Relationship between quality parameters and fertilizing ability of cryopreserved sexed bull sperm

Ahmed H., Andrabi S.M.H., Jahan S. (2016). Semen quality parameters as fertility predictors of water Buffalo bull spermatozoa during low-breeding season. Theriogenology, 86: 1516–1522.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2016.05.010 Search in Google Scholar

Al Naib A., Hanrahan J.P., Lonergan P., Fair S. (2011). In vitro assessment of sperm from bulls of high and low field fertility. Theriogenology, 76: 161–167.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.10.038 Search in Google Scholar

Alm K., Taponen J., Dahlbom M., Tuunainen E., Koskinen E., Andersson M.A. (2001). A novel automated fluorometric assay to evaluate sperm viability and fertility in dairy bulls. Theriogenology, 56: 677–684.10.1016/S0093-691X(01)00599-4 Search in Google Scholar

Bailey J. L., Bilodeau J. F., Cormier N. (2000). Semen cryopreservation in domestic animals, a damaging and capacitating phenomenon. J. Androl., 21: 1–7. Search in Google Scholar

Balao da Silva C.M., Ortega Ferrusola C., Morillo Rodriguez A., Gallardo Bolaños J.M., Plaza Dávila M., Morrell J.M., Rodriguez Martínez H., Tapia J.A., Aparicio I.M., Peña F.J. (2013). Sex sorting increases the permeability of the membrane of stallion spermatozoa. Anim. Reprod. Sci., 138: 241–251.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2013.02.021 Search in Google Scholar

Ballachey B.E., Hohenboken W.D., Evenson D.P. (1987). Heterogeneity of sperm nuclear chromatin structure and its relationship to bull fertility. Biol. Reprod., 36: 915–925.10.1095/biolreprod36.4.915 Search in Google Scholar

Bochenek M., Smorąg Z., Pilch J. (2001). Sperm chromatin structure assay of bulls qualified for artificial insemination. Theriogenology, 56: 557–567.10.1016/S0093-691X(01)00588-X Search in Google Scholar

Boe-Hansen G.B., Morris I.D., Ersboll A.K., Greve T., Christensen, P. (2005). DNA integrity in sexed bull sperm assessed by neutral comet assay and sperm chromatin structure assay. Theriogenology, 63: 1789–1802.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.08.004 Search in Google Scholar

Carvalho J.O., Sartoric R., Machadoa G.M., Mourãoc G.B., Dode M.A.N. (2010). Quality assessment of bovine cryo-preserved sperm after sexing by flow cytometry and their use in in vitro embryo production. Theriogenology, 74: 1521–1530.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.06.030 Search in Google Scholar

Chamberland A., Fournier V., Tardif S., Sirard M.A., Sullivan R., Bailey J.L. (2001). The effect of heparin on motility parameters and protein phosphorylation during bovine sperm capacitation. Theriogenology, 55: 823–835.10.1016/S0093-691X(01)00446-0 Search in Google Scholar

Christensen P., Labouriau R., Birck A., Boe-Hansen G.B., Pedersen J., Borchersen S. (2011). Relationship among seminal quality measures and field fertility of young dairy bulls using low-dose inseminations. J. Dairy Sci., 94: 1744–1754.10.3168/jds.2010-3087 Search in Google Scholar

DeJarnette J.M., McCleary C.R., Leach M.A., Moreno J.F., Nebel R.L., Marshall C.E. (2010). Effects of 2.1 and 3.5 × 10⁶ sex-sorted sperm dosages on conception rates of Holstein cows and heifers. J. Dairy Sci., 93: 4079–4085.10.3168/jds.2010-3181 Search in Google Scholar

DeJarnette J.M., Leach M.A., Nebel R.L., Marshall C.E., McCleary C.R., Moreno J.F. (2011). Effects of sex sorting and sperm dosage on conception rates in Holstein heifers. Is comparable fertility of sex-sorted and conventional semen plausible? J. Dairy Sci., 94: 3477–3483.10.3168/jds.2011-4214 Search in Google Scholar

Evenson D., Jost L. (2000). Sperm chromatin structure assay is useful for fertility assessment. Methods Cell Sci., 22: 169–189.10.1023/A:1009844109023 Search in Google Scholar

Farrell P.R., Presicce G.A., Brockett C.C., Foote R.H. (1998). Quantification of bull sperm characteristics measured by computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA) and the relationship to fertility. Theriogenology, 49: 871–879.10.1016/S0093-691X(98)00036-3 Search in Google Scholar

Frijters A.C., Mullaart E., Roelofs R.M., van Hoorne R.P., Moreno J.F., Moreno O., Merton J.S. (2009). What affects fertility of sexed bull semen more, low sperm dosage or the sorting process? Theriogenology, 71: 64–67.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.09.02519004486 Search in Google Scholar

Garner D.L. (2006). Flow cytometric sexing of mammalian sperm. Theriogenology, 65: 943–957.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2005.09.009 Search in Google Scholar

Gillan L., Kroetsch T., Chis Maxwell W.M., Evans G. (2008). Assessment of in vitro sperm characteristics in relation to fertility in dairy bulls. Anim. Reprod. Sci., 103: 201–214.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2006.12.010 Search in Google Scholar

Gogol P., Trzcińska M. (2020). Cell membrane integrity and sperm chromatin structure of sexed and unsexed bull semen (in Polish). Rocz. Nauk Zoot., 47: 235–244. Search in Google Scholar

Ho H.C., Suarez S.S. (2001). Hyperactivation of mammalian spermatozoa: function and regulation. Reproduction, 122: 519–526.10.1530/rep.0.1220519 Search in Google Scholar

Holden S.A., Fernandez-Fuertes B., Murphy C., Whelan H., O’Gorman A., Brennan L., Butler S.T., Lonergan P., Fair S. (2017). Relationship between in vitro sperm functional assessments, seminal plasma composition, and field fertility after AI with either non-sorted or sex-sorted bull semen. Theriogenology, 87: 221–228.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2016.08.024 Search in Google Scholar

Hollinshead F.K., O’brien J.K., Maxwell W.M.C., Evans G. (2004). Assessment of in vitro sperm characteristics after flow cytometric sorting of frozen-thawed bull spermatozoa. Theriogenology, 62: 958–968.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2003.12.030 Search in Google Scholar

Ishijima S., Baba S.A., Mohri H., Suarez S.S. (2002). Quantitative analysis of flagellar movement in hyperactivated and acrosome-reacted golden hamster spermatozoa. Mol. Reprod. Dev., 61: 376–384.10.1002/mrd.10017 Search in Google Scholar

Johnson L.A. (2000). Sexing mammalian sperm for production of offspring: the state of the art. Anim. Reprod. Sci., 60–61: 93–107.10.1016/S0378-4320(00)00088-9 Search in Google Scholar

Kumar P., Mohanty T.K., Kumaresan A., Nag P., Saraf K.K., Kumar V., Lathik S., Nayak S., Bhakat M. (2018). Incubation of spermatozoa with Anandamide prior to cryopreservation reduces cryocapacitation and improves post-thaw sperm quality in the water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis). Anim. Reprod. Sci., 189: 77–83.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2017.12.010 Search in Google Scholar

Lenz R.W., Gonzalez-Marin C., Gilligan T.B., DeJarnette J.M., Utt M.D., Helser L.A., Hasenpusch E., Evans K.M., Moreno J.F., Vishwanath R. (2016). SexedULTRA^TM, a new method of processing sex–sorted bovine sperm improves conception rates. Reprod. Fertil. Dev., 29: 203–204.10.1071/RDv29n1Ab190 Search in Google Scholar

Maicas C., Hutchinson I.A., Kenneally J., Grant J., Cromie A.R., Lonergan P., Butler S.T. (2019). Fertility of fresh and frozen sex-sorted semen in dairy cows and heifers in seasonal-calving pasture-based herds. J. Dairy Sci., 102: 10530–10542.10.3168/jds.2019-16740 Search in Google Scholar

Maicas C., Holden S.A., Drake E., Cromie A.R., Lonergan P., Butler S.T. (2020). Fertility of frozen sex-sorted sperm at 4 × 10⁶ sperm per dose in lactating dairy cows in seasonal-calving pasture-based herds. J. Dairy Sci., 103: 929–939.10.3168/jds.2019-17131 Search in Google Scholar

Mocé E., Graham J.K., Schenk J.L. (2006). Effect of sex-sorting on the ability of fresh and cryopreserved bull sperm to undergo an acrosome reaction. Theriogenology, 66: 929–936.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2006.01.063 Search in Google Scholar

Morrell J.M., Nongbua T., Valeanu S., Verde I.L., Lundstedt-Enkel K., Edman A., Johannisson A. (2017). Sperm quality variables as indicators of bull fertility may be breed dependent. Anim. Reprod. Sci., 185: 42–52.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2017.08.001 Search in Google Scholar

Oikawa K., Yamazaki T., Yamaguchi S., Abe H., Bai H., Takahashi M., Kawahara M. (2019). Effects of use of conventional and sexed semen on the conception rate in heifers: A comparison study. Theriogenology, 135: 33–37.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2019.06.012 Search in Google Scholar

Oliveira L.Z., de Arruda R.P., de Andrade A.F., Celeghini E.C., Reeb P.D., Martins J.P. (2013). Assessment of in vitro sperm characteristics and their importance in the prediction of conception rate in a bovine timed-AI program. Anim. Reprod. Sci., 137: 145–155.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2013.01.010 Search in Google Scholar

Phillips N., Mcgowan M., Johnston S., Mayer D. (2004). Relationship between thirty post-thaw spermatozoal characteristics and the field fertility of 11 high-use Australian dairy AI sires. Anim. Reprod. Sci., 81: 47–61.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2003.10.003 Search in Google Scholar

Rabidas S.K., Talukder A.K., Alam M.G.S., Bari F.Y. (2012). Relationship between semen quality parameters and field fertility of bulls. J. Emb. Trans., 27: 21–28. Search in Google Scholar

Reese S., Pirez M.C., Steele H., Kölle S. (2021). The reproductive success of bovine sperm after sex-sorting: a meta-analysis. Sci. Rep., 11: 17366.10.1038/s41598-021-96834-2 Search in Google Scholar

Rybak R., Faldikova L., Faldyna M., Machatkova M., Rubes J. (2004). Bull and boar sperm DNA integrity evaluated by sperm chromatin structure assay in the Czech Republic. Vet. Med. Czech, 49: 1–8.10.17221/5668-VETMED Search in Google Scholar

Sailer B.L., Jost L.K., Evenson D.P. (1996). Bull sperm head morphometry related to abnormal chromatin structure and fertility. Cytometry, 24: 167–173.10.1002/(SICI)1097-0320(19960601)24:2<167::AID-CYTO9>3.0.CO;2-G Search in Google Scholar

Schenk J.L., Cran D.G., Everestt R.W., Seidel G.E. Jr. (2009). Pregnancy rates in heifers and cows with cryopreserved sexed sperm: Effects of sperm numbers per inseminated, sorting pressure and sperm storage before sorting. Theriogenology, 71: 717–728.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.08.016 Search in Google Scholar

Seidel G.E. Jr. (2012). Sexing mammalian sperm – where do we go from here? J. Reprod. Dev., 58: 505–509.10.1262/jrd.2012-077 Search in Google Scholar

Seidel G.E. Jr. (2014). Update on sexed semen technology in cattle. Animal, 8 (Suppl. 1): 160–164.10.1017/S1751731114000202 Search in Google Scholar

Sellem E., Broekhuijse M.L.W.J., Chevrier L., Camugli S., Schmitt E., Schibler L., Koenen E.P.C. (2015). Use of combinations of in vitro quality assessments to predict fertility of bovine semen. Theriogenology, 84: 1447–1454.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2015.07.035 Search in Google Scholar

Singh V.K., Kumar R., Atreja S.K. (2014). Cryo-survival, cryo-capacitation and oxidative stress assessment of buffalo spermatozoa cryopreserved in new soya milk extender. Livest. Sci., 160: 214–218.10.1016/j.livsci.2013.12.013 Search in Google Scholar

Stauss C.R., Votta T.J., Suarez S.S. (1995). Sperm motility hyperactivation facilitates penetration of the hamster zona pellucida. Biol. Reprod., 53: 1280–1285.10.1095/biolreprod53.6.1280 Search in Google Scholar

Suh T.K., Schenk J.L., Seidel G.E. Jr. (2005). High pressure flow cytometric sorting damages sperm. Theriogenology, 64: 1035–1048.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2005.02.002 Search in Google Scholar

Szczęśniak-Fabiańczyk B., Gogol P., Gajda L., Smorąg Z. (2021). Application of high hydrostatic pressure (HHP) to improve cryopreservation of young bull semen. Ann. Anim. Sci., 21: 1367–1375.10.2478/aoas-2021-0059 Search in Google Scholar

Trzcińska M., Bryła M., Gajda B., Gogol P. (2015). Fertility of boar semen cryopreserved in extender supplemented with butylated hydroxytoluene. Theriogenology, 83: 307–313.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2014.07.045 Search in Google Scholar

Turner R.M. (2003). Tales from the tail: what do we really know about sperm motility? J. Androl., 24: 790–803.10.1002/j.1939-4640.2003.tb03123.x Search in Google Scholar

Vishwanath R., Moreno J. F. (2018). Review: Semen sexing – current state of the art with emphasis on bovine species. Animal, 12: 85–96.10.1017/S1751731118000496 Search in Google Scholar

Ward F., Rizos D., Corridan D., Quinn K., Boland M., Lonergan P. (2001). Paternal influence on the time of first embryonic cleavage post insemination and the implications for subsequent bovine embryo development in vitro and fertility in vivo. Mol. Reprod. Dev., 60: 47–55.10.1002/mrd.1060 Search in Google Scholar