Post-cervical compared with cervical insemination in gilts: Reproductive variable assessments

Abstract

The aim with this study was to compare cervical (CAI; 3 × 109 spermatozoa/90 mL) and post-cervical (PCAI; 1.5 × 109 spermatozoa/45 mL) artificial insemination (AI) techniques for frequency of incidences (unsuccessful or difficult probe passage, backflow, metritis and bleeding), values for reproductive variables and duration of the procedure in gilts. There were 644 gilts (255–270 days old, weighing 150 ± 5 kg) randomly assigned to PCAI (n = 320) and CAI (n = 324) groups. In total, there were 957 and 958 artificial inseminations performed in the CAI and PCAI groups, respectively (2–4 AIs/gilt). The frequency of unsuccessful or difficult PCAI probe passage/AI was 14.6% (140/958), therefore, there was a 85.7% probe passage success/AI rate (818/958). The semen backflow frequency/AI was less with PCAI than CAI (4.3% compared with 8.2%, P < 0.001). With the PCAI group, there were only a few cases of bleeding (11/958: 1.1% /AI) with no difference between the CAI and PCAI groups (P = 0.224). In gilts (n = 72) where there was not passage of the PCAI probe (72/320; 22.5%) there was use of CAI, (M, mixed group). For the CAI, PCAI and M groups, there were similar values for positive pregnancy diagnosis, farrowing rates and prolificacy (P > 0.05). The average duration for AI was shorter in the PCAI (2.34 ± 0.809 min) than CAI (4.77 ± 1.059 min) group, and it was longer in the M group (7.48 ± 2.454 min; P < 0.050). The PCAI procedure, therefore, is recommended for AI of gilts.