopulations, and recovery rates, were statistically compared among treatments. The SLC treatments showed higher (P < 0.001) TM and PM than UDC and SW. Following each SLC procedure, different percentages of the subpopulation with the most vigorous and progressive sperm (sP4) were obtained. SLC-A recovered a larger number of sperm belonging to sP4 than SLC-E, but not significantly higher than SW. From a practical point of view, sperm washing, the standard centrifugation procedure for equine semen processing, recovered the same amount of fast and progressive sperm as colloid centrifugation, apparently the best treatment according to traditional analysis. In conclusion, samples processed by SLC have higher motility percentages than SW and UDC but, after combining the available number of sperm, SLC and SW techniques are equally efficient in recovering sperm from the most vigorous, fast and progressive motile subpopulation (sP4). Colégio Brasileiro de Reprodução Animal - CBRA 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7673585/ /pubmed/33224288 http://dx.doi.org/10.21451/1984-3143-AR2018-0133 Text en Copyright © The Author(s). Published by CBRA. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0 license)
spellingShingle Original Article
Ortiz, Isabel
Dorado, Jesús
Morrell, Jane M.
Diaz-Jimenez, Maria Angeles
Pereira, Blasa
Consuegra, César
Hidalgo, Manuel
Comparison of sperm selection techniques in donkeys: motile subpopulations from a practical point of view
title Comparison of sperm selection techniques in donkeys: motile subpopulations from a practical point of view
title_full Comparison of sperm selection techniques in donkeys: motile subpopulations from a practical point of view
title_fullStr Comparison of sperm selection techniques in donkeys: motile subpopulations from a practical point of view
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of sperm selection techniques in donkeys: motile subpopulations from a practical point of view
title_short Comparison of sperm selection techniques in donkeys: motile subpopulations from a practical point of view
title_sort comparison of sperm selection techniques in donkeys: motile subpopulations from a practical point of view
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7673585/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33224288
http://dx.doi.org/10.21451/1984-3143-AR2018-0133
work_keys_str_mv AT ortizisabel comparisonofspermselectiontechniquesindonkeysmotilesubpopulationsfromapracticalpointofview
AT doradojesus comparisonofspermselectiontechniquesindonkeysmotilesubpopulationsfromapracticalpointofview
AT morrelljanem comparisonofspermselectiontechniquesindonkeysmotilesubpopulationsfromapracticalpointofview
AT diazjimenezmariaangeles comparisonofspermselectiontechniquesindonkeysmotilesubpopulationsfromapracticalpointofview
AT pereirablasa comparisonofspermselectiontechniquesindonkeysmotilesubpopulationsfromapracticalpointofview
AT consuegracesar comparisonofspermselectiontechniquesindonkeysmotilesubpopulationsfromapracticalpointofview
AT hidalgomanuel comparisonofspermselectiontechniquesindonkeysmotilesubpopulationsfromapracticalpointofview