Sevilla Francisco, Soler Carles, Araya-Zúñiga Ignacio, Barquero Vinicio, Roldan Eduardo R S, Valverde Anthony
Costa Rica Institute of Technology, School of Agronomy, San Carlos Campus, Alajuela 223-21002, Costa Rica.
Costa Rica Institute of Technology, Doctorate in Natural Sciences for Development (DOCINADE), San Carlos Campus, Alajuela 223-21002, Costa Rica.
Animals (Basel). 2023 May 12;13(10):1622. doi: 10.3390/ani13101622.
Artificial insemination in the swine industry, as in other species, demands adequate semen handling and accurate evaluation for the preparation of seminal doses. Sperm concentration and motility estimates are part of the semen evaluation process and are considered important for maximizing the yield of doses for insemination. In this study, methods were examined for their accuracy in the estimation of boar sperm concentration and motility. Assessments of sperm concentration were carried out using iSperm, ISAS v1, Open CASA v2, and the Accuread photometer. Analyses of sperm motility were performed with iSperm, ISAS v1, and Open CASA v2 systems. In this study, boar semen samples were collected from 10 healthy males from two genetic lines. There were no relevant differences between sire lines when sperm concentration was assessed. A Bayesian analysis was applied to the four methods used to assess sperm concentration to examine whether there are relevant differences between them. Results suggested differences in the four methods, with a probability of relevance (PR) of 0.86-1.00. The iSperm method revealed higher concentration values within the highest posterior density region at 95% confidence interval (HPD) = 167.0, 224.2 M/mL, whereas Open CASA v2 showed the lowest values, with HPD = 99.3, 155.9 M/mL. The iSperm demonstrated higher reliability in measuring sperm concentration compared to other methods or devices within the given range of confidence. ANOVAs revealed relevant differences in the three methods of motility estimation. Overall, differences in boar sperm concentration and motility estimates were found using various methods, but further studies are needed for better characterization of these differences.
与其他物种一样，养猪业中的人工授精需要对精液进行妥善处理，并进行准确评估以制备精液剂量。精子浓度和活力评估是精液评估过程的一部分，对于最大化授精剂量产量至关重要。在本研究中，对用于估计公猪精子浓度和活力的方法的准确性进行了检验。使用iSperm、ISAS v1、Open CASA v2和Accuread光度计对精子浓度进行评估。使用iSperm、ISAS v1和Open CASA v2系统对精子活力进行分析。在本研究中，从两个遗传系的10头健康雄性猪采集了精液样本。评估精子浓度时，父系之间没有相关差异。对用于评估精子浓度的四种方法进行了贝叶斯分析，以检验它们之间是否存在相关差异。结果表明这四种方法存在差异，相关概率（PR）为0.86 - 1.00。iSperm方法在95%置信区间（HPD）= 167.0, 224.2 M/mL的最高后验密度区域内显示出较高的浓度值，而Open CASA v2显示的值最低，HPD = 99.3, 155.9 M/mL。在给定的置信范围内，与其他方法或设备相比，iSperm在测量精子浓度方面表现出更高的可靠性。方差分析显示在三种活力估计方法中存在相关差异。总体而言，使用各种方法发现公猪精子浓度和活力估计存在差异，但需要进一步研究以更好地表征这些差异。
