Abstract
Canine epididymal sperm was collected from the cauda epididymis using 2 different methods (flushing and mincing) to compare the qualities (the percentage of progressively motile, viable, morphologically abnormal, immature and intact acrosomes) before and after freezing and thawing. No significant difference was noted in the quality of the cauda epididymal sperm immediately after collection and after freezing-thawing between the collection methods, although the mean levels of sperm quality with the flushing method were slightly better than that of the mincing method. The flushing method is simple and free of blood contamination, although the vas deferens was too small to be perfused in only 1 dog, and our results suggest that the flushing method is preferable to the mincing method for collecting sperm from the canine cauda epididymis.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
