Abstract

For invitro embryo production, spermatozoa with fertilizing capacity must possess optimal kinetic, morphometric, vitality, and DNA integrity characteristics. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of 3 sperm selection methods on sperm quality and invitro embryonic development in bovine. Frozen commercial semen (0.5 mL/straws) from one bull with known fertility was thawed at 37°C for 20s and was divided for 3 sperm selection techniques: density gradient, swim-up, and microfluidic sperm sorting. The sperm kinetic parameters (VCL=curvilinear velocity, VSL=straight line velocity, VAP=average path velocity, ALH=lateral displacement of sperm head, BCF=beat frequency cross, STR=path straightness) were assessed using computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA). Sperm morphometric parameters were evaluated using Diff-Quick staining followed by automated analysis. To assess vitality, the sperm were stained with propidium iodide and acridine orange, then analysed under a fluorescence microscope. In addition, DNA fragmentation was assessed using sperm chromatin dispersion method. Last, the fertilizing capacity of the selected sperm was tested by fertilizing cumulus–oocyte complexes (2×106 sperm mL−1) obtained from slaughterhouse ovaries and matured invitro for 24h. A standardized invitro embryo production protocol was used with commercial medium from Vitrogen. The cleavage rate and blastocyst yield were measured on Day 2 and 7, respectively (fertilization=Day 0). The results were calculated with analysis of variance and Tukey’s test (P<0.05). The values of sperm kinetic parameters obtained with swim-up (VCL 132.5µm/s; VSL 73.5µm/s) and microfluidic technique (VCL 129.5µm/s; VSL 64.4µm/s) were significantly higher (P<0.05) than those obtained by density gradient (VCL 98.3µm/s; VSL 45.01µm/s). However, the total and progressive motility by density gradient method was slightly higher (89% and 57%) compared with that assessed by swim-up (64% and 43%) or microfluidic technique (74% and 54%) respectively. Microfluidic sorting (11.3%) showed lower (P<0.05) DNA fragmentation levels compared with density gradient method (16.6%), whereas the swim-up technique (12.5%) was similar between both groups. No significant difference was detected between the 3 groups for sperm morphometric and vitality parameters. Moreover, cleavage rates were similar (P>0.05) between the 3 sperm selection techniques: density gradient (84.0%), swim-up (75.2%), and microfluidic sorting (67.3%). However, blastocyst yield was significantly higher (P<0.05) using sperm selected by density gradient (28.1%) and swim-up (21.9%) compared with microfluidic sorting (15.3%). In conclusion, sperm selection using microfluidic and swim-up techniques improved kinetic parameters with lower levels of DNA fragmentation, without affecting sperm morphometry. However, both the density gradient and swim-up techniques are efficient systems for producing invitro bovine embryo.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call