Improvement of low grade ejaculates of Holstein Friesian crossbred bulls by different filtration techniques for cryopreservation

M BHAKAT; T K MOHANTY; A K GUPTA; R KUMAR; P R SHIVAHRE; M ABDULLAH

doi:10.56093/ijans.v86i1.54981

Authors

M BHAKAT ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
T K MOHANTY ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
A K GUPTA ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
R KUMAR ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
P R SHIVAHRE ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
M ABDULLAH ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v86i1.54981

Keywords:

Crossbred bulls, Holstein Friesian, Semen analyses, Semen quality

Abstract

To improve the quality of poor ejaculates, sephadex (FS) and sephadex with ion-exchangers (FS+IE) filtration were used to examine split samples of 18 ejaculates of 6 Karan Fries bulls at various stages of cryopreservation. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance. All semen quality traits improved in both the filtration and further superiority of FS+IE column was observed due to its better efficacy of trapping immotile, dead and abnormal spermatozoa as well as there was decrease in sperm concentration, tail and total abnormalities. The initial, prefreeze and post-thaw motility, viability, sperm cells with intact plasma membranes and sperms with normal acrosomes of FS+IE filtrates were significantly better than the nonfiltered and FS filtered semen samples during different stages of cryopreservation. Therefore, it can be concluded that better quality semen can be harvested from poor ejaculates through FS+IE and FS filtration to improve fertilization potential of the spermatozoa.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ahmad Z, Anzar M, Shahab M, Ahmad N and Andrabi S M H. 2003. Sephadex and sephadex ion-exchange filtration improves the quality and freezability of low grade buffalo semen ejaculates. Theriogenology 59: 1189–202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(02)01159-7

Anzar M, Graham E F and Iqbal N. 1997. Post-thaw plasma membrane integrity of bull spermatozoa separated with a sephadex ion exchange column. Theriogenology 47: 845– 56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(97)00040-X

Anzar M and Graham E F. 1993. Filtration of bovine semen. 2. factors affecting the recovery rate of spermatozoa. Animal Reproduction Science 31: 197–204. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4320(93)90004-B

Anzar M and Graham E F. 1996. Role of sperm motility and acrosome integrity in the filtration of bovine semen. Theriogenology 45: 513–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0093-691X(95)00387-N

Bhakat M, Mohanty T K, Gupta A K, Mohanty A K, Abdullah M. 2014. Effect of filtration of low grade ejaculates on semen quality parameters at refrigerated temperature (4–7°C). Advances in Animal and Veterinary Sciences 2 (11): 625–31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14737/journal.aavs/2014/2.11.625.631

Bussalleu E, Pinart E, Rivera M M, Briz M, Sancho S, Yeste M, Casas I, Fàbrega A, Rigau T, Rodriguez-Gil J E, Bonet S. 2009. Effects of matrix filtration of low-quality boar semen doses on sperm quality. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 44 (3): 499–503. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.2008.01221.x

Goyal R L, Tuli R K, Georgie G C and Chand D. 1996. Comparison of quality and freezability of water buffalo semen after washing or sephadex filtration. Theriogenology 46: 679– 86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0093-691X(96)00219-1

Januskauskas A, Lukoseviciute K, Nagy S, Johannisson A and Rodriguez-Martinez H. 2005. Assessment of the efficacy of Sephadex G-15 filtration of bovine spermatozoa for cryopreservation. Theriogenology 63: 160–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.04.002

Maurya V P and Tuli R K. 2003. Post thaw thermal resistance test on motility and acrosomal integrity of filtered and non- filtered frozen semen of Murrah buffalo bulls. Asian Australasian Journal of Animal Science 16 (10): 1424–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2003.1424

Mustafa G, Anzar M and Arslan M. 1998. Separation of motile spermatozoa from frozen-thawed buffalo semen: swim-up vs filtration procedures. Theriogenology 50: 205–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(98)00127-7

Vyas S, Mohan G, Dhami A J and Sahani K L. 1992. Effect of filtration through sephadex and glass wool on the quality and freezability of semen of crossbred bulls. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 62: 341–43.