Effect of insemination-related factors on pregnancy rate using sexed semen in Holstein heifers
J. Kurykin, T. Hallap, M. Jalakas, P. Padrik, T. Kaart, A. Johannisson, Ü. Jaakmahttps://doi.org/10.17221/12/2016-CJASCitation:Kurykin J., Hallap T., Jalakas M., Padrik P., Kaart T., Johannisson A., Jaakma Ü. (2016): Effect of insemination-related factors on pregnancy rate using sexed semen in Holstein heifers. Czech J. Anim. Sci., 61: 568-577.
The objectives were to determine the effects of insemination with sexed semen at spontaneous and induced estrus, fixed-time insemination at synchronized estrus, the deposition site, estrous intensity, housing, age, body weight, and bull on the pregnancy rate in Holstein heifers, and to compare the quality traits of sexed sperm with those of unsexed semen. The study was conducted on 3206 heifers, housed in three free-stall barns and in four tie-stall facilities. After synchronization by two prostaglandin F2α (PGF2α) treatments 14 days apart, 281 heifers were inseminated conventionally and 118 intracornually with sexed semen, and 532 and 148 heifers, respectively, with unsexed semen 80–82 h after the second treatment. At spontaneous estrus, 1129 heifers were inseminated with sexed and 529 with unsexed semen, and at estrus induced by a single PGF2α treatment 185 heifers were inseminated with sexed and 284 with unsexed semen. Heifers were inseminated conventionally with sexed semen 12 h after detection of estrus, and with unsexed semen according to the a.m.–p.m rule. Sexed and unsexed semen doses from five bulls were evaluated for motility, morphology, membrane integrity, and chromatin stability. Overall pregnancy rate with sexed semen (41.7%) was 80.8% of that with unsexed semen (51.6%) and was lower than with unsexed semen irrespective of the type and intensity of estrus, and deposition site. Insemination at spontaneous estrus resulted in a higher pregnancy rate (53.4%) than at induced (41.9%) or synchronized (44.7%) estrus. Pregnancy rates did not differ after intracornual (44.9%) or conventional insemination (48.4%). Strong estrus resulted in higher pregnancy rate (by 14.4% points) compared to weak estrus. The type of housing, age, and weight of heifers had no effect irrespective of the type of semen. The total, progressive and linear motility, and membrane integrity were lower and proportions of immotile sperm greater, for sexed than for unsexed semen.Keywords:
Holstein; sex-sorted semen; estrus; sperm quality; intracornual insemination; fertilityReferences:
Abdel-Azim G. (2010): Effect of synchronization and semen sorting on artificial insemination bull fertility. Journal of Dairy Science, 93, 420-425 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2342An L, Wu Z-H, Wu Y-F, Zhang X-L, Liu X, Zhu Y-B, Cheng W-M, Gao H-M, Guo M, Tian J-H (2010): Fertility in Single-ovulating and Superovulated Dairy Heifers after Insemination with Low Dose Sex-sorted Sperm. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 45, e344-e350 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.2009.01574.xBlondin P., Beaulieu M., Fournier V., Morin N., Crawford L., Madan P., King W.A. (2009): Analysis of bovine sexed sperm for IVF from sorting to the embryo. Theriogenology, 71, 30-38 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.09.017Bodmer M., Janett F., Hässig M., Daas N. den, Reichert P., Thun R. (2005): Fertility in heifers and cows after low dose insemination with sex-sorted and non-sorted sperm under field conditions. Theriogenology, 64, 1647-1655 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2005.04.011Boe-Hansen Gry B., Morris Ian D., Ersbøll Annette K., Greve Torben, Christensen Preben (2005): DNA integrity in sexed bull sperm assessed by neutral Comet assay and sperm chromatin structure assay. Theriogenology, 63, 1789-1802 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.08.004Brickell J.S., Bourne N., McGowan M.M., Wathes D.C. (2009): Effect of growth and development during the rearing period on the subsequent fertility of nulliparous Holstein-Friesian heifers. Theriogenology, 72, 408-416 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2009.03.015Bucci D., Galeati G., Tamanini C., Vallorani C., Rodriguez-Gil J.E., Spinaci M. (2012): Effect of sex sorting on CTC staining, actin cytoskeleton and tyrosine phosphorylation in bull and boar spermatozoa. Theriogenology, 77, 1206-1216 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2011.10.028Carvalho J.O., Sartori R., Machado G.M., Mourão G.B., Dode M.A.N. (2010): Quality assessment of bovine cryopreserved sperm after sexing by flow cytometry and their use in in vitro embryo production. Theriogenology, 74, 1521-1530 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.06.030Cerchiaro I., Cassandro M., Dal Zotto R., Carnier P., Gallo L. (2007): A Field Study on Fertility and Purity of Sex-Sorted Cattle Sperm. Journal of Dairy Science, 90, 2538-2542 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2006-694Chatterjee Suvro, Gagnon Claude (2001): Production of reactive oxygen species by spermatozoa undergoing cooling, freezing, and thawing. Molecular Reproduction and Development, 59, 451-458 https://doi.org/10.1002/mrd.1052Christensen 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. Journal of Dairy Science, 94, 1744-1754 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2010-3087de Graaf S.P., Beilby K.H., Underwood S.L., Evans G., Maxwell W.M.C. (2009): Sperm sexing in sheep and cattle: The exception and the rule. Theriogenology, 71, 89-97 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.09.014DeJarnette 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. Journal of Dairy Science, 93, 4079-4085 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2010-3181DeJarnette J.M., Leach M.A., Nebel R.L., Marshall C.E., McCleary C.R., Moreno J.F. (2011): Effect of sex-sorting and sperm dosage on conception rates of Holstein heifers: Is comparable fertility of sex-sorted and conventional semen plausible? Journal of Dairy Science, 94, 3477–3483.Donovan G.Arthur, Bennett Fred L., Springer Frederick S. (2003): Factors associated with first service conception in artificially inseminated nulliparous Holstein heifers. Theriogenology, 60, 67-75 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(02)01296-7Dorsey B.R., Kasimanickam R., Whittier W.D., Nebel R.L., Wahlberg M.L., Hall J.B. (2011): Effect of time from estrus to AI on pregnancy rates in estrous synchronized beef heifers. Animal Reproduction Science, 127, 1-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2011.07.014Enciso M., Cisale H., Johnston S.D., Sarasa J., Fernández J.L., Gosálvez J. (2011): Major morphological sperm abnormalities in the bull are related to sperm DNA damage. Theriogenology, 76, 23-32 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.12.034Evenson D., Darzynkiewicz Z, Melamed M. (1980): Relation of mammalian sperm chromatin heterogeneity to fertility. Science, 210, 1131-1133 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7444440Frijters A.C.J., Mullaart E., Roelofs R.M.J., 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.Garner Duane L. (2006): Flow cytometric sexing of mammalian sperm. Theriogenology, 65, 943-957 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2005.09.009Gosálvez J., Ramirez M.A., López-Fernández C., Crespo F., Evans K.M., Kjelland M.E., Moreno J.F. (2011): Sex-sorted bovine spermatozoa and DNA damage: I. Static features. Theriogenology, 75, 197-205 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.08.006Hallap Triin, Nagy Szabolcs, Håård Margareta, Jaakma Ülle, Johannisson Anders, Rodriguez-Martinez Heriberto (2005): Sperm chromatin stability in frozen-thawed semen is maintained over age in AI bulls. Theriogenology, 63, 1752-1763 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.08.001Hunter R.H.F., Greve T. (1998): Deep uterine insemination in cattle: A fruitful way forward with small numbers of spermatozoa. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, 39, 149–163.Kaimio I., Mikkola M., Lindeberg H., Heikkinen J., Hasler J.F., Taponen J. (2013): Embryo production with sex-sorted semen in superovulated dairy heifers and cows. Theriogenology, 80, 950-954 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2013.07.025Mallory D.A., Lock S.L., Woods D.C., Poock S.E., Patterson D.J. (2013): Hot topic: Comparison of sex-sorted and conventional semen within a fixed-time artificial insemination protocol designed for dairy heifers. Journal of Dairy Science, 96, 854-856 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2012-5850Mannella C.A. (2000): Introduction: our changing views of mitochondria. Journal of Bioenergetics and Biomembranes, 32, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005562109678Maxwell WM, Welch GR, Johnson LA (1996): Viability and membrane integrity of spermatozoa after dilution and flow cytometric sorting in the presence or absence of seminal plasma. Reproduction, Fertility and Development, 8, 1165- https://doi.org/10.1071/RD9961165Mocé Eva, Graham James K., Schenk John L. (2006): Effect of sex-sorting on the ability of fresh and cryopreserved bull sperm to undergo an acrosome reaction. Theriogenology, 66, 929-936 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2006.01.063Mortimer S.T. (2000): CASA – practical aspects. Journal of Andrology, 21, 515–524.Peippo J., Vartia K., Kananen-Anttila K., Räty M., Korhonen K., Hurme T., Myllymäki H., Sairanen A., Mäki-Tanila A. (2009): Embryo production from superovulated Holstein-Friesian dairy heifers and cows after insemination with frozen-thawed sex-sorted X spermatozoa or unsorted semen. Animal Reproduction Science, 111, 80-92 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2008.02.002Sá Filho M.F., Ayres H., Ferreira R.M., Nichi M., Fosado M., Campos Filho E.P., Baruselli P.S. (2010): Strategies to improve pregnancy per insemination using sex-sorted semen in dairy heifers detected in estrus. Theriogenology, 74, 1636-1642 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.06.036Sartory R., Souza A.H., Guenther J.N., Caraviello D.Z., Geiger L.N., Schenk J.L., Wiltbank M.C. (2004): Fertilization rate and embryo quality in superovulated Holstein heifers artificially inseminated with X-sorted or unsorted sperm. Animal Reproduction, 1, 86–90.Saumande J., Humblot P. (2005): The variability in the interval between estrus and ovulation in cattle and its determinants. Animal Reproduction Science, 85, 171-182 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2003.09.009Savio J. D., Thatcher W. W., Badinga L., de la Sota R. L., Wolfenson D. (1993): Regulation of dominant follicle turnover during the oestrous cycle in cows. Reproduction, 97, 197-203 https://doi.org/10.1530/jrf.0.0970197Schenk J.L., Cran D.G., Everett R.W., Seidel G.E. (2009): Pregnancy rates in heifers and cows with cryopreserved sexed sperm: Effects of sperm numbers per inseminate, sorting pressure and sperm storage before sorting. Theriogenology, 71, 717-728 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.08.016Schopper D., Schemer R., Und U. Weiler, Claw R. (1993): Einfluß der Milchleistung auf Fruchtbarkeitskriterien der Milchkuh post partum: Auswertung von Progesteronprofilen. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 28, 225-235 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.1993.tb00131.xSeidel G.E., Schenk J.L. (2008): Pregnancy rates in cattle with cryopreserved sexed sperm: Effects of sperm numbers per inseminate and site of sperm deposition. Animal Reproduction Science, 105, 129-138 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2007.11.015Seidel G.E., Schenk J.L., Herickhoff L.A., Doyle S.P., Brink Z., Green R.D., Cran D.G. (1999): Insemination of heifers with sexed sperm. Theriogenology, 52, 1407-1420 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(99)00226-5Smith L. C. (1993): Membrane and intracellular effects of ultraviolet irradiation with Hoechst 33342 on bovine secondary oocytes matured in vitro. Reproduction, 99, 39-44 https://doi.org/10.1530/jrf.0.0990039Suarez S. S. (2008): Control of hyperactivation in sperm. Human Reproduction Update, 14, 647-657 https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmn029Yoshida C, Nakao T (2005): Some Characteristics of Primary and Secondary Oestrous Signs in High-producing Dairy Cows. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 40, 150-155 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.2005.00572.x