Predicting fertility from seminal traits: Performance of several parametric and non-parametric procedures

Abstract This research aimed at assessing the efficacy of non-parametric procedures to improve the classification of the ejaculates in the artificial insemination ( AI ) centers according to their fertility rank predicted from characteristics of the AI doses. A total of 753 ejaculates from 193 bucks were evaluated at three different times from 5 to 9 months of age for 21 seminal variables (related to ejaculate pH and volume, sperm concentration, viability, morphology and acrosome reaction traits, and dose characteristic) and their corresponding fertility score after AI over crossbred females. Fertility rate was categorized into five classes of equal length. Linear Regression ( LR ), Ordinal Logistic Regression ( OLR ), Support Vector Regression ( SVR ), Support Vector Ordinal Regression ( SVOR ), and Non-deterministic Ordinal Regression ( NDOR ) were compared in terms of their predictive ability with two base line algorithms: MEAN and MODE which always predict the mean and mode value of the classes observed in the data set, respectively. Predicting ability was measured in terms of rate of erroneous classifications, linear loss (average of the distance between the predicted and the observed classes), the number of predicted classes and the F 1 statistic (which allows comparing procedures taking into account that they can predict different number of classes). The seminal traits with a bigger influence on fertility were established using stepwise regression and a nondeterministic classifier. MEAN, LR and SVR produced a higher percentage of wrong classified cases than MODE (taken as reference for this statistic), whereas it was 6%, 13% and 39% smaller for SVOR, OLR and NDOR, respectively. However, NDOR predicted an average of 2.04 classes instead of one class predicted by the other procedures. All the procedures except MODE showed a similar smaller linear loss than the reference one (MEAN) SVOR being the one with the best performance. The NDOR showed the highest value of the F 1 statistic. Values of linear loss and F 1 statistics were far from their best value indicating that possibly, the variation in fertility explained by this group of semen characteristics is very low. From the total amount of traits included in the full model, 11, 16, 15, 18 and 3 features were kept after performing variable selection with the LR, OLR, SVR, SVOR and NDOR methods, respectively. For all methods, the reduced models showed almost an irrelevant decrease in their predictive abilities compared to the corresponding values obtained with the full models.

[1]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  Trust Region Newton Method for Logistic Regression , 2008, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[2]  Jason Weston,et al.  Gene Selection for Cancer Classification using Support Vector Machines , 2002, Machine Learning.

[3]  C. Boiti,et al.  Guidelines for the handling of rabbit bucks and semen. , 2005 .

[4]  M. Baselga Rabbit genetic resources in Mediterranean countries , 2002 .

[5]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  A tutorial on?-support vector machines , 2005 .

[6]  C. Soler,et al.  Sperm morphological abnormalities appearing in the male rabbit reproductive tract. , 1997, Theriogenology.

[7]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines , 2011, TIST.

[8]  Chih-Jen Lin,et al.  LIBLINEAR: A Library for Large Linear Classification , 2008, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[9]  W. Flowers Management of boars for efficient semen production. , 2020, Journal of reproduction and fertility. Supplement.

[10]  S. Meding,et al.  Fertility of long-term-stored boar semen: Influence of extender (Androhep and Kiev), storage time and plasma droplets in the semen , 1994 .

[11]  T. Cooper Cytoplasmic droplets: the good, the bad or just confusing? , 2005, Human Reproduction.

[12]  M. Theau-Clément,et al.  The relationship between rabbit semen characteristics and reproductive performance after artificial insemination. , 2002, Animal reproduction science.

[13]  J. Courtens,et al.  Effect of acrosome defects and sperm chromatin decondensation on fertility and litter size in the rabbit. Preliminary electron-microscopic study. , 1994, Reproduction, nutrition, development.

[14]  E. A. Gómez,et al.  The Caldes Strain (Spain) , 2002 .

[15]  Wei Chu,et al.  New approaches to support vector ordinal regression , 2005, ICML.

[16]  L. Wasserman All of Nonparametric Statistics , 2005 .

[17]  J. Gadea,et al.  The predictive value of porcine seminal parameters on fertility outcome under commercial conditions. , 2004, Reproduction in domestic animals = Zuchthygiene.

[18]  O. Rafel,et al.  Variability, repeatability and phenotypic relationships of several characteristics of production and semen quality in rabbit. , 2006, Animal reproduction science.

[19]  LinChih-Jen,et al.  A tutorial on -support vector machines , 2005 .

[20]  M. Piles,et al.  Post-natal sexual development of testis and epididymis in the rabbit: variability and relationships among macroscopic and microscopic markers. , 2009, Animal reproduction science.

[21]  T. Cooper,et al.  Acquisition of volume regulatory response of sperm upon maturation in the epididymis and the role of the cytoplasmic droplet , 2003, Microscopy research and technique.

[22]  A G Braundmeier,et al.  The search is on: finding accurate molecular markers of male fertility. , 2001, Journal of dairy science.

[23]  S. Martínez,et al.  Viability and fertility of rabbit spermatozoa diluted in Tris-buffer extenders and stored at 15°C , 2000 .

[24]  Bernhard Schölkopf,et al.  A tutorial on support vector regression , 2004, Stat. Comput..

[25]  R. Wall,et al.  Relationship of semen quality, number of sperm inseminated, and fertility in rabbits. , 1993, Journal of andrology.

[26]  H. Rodríguez-Martínez,et al.  Assessment of sperm characteristics post-thaw and response to calcium ionophore in relation to fertility in Swedish dairy AI bulls. , 2000, Theriogenology.

[27]  B. Gadella,et al.  The predictive value of semen analysis in the evaluation of stallion fertility. , 2003, Reproduction in domestic animals = Zuchthygiene.

[28]  G. Killian,et al.  Fertility-associated proteins in Holstein bull seminal plasma. , 1993, Biology of reproduction.

[29]  Manuel Baselga,et al.  Mixed model methodology for the estimation of genetic response to selection in litter size of rabbits , 1989 .

[30]  E. Nieschlag,et al.  The Cause of Infertility of Male c-ros Tyrosine Kinase Receptor Knockout Mice1 , 2000, Biology of reproduction.

[31]  N. Bencheikh Effet de la fréquence de collecte de la semence sur les caractéristiques du sperme et des spermatozoïdes récoltés chez le lapin , 1995 .

[32]  O. Rafel,et al.  Reproductive performance of crossbred and purebred male rabbits , 2006 .

[33]  Vladimir N. Vapnik,et al.  The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory , 2000, Statistics for Engineering and Information Science.

[34]  J. Vicente,et al.  Effect of sperm count on the fertility and prolificity rates of meat rabbits. , 1997, Animal reproduction science.

[35]  K. Bamba EVALUATION OF ACROSOMAL INTEGRITY OF BOAR SPERMATOZOA BY BRIGHT FIELD MICROSCOPY USING AN EOSIN-NIGROSIN STAIN , 1988 .

[36]  A. Legarra,et al.  Different ways to model biological relationships between fertility and pH of the semen in rabbits. , 2011, Journal of animal science.

[37]  J. Gadea Sperm factors related to in vitro and in vivo porcine fertility. , 2005, Theriogenology.

[38]  Juan José del Coz,et al.  Learning to Predict One or More Ranks in Ordinal Regression Tasks , 2008, ECML/PKDD.

[39]  J. Hanley,et al.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. , 1982, Radiology.

[40]  C. Hulet,et al.  A Fertility Index for Rams , 1962 .

[41]  Juan José del Coz,et al.  Learning Nondeterministic Classifiers , 2009, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[42]  M. López‐Béjar,et al.  Influence of environmental temperature and relative humidity on quantitative and qualitative semen traits of rabbits. , 2008 .