[Banaszewska D., Kondrcki S. (2012). An assessment of the breeding maturity insemination boars based on ejaculate quality changes. Folia Biol.-Krakow, 60: 151–162.]Search in Google Scholar
[Blom E. (1981). The morphological estimation of the spermatozoa defects of bull II. The proposal of new classification of spermatozoa defects (in Polish). Med. Weter., 37: 239–242.]Search in Google Scholar
[Chamberlain T.S., Hughes P.E. (1996). The influence of mating frequency and nutrition on the stimulus value of boars. Anim. Reprod. Sci., 43: 151–160.]Search in Google Scholar
[Ciereszko A., Ottobre J.S., Glogowski J. (2000). Effects of season and breed on sperm acrosin activity and semen quality of boars. Anim. Reprod. Sci., 64: 89–96.]Search in Google Scholar
[Czarnecki R., R ó ż ycki M., Udała J., Kawê cka M., Kamyczek M., Pietruszka A., Delikator B. (1999). The growth rate, meatiness value and reproductive performance of young Duroc boars and their hybrids with the Pietrain breed. Ann. Anim. Sci. Suppl., 3: 105–110.]Search in Google Scholar
[Estienne M.J., Harper A.F. (2000). PGF2. facilitates the training of sexually active boars for semen collection. Theriogenology, 4: 1087–1092.]Search in Google Scholar
[Estienne M.J., Harper A.F. (2004). Semen characteristics and libido in boars treated repeatedly with PGF2. J. Anim. Sci., 82: 1494–1498.]Search in Google Scholar
[Estienne M.J., Harper A.F., Knight J.W., Barb C.R., Pampace k G.B. (2004). Sexual behavior after treatment with prostaglandin-F2. in boars with suppressed concentrantions of gonadal steroids. App. Anim. Behav. Sci., 89: 53–57.]Search in Google Scholar
[Frydrychova S., Opleta l L., Macá ková K., Luyková A., Rozkot M., Lipen - ský J. (2011). Effects of herbal preparation on libido and semen quality in boars. Reprod. Dom.10.1111/j.1439-0531.2010.01703.x21092065]Search in Google Scholar
[Anim., 46: 573–578.]Search in Google Scholar
[Galina C.S., Horn M.M., Molina R. (2007). Reproductive behaviour in bulls raised under tropical and subtropical conditions. Horm. Behav., 52: 26–31.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hemsworth P.H., Tilbrook A.J. (2007). Sexual behavior of male pigs. Horm. Behav., 52: 39–44.]Search in Google Scholar
[Horn M.M., Moraes J.C.F., Jaume C.M., Edelweiss M.I.A., Ros ado A. (2005). Reproductive deficiency in bulls from synthetic breeds according to the type of crossbreed and the morphology of the Y chromosome. Genet. Mol. Biol., 28: 225–229.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kawê cka M., Pietruszka A., Jacyno E., Czarnecki R., Kamyczek M. (2008). Quality of semen of young boars of the breeds Pietrain and Duroc and their reciprocal crosses. Arch. Tierz., 51: 42–54.]Search in Google Scholar
[Knecht D., ś rodoñ S., Szulc K., Duziñ ski K. (2013). The effect of photoperiod on selected parameters of boar semen. Livest. Sci., 157: 364–371.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kondracki S., Iwanina M., Wysokiñ ska A., Huszno M. (2012). Comparative analysis of Duroc and Pietrain boar sperm morphology. Acta Vet. Brno, 81: 195–199.]Search in Google Scholar
[Levis D.G., Ford J.J., Christensen R.K. (1997). An evaluation of three methods for assessing sexual behaviours in boars. J. Anim. Sci., 75: 348–355.]Search in Google Scholar
[Levis D.G., Reicks D.L. (2005). Assessment of sexual behavior and effect of semen collection pen design and sexual stimulation of boars on behavior and sperm output – a review. Theriogenology, 63: 630–642.]Search in Google Scholar
[Okere Ch., Joseph A., Ezekwe M. (2005). Seasonal and genotype variations in libido, semen production and quality in artificial insemination boars. J. Anim. Vet. Adv., 4: 885–888.]Search in Google Scholar
[Petherick J.C. (2005). A review of some factors affecting the expression of libido in beef cattle, and individual bull and herd fertility. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 90: 185–205.]Search in Google Scholar
[Pound N., Javed M.H., Ruberto C., Anis Shaikh M., Del Valle A.P. (2002). Duration of sexual arousal predicts semen parameters for masturbatory ejaculates. Physiol. Behav., 76: 685–689.]Search in Google Scholar
[Quririno C.R., Bergmann J.A.G., Vale Filho V.R., Andrade V.J., Reis S.R., Men - donca R.M., Fonseca C.G. (2004). Genetic parameters of libido in Brazilian Nellore bulls. Theriogenology, 62: 1–7.]Search in Google Scholar
[Ren D., Xing Y., Lin M., Wu Y., Li K., Li W., Yang S., Guo T., Ren J., Ma J., Lan L., Huang L. (2009). Evaluations of boar gonad development, spermatogenesis with regard to semen characteristics, libido and serum testosterone levels based on Large White Duroc × Chinese Erhualian crossbred boars. Reprod. Dom. Anim., 44: 913–919.]Search in Google Scholar
[Smital J., De Sousa L.L., Mohnsen A. (2004). Differences among breeds and manifestation of heterosis in AI boar sperm output. Anim. Reprod. Sci., 80: 121–130.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sonderman J.P., Luebbe J.J. (2008). Semen production and fertility issues related to differences in genetic lines of boars. Theriogenology, 70: 1380–1383.]Search in Google Scholar
[Williams S. (2009). Assessment of the boar reproductive efficiency: Physiology and implications. Rev. Bras. Reprod. Anim. Belo Horizonte, 6: 194–198.]Search in Google Scholar
[Wolf J., Smital J. (2009). Quantification of factors affecting semen traits in artificial insemination boars from animal model analyses. J. Anim. Sci., 87: 1620–1627.]Search in Google Scholar
[Wysokiñ ska A., Kondracki S., Banaszewska D. (2006). Application of spermiogram classification in the evaluation of the semen morphology of Duroc× Pietrain crossbreds and purebred Duroc and Pietrain. Anim. Sci. Pap. Rep., 24: 319–325.]Search in Google Scholar
[Wy sokiñ ska A., Kondracki S., Kowalewski D., Adamiak A., Muczyñ ska E. (2009). Effect of seasonal factors on the ejaculate properties of crossbred Duroc× Pietrain and Pietrain × Duroc boars as well as purebred Duroc and Pietrain boars. Bull. Vet. Inst. Pulawy, 53: 677–685.]Search in Google Scholar
[Xing Y., Ren J., Ren D., Guo Y., Wu Y., Yang G., Mao H., Brenig B., Huang L. (2009). A whole genome scanning for quantitative trait loci on traits related to sperm quality and ejaculation in pigs. Anim. Reprod. Sci., 114: 210–218.]Search in Google Scholar
