02.09.2013 Views

view - Department of Reproduction, Obstetrics and Herd Health

view - Department of Reproduction, Obstetrics and Herd Health

view - Department of Reproduction, Obstetrics and Herd Health

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

4.1.5. Discussion<br />

CHAPTER 4.1<br />

In this study, we demonstrated that the loss <strong>of</strong> sperm after centrifugation can be minimized<br />

by using an appropriate protocol without damaging the sperm. Centrifugation protocol had a limited<br />

effect on in vitro sperm characteristics in our study. We specifically showed that the use <strong>of</strong> the<br />

st<strong>and</strong>ard protocol (CP 1) led to an average sperm loss <strong>of</strong> 22%, resulting in a considerable reduction in<br />

the number <strong>of</strong> AI doses obtained. If the centrifugation time was decreased while the exerted g-force<br />

was increased up to 1800 × g or even 2400 × g, sperm losses were reduced to 7.4% <strong>and</strong> 2.1%,<br />

respectively, without any apparent changes in the in vitro sperm quality.<br />

If semen was cooled <strong>and</strong> stored after centrifugation, only a minimal effect <strong>of</strong> the used CP<br />

was noticed on total motility as evaluated by CASA. Surprisingly, the motility was reduced in the<br />

group where the lowest centrifugation force was used for the shortest time (600 × g for 5 min). The<br />

sperm pellet probably was very s<strong>of</strong>t which allowed the most motile sperm cells to swim up<br />

immediately after centrifugation had ceased. As a consequence, these highly motile sperm may be<br />

discarded during aspiration <strong>of</strong> the supernatant. This was confirmed in a preliminary experiment (n=4)<br />

by analyzing the supernatant <strong>of</strong> semen samples centrifuged according to CP1, 2 <strong>and</strong> 5 (data not<br />

shown). The average TM <strong>and</strong> PM in the supernatant was 41.3% <strong>and</strong> 23.5%, 54.8% <strong>and</strong> 31.8% <strong>and</strong> 8.3%<br />

<strong>and</strong> 4.0% for CP1, 2 <strong>and</strong> 5, respectively, suggesting that the motility <strong>of</strong> the discarded sperm cells in<br />

the supernatant is much higher when low centrifugation forces are used. Therefore, application <strong>of</strong> a<br />

low g-force for a short time leads to important losses <strong>of</strong> top quality sperm cells <strong>and</strong> must definitely<br />

be avoided.<br />

Additionally, we found a significant effect on BCF for sperm samples cooled <strong>and</strong> stored after<br />

centrifugation. The BCF <strong>of</strong> the sperm subjected to CPs 2 <strong>and</strong> 4 was reduced compared to the<br />

st<strong>and</strong>ard protocol. Moreover, the quality <strong>of</strong> the frozen-thawed samples after being subjected to one<br />

<strong>of</strong> the tested CPs did not differ significantly for any <strong>of</strong> the tested quality parameters except for BCF.<br />

Protocols 2 <strong>and</strong> 4 yielded the highest BCF values after thawing, which was in contrast with our<br />

observations for cooled preservation. However, the actual impact <strong>of</strong> BCF on fertility is difficult to<br />

predict since few data are available in literature (Gil et al., 2009). BCF is a parameter indicative for<br />

spermatic vigor. Changes in BCF under capacitating conditions in vitro are thought to be related to<br />

sperm hyperactivation that occurs in vivo <strong>and</strong> might favor the penetration <strong>of</strong> oocytes (Gil et al.,<br />

2009).<br />

The results <strong>of</strong> the experiment 3 showed a decrease <strong>of</strong> DNA integrity over time, although<br />

centrifugation did not influence DNA integrity. These findings are contradictory with the study <strong>of</strong><br />

153

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!