Browse > Article

Effects of Bacterial Contamination of Extended Boar Semen Preservation Periods on Embryo Production In Vitro  

Kim, Y.S. (Department of Animal Resources Technology, Jinju National University)
Lee, H.T. (Department of Animal Resources Technology, Jinju National University)
Kim, I.C. (Swine Science Division, NLRI, RDA)
Ryu, J.W. (Swine Science Division, NLRI, RDA)
Kim, C.W. (Department of Animal Resources Technology, Jinju National University)
Chung, K.H. (Department of Animal Resources Technology, Jinju National University)
Publication Information
Journal of Embryo Transfer / v.21, no.4, 2006 , pp. 345-351 More about this Journal
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of preservation period of porcine liquid semen on bacterial contamination and in vitro production of embryo. Extended liquid semen was prepared by three mixture of boar's ejaculates from each farm without antibiotics, and were kept in $17^{\circ}C$ semen preservation incubator until use. Sperm motility was significantly (p<0.05) decreased as semen preservation time goes by (78.7$\pm$2.4% for 1 day vs. 71.1$\pm$2.4 and 64.8$\pm$2.4% for 3 and 5 days of presentation, respectively). Quantitative of bacteria in semen was significantly (p<0.05) higher in 5 days ($57.8\pm105.2\times10^4$ Cfu) compared to 0 and 3 days ($32.1\pm76.8\times10^4$ and $26.9\pm46.6\times10^4$ Cfu, respectively) of preservation. In terms of development of in vitro fertilization of porcine embryos inseminated by preserved semen, the rate of normal fertilization (2PN) was significantly (p<0.05) decreased in 5 days (56.0$\pm$2.6%) compared to 1 and 3 days (66.0$\pm$2.7 and 64.0$\pm$2.7%, respectively) of preservation. Cleavage rate was also significantly (p<0.05) affected by preservation period (75.0$\pm$4% for 1 day, 70.0$\pm$0.3 and 71.0$\pm$0.3% for 3 and 5 days, respectively). The in vitro developmental rate of blastocyst stage embryo was significantly (p<0.05) affected by semen preservation period (15.0$\pm$1.0% for 1 day vs. 11.0$\pm$0.9 and 8.0$\pm$0.9% for 3 and 5 days, respectively). It is concluded that more than 3 days of liquid semen preservation without antibiotics increased the quantity of bacteria resulted in detrimental effect on sperm motility and decreased both normal insemination rate and the developmental rate of blastocyst stage embryo.
Keywords
boar semen; bacterial contamination; semen quality; sperm motility; embryo development;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Althouse GC. 1999. Origines y efectos de la contaminacion microbiologica en el semen porcino conservado. In: Proceedings of the VI symposium on Int de Reprod E I.A. Porcina, pp. 7-13
2 Dagnall GJR. 1986. An investigation of the bacterial flora of the preputial diverticulum and of the semen of boars. M.Ph. thesis, Royal Veterinary College, Hertfordshire
3 Gadea J, Matas C and Lucas X. 1998. Prediction of porcine semen fertility by homologous in vitro penetration (hIVP) assay. Anim. Reprod. Sci., 54:95-108   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Kohn FM, Erdmann I, Oeda T, Mulla KF, Schiefer HG and Schill WB. 1998. Influence of urogenital infections on sperm functions. Andrologia, 30: 73-80
5 Sone M. 1990. Investigation on the control of bacteria in boar semen. Jpn. J. Anim. Reprod., 36: 23-29   DOI
6 Zhang BR, Larsson B, Lundeheim N and Rodriguez-Martinez H. 1997. Relationship between embryo development in vitro and 56-day non-return rates of cows inseminated with frozenthawed semen from dairy bulls. Theriogenology, 48:221-231   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Danowski KM. 1989. Qualitative and quantitative investigation of the germ content in boar semen and the antibiotic sensitivity of the prevailing germ spectrum. Dr Med Vet Inaugural Dissertation, Tierarztliche Hochschule, Hannover
8 Monga M and Roberts JA. 1994. Spermagglutination by bacteria: receptor-specific interactions. J. Androl., 15:151-156
9 Sone M 1982. Effects of various antibiotics on the control of bacteria in boar semen. Vet. Rec., 111 :11-14   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Dahlberg B. 1990. Asthenozoospermia/teratozoospermia and infertility. Arch. Androl., 25:85-87   DOI
11 Larson KL, DeJonge CJ, Barnes AM, Jost LK and Evenson DP. 2000. Sperm chromatin structure assay parameters as predictors of failed pregnancy following assisted reproductive techniques. Hum. Reprod., 15:1717-1722   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Tamuli MK, Sharma DK and Rajkonwar CK. 1984. Studies on the microbial flora of boar semen. Indian Vet. J., 61:858-861
13 유재원. 2005. 종모돈에 있어서 수태율과 정자 기능 및 염색질 구조 분석법 간의 상관관계에 관한 연구. 중앙대학교 대학원 박사학위 논문
14 Althouse GC, Kuster CE and Clark SG. 1998. Contaminant growth of spermicidal bacteria in extended porcine semen. In: Proceedins of the 15th International Pig Veterinary Society Congress, 2:37 (abstr.)
15 Althouse GC, Kuster CE, Clark SG and Weisiger RM. 2000. Field investigations of bacterial contaminants and their effects on extended porcine semen. Theriogenology, 53: 1167-1176   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Hammitt DG, Martin PA and Callanan T. 1989. Correlations between heterospermic fertility and assays of porcine seminal quality before and after cryopreservation. Theriogenology, 32:385-399   DOI   ScienceOn