Introduction: Determination of sperm concentration and morphology in ejaculate is essential in evaluating fertility. Sperm shape and dimensions may depend on their concentration in ejaculate. The aim of the study was to evaluate the dependence of Hypor boar morphological and morphometric sperm characteristics on concentration in ejaculate.
Material and Methods: The study was conducted on 120 ejaculates from 12 Hypor boars. Depending on sperm concentration, they were put into three groups: low, medium, and high. Ejaculate sperm concentration was determined with the photometric method. Slides were prepared from semen samples which were evaluated for the morphology of spermatozoa. The preparations for morphological analyses were by the eosin-gentian staining method.
Results: As the sperm concentration in the ejaculate increased, the length, perimeter, and area of the sperm heads also did. In the ejaculates with higher sperm concentration the sperm heads were rounder. The ratios of head dimensions to tail length or total length were the highest in the sperm from ejaculates with the highest concentrations. The highest percentage of morphologically abnormal sperm was noted in ejaculates with low concentrations.
Conclusion: The dimensions and shape of sperm depend on the sperm concentration in the ejaculate. In ejaculates with the highest concentrations, the sperm have larger dimensions. Sperm concentration affects the frequency of morphological anomalies in the spermatozoa.
1. Alm K., Peltoniemi O., Koskinen E., Andersson M.: Porcine field fertility with two different insemination doses and the effect of sperm morphology. Reprod Dom Anim 2006, 41, 210–213.
2. Blom E.: The morphological estimation of the spermatozoa defects of bull II: The proposal of new classification of spermatozoa defects. Med Weter 1981, 37, 239–242.
3. Cao X., Cui Y., Zhang X., Lou J., Zhou J., Wei R.: The correlation of sperm morphology with unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 55646–55656.
4. Davis R.O., Gravance C.G., Casey P.J.: Automated morphometric analysis of stallion spermatozoa. Am J Vet Res 1993, 11, 1808–1811.
5. Evenson D.P., Wixon R.: Clinical aspects of sperm DNA fragmentation detection and male infertility. Theriogenology 2006, 65, 979–991.
6. García-Vázquez F.A., Gadea J., Matás C., Holt W.V.: Importance of sperm morphology during sperm transport and fertilization in mammals. Asian J Androl 2016, 18, 844–850.
7. Gil M.C., García-Herreros M., Barón F.J., Aparicio I.M., Santos A.J., García-Marín L.J.: Morphometry of porcine spermatozoa and its functional significance in relation with the motility parameters in fresh semen. Theriogenology 2009, 71, 254–263.
8. Gillies E., Cannon R., Green R., Pacey A.: Hydrodynamic propulsion of human sperm. J Fluid Mech 2009, 625, 445–474.
9. Górski K., Kondracki S., Strachocka K., Wysokińska A.: Association of ejaculate sperm counts with their morphological and morphometric characteristics in Hypor boars. Ann Anim Sci 2017, 17, 1043–1052.
10. Górski K., Kondracki S., Wysokińska A.: Effects of season on semen parameters and relationships between selected semen characteristics in Hypor boars. Turk J Vet Anim Sci 2017, 41, 563–569.
11. Hidalgo M., Rodriguez I., Dorado J.M., Soler C.: Morphometric classification of Spanish thoroughbred stallion sperm heads. Anim Reprod Sci 2008, 103, 374–378.
12. Hirai M., Boersma A., Hofflich A., Wolf E., Föll J., Aumüller R., Braun A.J.: Objectively measured sperm motility and sperm head morphometry in boars (Sus scrofa): relation to fertility and seminal plasma growth factors. J Androl 2001, 22, 104–110.
13. Johnson L.A., Weitze K.F., Fiser P., Maxwell W.M.C.: Storage of boar semen. Anim Reprod Sci 2000, 62, 143–172.
14. King G.J., Macpherson J.W.: A comparison of two methods for boar semen collection. J Anim Sci 1973, 36, 563–565.
15. Kondracki S., Banaszewska D., Mielnicka C.: The effect of age on the morphometric sperm traits of domestic pigs. Cell Mol Biol Lett 2005, 10, 3–13.
16. Kondracki S., Wysokińska A., Kania M., Górski K.: Application of two staining methods for sperm morphometric evaluation in domestic pigs. J Vet Res 2017, 61, 345–349.
17. Loutradi K.E., Tarlatzis B.C., Goulis D.G., Zepiridis L., Pagou T., Chatziioannou E., Grimbizis G.F., Papadimas I., Bontis I.: The effects of sperm quality in embryo development after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. J Assist Reprod Gen 2006, 23, 69–74.
18. Malo A.F., Gomendio M., Garde J., Lang-Lenton B., Soler A.J., Roldan E.R.S.: Sperm design and sperm function. Biol Lett 2006, 2, 246–249.
19. Maroto-Morales A., Ramon M., Garcia-Alvarez O., Soler A.J., Esteso M.C., Martinez-Pastor F., Perez-Guzman M.D., Garde J.J.: Characterization of ram (Ovis aries) sperm head morphometry using the Sperm-Class Analyzer. Theriogenology 2010, 73, 437–448.
20. Menkveld R., El-Garem Y., Schill W.B., Henkel R.: Relationship between human sperm morphology and acrosomal function. J Assist Reprod Gen 2003, 20, 432–438.
21. Menkveld R.: Clinical significance of the low normal sperm morphology value as proposed in the 5th WHO laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen. Asian J Androl 2010, 12, 47–58.
22. Mossman J., Slate J., Humphries S., Birkhead T.: Sperm morphology and velocity are genetically codetermined in the zebra finch. Evolution 2009, 63, 2730–2737.
23. Pena F.J., Saravia F., Garcia-Herreros M., Nunez-Martinez I., Tapia J.A., Johannisson A., Wallgren M., Rodriguez-Martinez H.: Identification of sperm morphometric subpopulations in two different portions of the boar ejaculate and its relation to post thaw quality. J Androl 2005, 26, 716–723.
24. Pesch S., Bergmann M.: Structure of mammalian spermatozoa in respect to viability, fertility, and cryopreservation. Micron 2006, 37, 597–612.
25. Rijsselaere T., Soom A., Hoflack G., Meas D., Kruif A.: Automated sperm morphometry and morphology analysis of canine semen by the Hamilton-Thorne analyser. Theriogenology 2004, 62, 1292–1306.
26. Sailer B.L., Jost L.K., Evenson D.P.: Bull sperm head morphometry related to abnormal chromatin structure and fertility. Cytometry 1996, 24, 167–173.
27. Saravia F., Nunez-Martinez I., Moran J.M., Soler C., Muriel A., Rodriguez-Martinez H., Pena F.J.: Differences in boar sperm head shape and dimensions recorded by computer-assisted sperm morphometry are not related to chromatin integrity. Theriogenology 2007, 68, 196–203.