4.5 Article

Effect of bee venom on reproductive performance and immune response of male rabbits

Journal

PHYSIOLOGY & BEHAVIOR
Volume 223, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2020.112987

Keywords

Buck; Immune-response; Melittin; Semen quality; Sexual behavior; Testosterone

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The current study aimed to investigate the effects of injecting bucks with different doses of bee venom (BV) on reproductive performance and immune response during the summer season. Forty-eight male V-line rabbits were randomly distributed among four homogeneous groups (12 bucks each). Three groups were injected BV under the neck skin with 0.1 (G1), 0.2 (G2) and 0.3 (G3) mg/rabbit twice weekly over 20 wks of treatment period. The 4th group (GO) was not injected BV and served as a control group. Buck groups that were treated with BV showed significantly (p <= 0.05) shorter reaction time (increased libido) compared to the control, and this effect was BV dose-dependent manner. Viable sperm and concentration, total sperm output, live sperm, and fertility percentage were significantly (p <= 0.05) higher in BV groups than in the control group. Additionally, testosterone concentration, and some other blood biochemical constituents (total protein, albumin, and glucose) were significantly (p <= 0.05) higher in BV groups than those in the control group. The BV doses resulted in a significant (p <= 0.05) increase of antioxidant indices (TAC, GST, and GSH) compared to the control group. Furthermore, the Immunoglobulin A (IgA) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) were significantly (p <= 0.05) higher in BV groups-compared to the control group. From these results, we concluded that BV had significant positive impacts on some semen quality traits, sexual behavior, blood biochemical parameters, blood antioxidant content, lipid peroxidation biomarkers, and immune response in V-line bucks.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available