Interbreed differences in Bovine semen quality characteristics before and after cryopreservation

Authors

  • Sara Ataei-Nazari Institute of Biotechnology, Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, Tr. A. Hlinku 2 – 94976 - Nitra, Slovakia
  • Filip Benko Institute of Biotechnology, Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, Tr. A. Hlinku 2 – 94976 - Nitra, Slovakia
  • Michal Ďuračka AgroBioTech Research Centre, Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, Tr. A. Hlinku 2 – 94976 - Nitra, Slovakia
  • Peter Ivanič Slovak Biological Services a.s., Breeding station in Lužianky - 951 41 - Lužianky, Slovakia
  • Eva Tvrdá 1.Institute of Biotechnology, Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, Tr. A. Hlinku 2 – 94976 - Nitra, Slovakia; 2. Chair of Animal Breeding and Biotechnology, Institute of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 62 – 51006 - Tartu, Estonia

Keywords:

Bovine semen, Cryo-resistance, Interbreeds differences, Quality characteristics.

Abstract

The current experiment was conducted to evaluate the semen parameters in Holstein, Simmental and Limousin breeds before and after cryopreservation. Semen was collected from 5 bulls from each breed. The computer-assisted sperm analysis was used to evaluate the motility parameters including total and progressive motilities and secondary kinematic parameters including path velocity, linear velocity, curvilinear velocity, lateral amplitude of head displacement, beat cross frequency, straightness and linearity in fresh and post-thawing semen samples. Fresh semen parameters were not affected by the type of species, whereas there were some post-thawing differences in semen quality characteristics. Post-thawing total and progressive motilities were highest in Holstein semen followed by Simmental and Limousin breeds. Moreover, progressive velocity was highest, medium and lowest respectively in Holstein, Simmental and Limousin breeds. The results from the current demonstrate that the semen from Holstein as a dairy breed has more satisfactory quality characteristics comparing to other two breeds which can be critical in fertility and conception rate and the sperm cells of this breed are more resistant to cryopreservation comparing to Simmental and Limousin breeds. Further research to explore the underlying mechanisms controlling these superior quality parameters would be beneficial in acquiring strategies to reinforcement the strengths and mitigate the weaknesses.

References

Chenoweth P, McPherson F. Bull breeding soundness, semen evaluation and cattle productivity. Animal Reproduction Science. 2016; 169:32–36. doi: 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2016.04.010.

Oliveira LZ, de Arruda RP, de Andrade AFC, Celeghini ECC, Reeb PD, Martins JPN, et al. Assessment of in vitro sperm characteristics and their importance in the prediction of conception rate in a bovine timed-AI program. Animal Reproduction Science. 2013;137(3–4):145–155. doi: 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2012.12.010.

Tanga BM, Qamar AY, Raza S, Bang S, Fang X, Yoon K, et al. Semen evaluation: Methodological advancements in sperm quality-specific fertility assessment—A review. Animal Bioscience. 2021;34(8):1253–1270. doi:10.5713/ab.20.0606.

Simon L, Lewis SE. Sperm DNA damage or progressive motility: which one is the better predictor of fertilization in vitro? Systems Biology in Reproductive Medicine. 2011;57(3):133–138. doi:10.3109/19396368.2011.553984.

Nagy Á, Polichronopoulos T, Gáspárdy A, Solti L, Cseh S. Correlation between bull fertility and sperm cell velocity parameters generated by computer-assisted semen analysis. Acta Veterinaria Hungarica. 2015;63(3):370–381. doi:10.1556/004.2015.035.

Byrd W, Bradshaw K, Carr B, Edman C, Odom J, Ackerman G. A prospective randomized study of pregnancy rates following intrauterine and intracervical insemination using frozen donor sperm. Fertility and Sterility. 1990;53(3):521–527. doi:10.1016/S0015-0282(16)53364-3.

Menon AG, Barkema HW, Wilde R, Kastelic JP, Thundathil JC. Associations between sperm abnormalities, breed, age, and scrotal circumference in beef bulls. Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research. 2011;75(4):241–247. doi:10.4141/CJVR2011-020.

Khan IM, Khan RU, Qureshi MS, Usman T, Khan A, Ullah Z, et al. Cross breeding promotes deterioration of semen quality in cattle bulls. Pakistan Journal of Zoology. 2018;50(1):97–103. doi: 10.17582/journal.pjz/2018.50.1.97.103.

Morrell JM, Valeanu AS, Lundeheim N, Johannisson A. Sperm quality in frozen beef and dairy bull semen. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica. 2018; 60:41. doi:10.1186/s13028-018-0396-9.

Gürler H, Calisici O, Bollwein H. Inter- and intra-individual variability of total antioxidant capacity of bovine seminal plasma and relationships with sperm quality before and after cryopreservation. Animal Reproduction Science. 2015; 155:99–105. doi: 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2015.02.009.

Fischer A, Hasenpusch E, Weyand A, Bollwein H. Effects of different dilution levels on bull- and ejaculate-related variability of plasma membrane integrity, acrosomal damage and DNA integrity of cryopreserved bull spermatozoa. Berliner und Münchener Tierärztliche Wochenschrift. 2010; 123:83–88. doi:10.2376/0005-9366-123-83.

Lenický M, Slanina T, Kačániová M, Galovičová L, Petrovičová M, Ďuračka M, et al. Identification of bacterial profiles and their interactions with selected quality, oxidative, and immunological parameters of turkey semen. Animals. 2021;11(6):1771. doi:10.3390/ani11061771.

Berry DP, Eivers B, Dunne G, McParland S. Genetics of bull semen characteristics in a multi-breed cattle population. Theriogenology. 2019; 123:202–208. doi: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2018.09.017.

Morrell JM, Nongbua T, Valeanu S, Verde IL, Lundstedt-Enkel K, Edman A, et al. Sperm quality variables as indicators of bull fertility may be breed dependent. Animal Reproduction Science. 2017; 185:42–52. doi: 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2017.08.002.

Hoflack G, Opsomer G, Rijsselaere T, Van Soom A, Maes D, De Kruif A, et al. Comparison of computer‐assisted sperm motility analysis parameters in semen from Belgian Blue and Holstein–Friesian bulls. Reproduction in Domestic Animals. 2007;42(2):153–161. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0531.2006. 00738.x.

Bochenek M, Smorąg Z. The level of sperm DNA fragmentation in bulls of different breeds. Polish Journal of Veterinary Sciences. 2010;13(3):379–384. doi:10.2478/v10181-009-0110-3.

Sushadi PS, Kuwabara M, Maung EEW, Mohamad Mohtar MS, Sakamoto K, Selvaraj V, et al. Arresting calcium-regulated sperm metabolic dynamics enables prolonged fertility in poultry liquid semen storage. Scientific Reports. 2023;13(1):21775. doi:10.1038/s41598-023-48550-2.

Tamargo C, Garriga F, Yeste M, Pinart E, Muiño R, Carbajo MT, et al. Predictive Indicators of Cryotolerance and Fertility in Bovine Sperm: Evaluating Fresh Semen Quality to Improve AI Outcomes with Frozen–Thawed Sperm. Reproduction in Domestic Animals. 2024;59(11):e14742. doi:10.1111/rda.14742.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-01