
Get access to all handy features included in the IVIS website
- Get unlimited access to books, proceedings and journals.
- Get access to a global catalogue of meetings, on-site and online courses, webinars and educational videos.
- Bookmark your favorite articles in My Library for future reading.
- Save future meetings and courses in My Calendar and My e-Learning.
- Ask authors questions and read what others have to say.
Cooled-transported epididymides for donkey semen cryopreservation
Yamilka Lago-Alvarez, a Giorgia...
Get access to all handy features included in the IVIS website
- Get unlimited access to books, proceedings and journals.
- Get access to a global catalogue of meetings, on-site and online courses, webinars and educational videos.
- Bookmark your favorite articles in My Library for future reading.
- Save future meetings and courses in My Calendar and My e-Learning.
- Ask authors questions and read what others have to say.
Read
In the event of death or unforeseen castration for medical reasons, epididymal semen harvesting represents the last opportunity to preserve valuable jacks’ genetics. Objective was to compare 2 semen cryopreservation methods (centrifugation versus noncentrifugation) on donkey cooled-shipped epididymides. We hypothesized that both methods would result in equivalent postthaw semen parameters. Experiment 1: donkeys (n = 7) housed at Bureau of Land Management in Tucson, AZ were surgically castrated. Testes and epididymides were placed in a plastic bag containing skim milk-based extender (25 ml, Botusemen, Botupharma, Scottsdale, AZ), and cooled-shipped overnight in an Equitainer to University of Illinois for semen cryopreservation. Each pair of epididymides was submitted to retrograde flushing with 5 - 10 ml with a cooling extender Botugold (Botupharma), or a similar volume of Botucrio (Botupharma). Botugold group samples were submitted to cushion-centrifugation (1000 g × 20 minutes), supernatant was discarded, and pellet was resuspended at 100 x106 sperm/ml in Botucrio. Botucrio group samples were resuspended to a similar final concentration. Semen from both groups was loaded in 0.5 ml straws, cooled at 5C for 20 minutes, placed 5 cm over LN 2 for 15 minutes, and then plunged in LN 2 for storage. Experiment 2: donkeys (n = 20) housed at Peaceful Valley rescue in San Angelo, TX were surgically castrated and epididymides dissected away from testes and each pair was shipped similar to Experiment 1, except that a different shipping container was used (Botuflex, Botupharma). Each pair was submitted to retrograde flushing with either Botugold or Botucrio and processed exactly as in Experiment 1. For both experiments, 1 straw for each group was thawed at 38C for 1 minute before sperm motility parameters assessments with CASA. Data were analyzed with R, using a mixed model Tukey’s as post hoc. Motility parameters were affected by shipment method (p < 0.05) but not by cushion centrifugation (p > 0.05) processing (Table). Donkeys had poor postthaw sperm motility compared to what was expected for donkey ejaculates subjected to cryopreservation. This was apparently the first study involving epididymal semen in donkeys.

Table. Sperm motility parameters
Keywords: Epididymis, storage time, testis
This manuscript was originally published in the journal Clinical Theriogenology Vol 12(3) Sept 2020. Clinical Theriogenology is the official journal of the Society for Theriogenology (SFT) and the American College of Theriogenologists (ACT). This content has been reproduced on the IVIS website with the explicit permission of the SFT/ACT.
Get access to all handy features included in the IVIS website
- Get unlimited access to books, proceedings and journals.
- Get access to a global catalogue of meetings, on-site and online courses, webinars and educational videos.
- Bookmark your favorite articles in My Library for future reading.
- Save future meetings and courses in My Calendar and My e-Learning.
- Ask authors questions and read what others have to say.
About
Affiliation of the authors at the time of publication
a Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL
b Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
c Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, University of Arizona, Oro Valley, AZ
Comments (0)
Ask the author
0 comments