Morphologically distinct sperm subpopulations defined by Fourier shape descriptors in fresh ejaculates correlate with variation in boar semen quality following cryopreservation.

This study investigated two hypotheses: 1) that consistent between-boar variation in frozen semen quality exists and is genetically determined, and 2) that morphologically distinct subpopulations of spermatozoa exist within fresh boar ejaculates and that the incidence of these subpopulations is correlated with semen quality following cryopreservation. Five ejaculates were collected from each of 15 boars (5 boars from each of 3 breeds). An objective sperm morphology analyzer used Fourier shape descriptors to describe variation in the morphology of 300 spermatozoa per ejaculate before freezing. Semen was diluted into a commercial freezing buffer (700 mOsm/kg, 3% glycerol) and 5 straws (0.5 mL) per ejaculate were cryopreserved (to -5 degrees C at 6 degrees C/min, then -5 degrees C to -80 degrees C at 40 degrees C/min). Semen was assessed for percentage of motile cells and motility characteristics (with computer-aided sperm analysis), plasma membrane integrity (SYBR-14 positive), and acrosome integrity (fluorescein-labeled peanut agglutinin positive). Consistent between-boar variability was detected for post-thaw sperm motility (P < .01), membrane integrity (P < .01), acrosome integrity (P < .01), curvilinear velocity (P < .01), straight-line velocity (P < .05), beat cross-frequency (P < .05), and amplitude of lateral head displacement (P < .01). Three morphologically distinct subpopulations of spermatozoa, defined by Fourier descriptors, were detected. The proportion of these subpopulations within the fresh ejaculate correlated with semen quality assessments made following cryopreservation. These findings support the hypothesis that consistent interindividual variation in sperm freezability is genetically determined and may relate to processes that occur during spermatogenesis. Subsequent characterization of these genetic differences between "good" and "poor" freezers may ultimately identify biophysical components of the spermatozoa that are essential for successful cryopreservation.

[1]  R. P. Amann,et al.  Principles of cryopreservation and a review of cryopreservation of stallion spermatozoa , 1987 .

[2]  P. Burgoyne.  Sperm phenotype and its relationship to somatic and germ line genotype: a study using mouse aggregation chimeras. , 1975, Developmental biology.

[3]  W. Holt,et al.  Choice of operating conditions to minimize sperm subpopulation sampling bias in the assessment of boar semen by computer-assisted semen analysis. , 1996, Journal of andrology.

[4]  N. Miller,et al.  Bicarbonate/CO2, an effector of capacitation, induces a rapid and reversible change in the lipid architecture of boar sperm plasma membranes , 1996, Molecular reproduction and development.

[5]  Watson Pf,et al.  Cold shock injury in animal cells. , 1987 .

[6]  N. Songsasen,et al.  Cryopreservation of Mouse Spermatozoa , 1997 .

[7]  K. Kasai,et al.  Cryopreservation of mouse spermatozoa in the presence of raffinose and glycerol. , 1990, Journal of reproduction and fertility.

[8]  C. Gravance,et al.  Consistency of sperm morphology classification methods. , 1994, Journal of andrology.

[9]  W. Wang,et al.  Functional analysis using chlortetracycline fluorescence and in vitro fertilization of frozen-thawed ejaculated boar spermatozoa incubated in a protein-free chemically defined medium. , 1995, Journal of reproduction and fertility.

[10]  J. F. Lasley,et al.  A Comparative Study of Epididymal and Ejaculated Spermatozoa of the Boar , 1944 .

[11]  J. Cummins,et al.  On mammalian sperm dimensions. , 1985, Journal of reproduction and fertility.

[12]  W. Holt,et al.  Objectively measured boar sperm motility parameters correlate with the outcomes of on-farm inseminations: results of two fertility trials. , 1997, Journal of andrology.

[13]  M. Besten,et al.  Boar variation in "freezability" of the semen , 1995 .

[14]  R. Beatty,et al.  III.—Genetics of Gametes. III. Strain Differences in Spermatozoa from Eight Inbred Strains of Mice , 1961 .

[15]  L. M. Thurston,et al.  Sources of variation in the morphological characteristics of sperm subpopulations assessed objectively by a novel automated sperm morphology analysis system. , 1999, Journal of reproduction and fertility.

[16]  N. Songsasen,et al.  Cryopreservation of mouse spermatozoa. II. Relationship between survival after cryopreservation and osmotic tolerance of spermatozoa from three strains of mice. , 1997, Cryobiology.

[17]  R. Yanagimachi,et al.  Calcium dependence of the acrosome reaction and activation of guinea pig spermatozoa. , 1974, Experimental cell research.

[18]  J. Alfredo.,et al.  The importance of individual variation in Boar semen cryopreservation. , 1998 .

[19]  I. White,et al.  Influence of the cholesterol content of mammalian spermatozoa on susceptibility to cold-shock. , 1977, Cryobiology.

[20]  M. Gomendio,et al.  Inbreeding, fluctuating asymmetry, and ejaculate quality in an endangered ungulate , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[21]  L. Johnson,et al.  Viability assessment of mammalian sperm using SYBR-14 and propidium iodide. , 1995, Biology of reproduction.

[22]  W. Holt,et al.  Sperm subpopulations in boar (Sus scrofa) and gazelle (Gazella dama mhorr) semen as revealed by pattern analysis of computer-assisted motility assessments. , 1999, Biology of reproduction.

[23]  J. W. Macpherson,et al.  A comparison of two methods for boar semen collection. , 1973, Journal of animal science.

[24]  T. Parkinson,et al.  Optimisation of freezing conditions for bovine spermatozoa. , 1987, Theriogenology.

[25]  C. Thomas,et al.  Fluorometric assessments of acrosomal integrity and viability in cryopreserved bovine spermatozoa. , 1997, Biology of reproduction.