4.6 Article

Do parameters of seminal quality correlate with the results of on-farm inseminations in rabbits?

Journal

THERIOGENOLOGY
Volume 64, Issue 5, Pages 1130-1141

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2005.01.009

Keywords

semen quality; fertility; CASA; rabbit; sperm

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study was conducted to determine if different sperm characteristics correlate with the in vivo fertility of rabbit sperm. A total of 2765 heterospermic inseminations were performed in commercial rabbitries using 50-pooled samples of fresh semen. Sperm motility and morphological evaluations were performed on each of the heterospermic pooled samples to asses the seminal quality, and the percentage of kindling rate (76.2%) and number of kits born alive (9.3) were recorded. Sperm motility parameters, assessed using a computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA) system (Sperm Class Analyzer, Microptic, Barcelona, Spain), were: average path velocity, curvilinear velocity, straight-line velocity, linearity, amplitude of lateral head displacement, beat cross-frequency, wobble and percentage of total motile spermatozoa. Morphological analyses included the percentage of sperm with a normal apical ridge, the percentage of sperm with cytoplasmatic droplets and the percentage of abnormal sperm. Significant correlations were observed between kindling rate and the percentage of total motile cells (r = 0.3 1; P < 0.05), linearity index (r = -0.32; P < 0.05) and the percentage of abnormal sperm in the sample (r = -0.32; P < 0.05). Regression models including motility and the morphological parameters explained 45% of the variation in kindling rate. These results indicate that motility parameters, determined by CASA systems, in combination with sperm morphology analyses can provide some information about the fertilizing potential of rabbit sperm. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available