[Althouse C.G. & Lu K.G. (2005): Bacteriospermia in extended porcine semen. Theriogenology, 63(2): 573-584.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.09.031]Search in Google Scholar
[Althouse G.C. (2008): Sanitary procedures for the production of extended semen. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 43: 374–378.10.1111/j.1439-0531.2008.01187.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Althouse G.C., Kuster C.E., Clark S.G., Weisiger R.M. (2000): Field investigations of bacterial contaminants and their effects on extended porcine semen. Theriogenology, 53: 1167–76.10.1016/S0093-691X(00)00261-2]Search in Google Scholar
[Blom E. (1950): A one-minute live-dead sperm stain by means of eosin-nigrosin. Fertility and Sterility, 1: 176-177.10.1016/S0015-0282(16)30125-X]Search in Google Scholar
[Bonet S., Briz M., Pinart E., Camps R., Fradera A. et al. (1995): Light microscopy characterization of sperm morphology. Microscopy and Analysis, 9: 29-31.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bresciani C., Morini G., Bettini R., Bigliardi E., Di Ianni F., Cabassi C.S., Sabbioni A., Parmigiani E. (2013): Reproductive efficiency of a new modified boar semen extender for liquid storage. Livestock Science, 157: 384–388.10.1016/j.livsci.2013.07.005]Search in Google Scholar
[Briz M. (1994): Microscopical analysis of the ejaculated sperm and the sperm epididymal maturation of Sus domesticus. PhD Thesis, Universitat de Girona.]Search in Google Scholar
[Briz M.D., Bonet S., Pinart B., Egozcue J., Camps R. (1995): Comparative study of boar sperm coming from the caput, corpus, and cauda regions of the epididymis. Journal of Andrology, 16(2): 175-188.10.1002/j.1939-4640.1995.tb01751.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Bryła M. & Trzcińska, M. (2015): Quality and fertilizing capacity of boar spermatozoa during liquid storage in extender supplemented with different antibiotics. Animal Reproduction Science, 163: 157–163.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2015.11.005]Search in Google Scholar
[Buxade C.C. (1984): Ganado Porcino: Sistemas de explotacion y tecnicas de produccion. Mundi-Prensa. Madrid, Spain.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cerolini S., Maldjian A., Surai P., Noble R. (2000): Viability, susceptibility to peroxidation and fatty acid composition of boar semen during liquid storage. Animal Reproduction Science, 58(1-2): 99-111.10.1016/S0378-4320(99)00035-4]Search in Google Scholar
[Dahmani Y., Ausejo R., Mendoza N., Yeregui J. (2015): Antibacterial efficiency of Dicol and reduction of antibiotics use in boar semen doses. Reproduction of Domestic Animals, 50 (Supplement 2): 126.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dias C.P., Castagna, C.D., Reis G.R., Simonetti R., Bortolozzo, F.P., Wentz I., Cardoso M. (2000): Grau de contaminação bacteriana no ejaculado de suínos submetidos a dois métodos de higienização e coleta. Arquivos da faculdade de veterinária UFRGS, 28: 32–40.]Search in Google Scholar
[Freking B.A., Purdy P.H., Spiller S.F., Welsh C.S., Blackburn H.D. (2012): Boar sperm quality in lines of pigs selected for either ovulation rate or uterine capacity. Journal of Animal Sciences, 90(8): 2515-2523.10.2527/jas.2011-4723]Search in Google Scholar
[Gadea J. (2003): Review: Semen extenders used in the artificial insemination of swine. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 1(2): 17-27.10.5424/sjar/2003012-17]Search in Google Scholar
[Gadea J., Selles E., Marco M.A. (2004): The predictive value of porcine seminal parameters on fertility outcome under commercial conditions. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 39(5): 303-308.10.1111/j.1439-0531.2004.00513.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Gogol P., Szczesniak-Fabianczyk B., Wierzchos-Hilczer A. (2009): The photon emission, ATP level and motility of boar spermatozoa during liquid storage. Reproductive Biology, 9(1): 39-49.10.1016/S1642-431X(12)60093-X]Search in Google Scholar
[Goldberg A.M.G., Argenti L.E., Faccin J.E., Linck L., Santi M., Bernardi M.L., Cardoso M.R.I., Wentz I., Bortolozzo F.P. (2013): Risk factors for bacterial contamination during boar semen collection, Research in Veterinary Science, 95: 362–367.10.1016/j.rvsc.2013.06.022]Search in Google Scholar
[Holt W., Watson P., Curry M., Holt C. (1994): Reproducibility of Computer-aided Semen Analysis: Comparison of Five Different Systems Used in a Practical Workshop. Fertiliy and Sterility, 62(6): 1277-1282.10.1016/S0015-0282(16)57201-X]Search in Google Scholar
[Huerta I., Dahmani Y., Ausejo R., Ubeda J.L. (2011): A new tool for control of bacterial contamination in boar semen. Spain. Allen D. Leman Swine Conference, pp. 288.]Search in Google Scholar
[Huo L.J., Ma X.H., Yang Z.M. (2002): Assesment of sperm viability, mitochondrial activity, capacitation and acrosome intactness in extended boar semen during long-term storage. Theriogenology, 58(7): 1349-1360.10.1016/S0093-691X(02)00953-6]Search in Google Scholar
[Jeyendran R.S., Van der Ven H.H., Perez-Pelaez M., Crabo B.G., Zaneveld L.J. (1984): Development of an assay to assess the functional integrity of the human sperm membrane and its relationship to other semen characteristics. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility, 70(1): 219-228.10.1530/jrf.0.0700219]Search in Google Scholar
[Johnson L.A., Weitze K.F., Fiser P., Maxwell W.M.C. (2000): Storage of boar semen. Animal Reproduction Science, 62(1-3): 143-172.10.1016/S0378-4320(00)00157-3]Search in Google Scholar
[Jotanović S. & Savić Đ. (2017): The Boar. 1st ed. Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina: University of Banja Luka, Faculty of Agriculture.]Search in Google Scholar
[Knox R.V. (2016): Artificial insemination in pigs today. Theriogenology, 85: 83-93.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2015.07.00926253434]Search in Google Scholar
[Kommisrud E., Paulenz H., Sehested E., Grevle I.S. (2002): Influence of boar and semen parameters on motility and acrosome integrity in liquid boar semen stored for five days. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, 43(1): 49-55.10.1186/1751-0147-43-49176418112071116]Search in Google Scholar
[Mapeka M.H., Lehloenya K.C., Nedambale T.L. (2012): Comparison of different extenders and storage temperature on the sperm motility characteristics of Kolbroek pig semen. South African Journal of Animal Science, 42(5): 530-534.10.4314/sajas.v42i5.18]Search in Google Scholar
[Maroto Martín L.O., Muñoz E.C., De Cupere F., Van Driessche E., Echemendia-Blanco D., Rodríguez J.M., Beeckmans S. (2010): Bacterial contamination of boar semen affects the litter size. Animal Reproduction Science, 120(1-4): 95-104.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2010.03.00820427136]Search in Google Scholar
[Martín L.O.M., Muñoz E.C., Cupere F., Driessche E.V., Echemendia-Blanco D., Rodríguez J.M.M., Beeckmans S., (2010): Bacterial contamination of boar semen affects the litter size. Animal Reproduction Science, 120: 95-104.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2010.03.008]Search in Google Scholar
[Paquignon M., Bussière J., Bariteau F. (1988): Efficacité des techniques de conservation de la semence de verrat. INRA Production Animales, 1(4): 271-280.10.20870/productions-animales.1988.1.4.4463]Search in Google Scholar
[Pezo F., Romero F., Zambrano F., Sánchez R. S. (2019): Preservation of boar semen: An update. Reproduction in domestic animals, 54(3): 423-434.10.1111/rda.1338930536928]Search in Google Scholar
[Rath D., Bathgate R., Rodriguez-Martinez H., Roca J., Strzezek J., Waberski D. (2009): Recent advances in boar sperm cryopreservation. Society of Reproduction and Fertility, Supplement, 66: 51-66.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sancho Badell S. (2002): Efectes del fotoperiode sobre la qualitat espermatica de mascles porcins Sus domesticus. PhD Thesis. Universitat de Girona.]Search in Google Scholar
[Santos P.M., Bennemann P.E., Rocha J.C., Reis G.M., Calderam K. (2018): Uso do Dicol® como ferramenta de reducao da contaminacao bacteriana do ejaculado suino: efeito sobre a motilidade espermatica de doses inseminates. PORKEXPO 2018 IX Forum Internacional de Suinocultura. Foz do Iguacu/PR, pp. 305-306.]Search in Google Scholar
[Schulze M., Ammon C., Rüdiger K., Jung M., Grobbel M. (2015): Analysis of hygienic critical control points in boar semen production. Theriogenology, 83: 430–437.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2014.10.00425459424]Search in Google Scholar
[Sone M. (1990): Investigations on the control of bacteria in boar semen. Japan Journal of Animal Reproduction, 36: 23-29.10.1262/jrd1977.36.23P]Search in Google Scholar
[Suwimonteeraburt J., Thuwanut P., Singlor J., Chatdarong K., Tummaruk P. (2011): Effect of collection extender (Dicol) on cold stored boar sperm viability and bacterial contamination. Thai Journal of Veterinary Medicine, 41: 173-174.]Search in Google Scholar
[Ubeda J.L., Ausejo R., Dahmani Y., Falceto M.V., Usan A., Malo C, et al. (2013): Adverse effects of members of the Enterobacteriaceae family on boar sperm quality. Theriogenology, 80:565–70.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2013.05.02223827823]Search in Google Scholar
[Vyt P., Maes D., Quinten C., Rijsselaere T., Deley W. Aarts M., de Kruif A., Van Soom A. (2008): Detailed motility evaluation of boar semen and its predictive value for reproductive performance in sows. Vlaams Diergeneeskundig Tijdschrift, 77: 291-298.10.21825/vdt.87221]Search in Google Scholar
[Waberski D., Weyand A., Seedorf J., Weitze, K.F. (2010): Hygiene measures in boar semen production. Acta Scientiae Veterinariae, 38 (Suppl. 1): 1–7.]Search in Google Scholar
[Waberski D., Riesenbeck A., Schulze M., Weitze K. F., Johnson L. (2019): Application of preserved boar semen for artificial insemination: past, present and future challenges. Theriogenology, 137: 2-7.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2019.05.03031186127]Search in Google Scholar
[Yeste M. (2017): State-of-the-art of boar sperm preservation in liquid and frozen state. Animal Reproduction, 14(1): 69–81.10.21451/1984-3143-AR895]Search in Google Scholar