Breeding soundness evaluation in crossbred bulls: Can testicular measurements be used as a tool to predict ejaculate quality?

B T VIJETHA; S K RAJAK; S S LAYEK; A KUMARESAN; T K MOHANTY; A K CHAKRAVARTY; A K GUPTA; MUHAMMAD ASLAM M K; A MANIMARAN; SHIV PRASAD

doi:10.56093/ijans.v84i2.37848

Authors

B T VIJETHA National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
S K RAJAK National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
S S LAYEK National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
A KUMARESAN National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
T K MOHANTY National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
A K CHAKRAVARTY National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
A K GUPTA National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
MUHAMMAD ASLAM M K National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
A MANIMARAN National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
SHIV PRASAD National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v84i2.37848

Keywords:

Crossbred bulls, Ejaculate rejection rate, Scrotal circumference, Semen quality

Abstract

The present study analyzed the relationship between testicular biometry and initial semen quality in Karan Fries (KF) crossbred bulls. Data on semen production traits of KF bulls (n=32) spread over a period of 3 years were analyzed to find out the ejaculate rejection rate (ERR). The scrotal circumference (SC), testicular length (TL) and testicular width (TW) were measured once in a month and 16 ejaculates were collected from bulls (n=24). The relationship between different testicular measurements and the ejaculate quality was studied. To study if the testicular biometry parameters differ between good and poor semen producing bulls, based on the semen evaluation, the bulls were ranked into good and poor. Our study revealed that ERR in KF bulls varied from 23.02 to 100%, with the average of 52.46%. The SC was significantly negatively correlated (–0.459) with ERR. Between good and poor bulls, there was no difference in SC, TL and TW, however, testicular mass (TM) and testicular volume (TV) differed significantly. From the results of the study, it may be inferred that that SC had a positive relationship with initial semen quality, but combination of SC, TL, TW, TV and TM may yield superior results for the selection of crossbred bulls.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ahmad E, Ahmad N, Naseer Z, Aleem M, Khan M S, Ashiq M and Younis M. 2011. Relationship of age to body weight, scrotal circumference, testicular ultrasonograms, and semen quality in Sahiwal bulls. Tropical Animal Health and Production 43 (1): 159–64

Bailey T L, Monke D, Hudson R S, Wolfe D F, Carson R L and Riddell M G. 1996. Testicular shape and its relationship tp sperm production in marure Holstein bulls. Theriogenology 46: 881– 87.

Ball L, Ott R S, Mortimer R G, Simons J C. 1983. Manual for breeding soundness examination of bulls. Journal of the Society for Theriogenology 12: 1–65.

Campbell R C, Dott H M and Glover T D. 1956. Nigrosin-eosin as a stain for differentiating live and dead spermatozoa. Journal of Agricultural Science 48: 1–8.

Castro V M, Vale F and Reis S R. 1991. Relationship of scrotal circumference with body weight and sperm abnormalities (major and total) in Nellore bulls, aged 10–31 months. Anals IX Congresso Brasileiro de Reprodução Animal, Belo Horizonte, Brazil 2: 427.

Chenoweth P J, Spitzer J C, and Hopkins F M. 1992. A new bull breeding soundness evaluation form. Proceedings of Society for Theriogenology. pp. 63–70. Hastings, NE.

Coulter G H. 1991. Scrotal circumeference - a review. Proceedings of Society for Theriogenology. 4: 113–16.

Devkota B, Koseki T, Matsui M, Sasaki M, Kaneko E, Miyamoto A, Montoya C A and Miyake Y. 2008. Relationships Among Age, Body Weight, Scrotal Circumference, Semen Quality and Peripheral Testosterone and estradiol concentrations in pubertal and postpubertal Holstein Bulls. The Journal of Veterinary Medical Science 70(1): 119–21.

Jeyendran R S, Van der Ven H H, Perez Pelaez M, Crabo B G and Zaneveld L J D. 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: 219–28.

Kumaresan A, Muhammad Aslam M K, Rajak S K, Vijetha B T, Tripathi U K and Mohanty T K. 2012. Advances in fertility prediction and strategies for production of quality breeding bulls. Proceedings National Symposium on Addressing Animal Reproductive Stresses Through Biotechnological Tools. 28th annual convention of the Indian society for study of animal reproduction. November 21–23, 2012, Guwahati.

Mathur A K, Tyagi S, Mukherjee S and Singh S P. 2002. Semen quality attributes in Frieswal bulls. The Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 72: 59–60

Mohanty D N, Dugwekar Y G and Biswas R K. 1991. Testicular measurements of Holstein-Friesian bulls as an indicator of reproductive performances. Orissa Veterinary Journal 16: 17– 23.

Mukhopadhyay C S, Gupta A K, Yadav B R, Khate K, Raina V S, Mohanty T K and Dubey P P. 2010. Subfertility in males: an important cause of bull disposal in bovines. Asian - Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 23: 450–55.

Salisbury G W, Van Denmark N L and Lodge J R. 1985. Physiology of Reproduction and Artificial Insemination of cattle. 2nd edn. CBS Publications and Distributors, New Delhi, India.

Sudheer S and Xavier C J. 2000. Disposal pattern of breeding bulls in Kerala. The Indian Journal of Animal Reproduction 211: 72– 73.

Tyagi S, Mathur A K and Agarwal S C. 2000. Semen production performance of Frieswal bulls. The Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 70: 1032–34.