Antimicrobial Resistance as a Problem for the Quality of Boar Semen

1. Cottell E, Harrison R.F, McCaffrey M, Walsh T, Mallon E, Barry-Kinsella C: Are seminal fluid microorganisms of significance or merely contaminants?. Fertil Steril 2000, 74, 465-470.10.1016/S0015-0282(00)00709-3Search in Google Scholar

2. Žura Zaja I, Samardžija M, Vince S, Majić-Balić I, Vilić M, Ðuričcić D, Milinković-Tur S: Influence of boar breeds or hybrid genetic composition onsemen quality and seminal plasma biochemical variables. Anim Reprod Sci, 2016, 164, 169-17610.1016/j.anireprosci.2015.11.02726692346Search in Google Scholar

3. Althouse GC. and Lu KG: Bacteriospermia in extended porcine semen. Theriogenology 2005, 63, 573-584.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.09.03115626417Search in Google Scholar

4. Morrell JM, Wallgren M: Removal of bacteria from boar ejaculates by single layer centrifugation can reduce the use of antibiotics in semen extenders. Anim Reprod Sci 2011, 123, 64–69.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2010.11.00521145185Search in Google Scholar

5. Althouse GC, Pierdon MS, Lu KG:Thermotemporal dynamics of contaminant bacteria and antimicrobials in extended porcine semen. Theriogenology 2008, 70, 1317–1323.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.07.01018774598Search in Google Scholar

6. Bussalleu E, Yeste M, Sepúlveda L, Torner E, Pinart E, Bonet B: Effects of different concentrations of enterotoxigenic and verotoxigenic E. coli on boar sperm quality. Anim Reprod Sci 2011, 127, 176–182.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2011.07.01821907505Search in Google Scholar

7. Ubeda JL, Ausejo R, Dahmani Y, Falceto MV, Usan A, Malo C:Adverse effects of members of the Enterobacteriaceae family on boar sperm quality. Theriogenology 2013, 80, 565–570.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2013.05.02223827823Search in Google Scholar

8. Fraczek M, Hryhorowicz M, Gaczarzewicz D, Szumala-Kakol A, Kolanowski TJ, Beutin L: Can apoptosis and necrosis coexist in ejaculated human spermatozoa during in vitro semen bacterial infection?. J Assist Reprod Genet 2015, 32, 771–779.10.1007/s10815-015-0462-x442945225808020Search in Google Scholar

9. Köhn FM, Erdmann I, Oeda T, El Mulla KF, Schiefer HG, Schill WB: Influence of urogenital infections on sperm functions. Andrologia 1998, 30, 73–80.10.1111/j.1439-0272.1998.tb02829.x9629446Search in Google Scholar

10. Diemer T, Huwe P, Michelmann HW, Mayer F, Schiefer HG, Weidner W: Escherichia coli-induced alterations of human spermatozoa. An electron microscopy analysis. Int J Androl 2000, 23, 178–186.10.1046/j.1365-2605.2000.00224.x10844544Search in Google Scholar

11. Zan Bar T, Yehuda R, HachamT, Krupnik S, BartoovB: Influence of Campylobacter fetus subsp. fetus on ram sperm cell quality. J Med Microbiol 2008, 57, 1405–1410.10.1099/jmm.0.2008/001057-018927420Search in Google Scholar

12. Prieto-Martínez N, Bussalleu E, Gracia-Bonavila E, Bonet S, Yeste M: Effects of Enterobacter cloacae on boar sperm quality during liquid storage at 17°C. Anim Reprod Sci 2014, 148, 72–82.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2014.05.00824880981Search in Google Scholar

13. Monga M and Roberts JA:Spermagglutination by bacteria: receptor-specific interactions. J Androl 1994, 15, 151–156.Search in Google Scholar

14. Schulz M, Sánchez R, Soto L, Risopatrón J, Villegas J: Effect of Escherichia coli and its soluble factors on mitochondrial membrane potential, phosphatidylserine translocation, viability, and motility of human spermatozoa. Fertil Steril 2010, 94, 619–623.10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.01.14019324341Search in Google Scholar

15. Gączarzewicz D, Udała J, Piasecka M, Błaszczyk B, Stankiewicz T: Bacterial contamination of boar semen and its relationship to sperm quality preserved in commercial extender containing gentamicin sulfate. Pol J Vet Sci 2016, 19, 3, 451–459.10.1515/pjvs-2016-005727760038Search in Google Scholar

16. International ISO standard 8607, First Edition 2003-02-01 Clean the sensitive animal – Frozen seed of breeding bulls - Number of live aerobic microorganisms, Reference number ISO 8607: 2003 (E)Search in Google Scholar

17. Rozeboom JK: Evaluating Boar Semen Quality. Animal science facts, Extension Swine Husbandry. North Carolina State University 2000., College of Agriculture & Life Sciences. Publication number: ANS00-812S.Search in Google Scholar

18. Heriberto Rodriguez-Martinez: Semen evaluation: can we forecast fertility?. Vet stanica 2019, 50, 293-305Search in Google Scholar

19. Apić J, Stančić I., Vakanjac S, Radović I, Milovanović A, Barna T, Maletić M.,: Influence of the protein content of boar seminal plasma on spermatozoa viability, motility and acrosome integrity in diluted semen stored for 3 days. Animal Reproduction,2016, v.13, n.1, p.36-4110.21451/1984-3143-AR792Search in Google Scholar

20. Maes D, Nauwynck H, Rijsselaere T, Mateusen B, Vyt P, de Kruif A, Van Soom A: Diseases in swine transmitted by artificial insemination: An overview.Theriogenology 2008, 70, 8, 1337-1345.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.06.01818657310Search in Google Scholar

21. Maroto Martín LO, Muñoz EC, De Cupere F, Van Driessche E, Echemendia-Blanco D, Rodríguez JMM, Beeckmans S: Bacterial contamination of boar semen affects the litter size. Anim Reprod Sci 2010, 120, 95–104.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2010.03.00820427136Search in Google Scholar

22. Bresciani C, Cabassi CS, Morini G, Taddei S, Bettini R, Bigliardi E, Di Ianni F,Sabbioni A, Parmigiani E: Boar semen bacterial contamination in Italy and antibiotic efficacy in a modified extender. Ital. J. Anim Sci 2014, 13, 83–87.10.4081/ijas.2014.3082Search in Google Scholar

23. Schulze M, Dathe M, Waberski D, Müller K: Liquid storage of boar semen: Current and future perspectives on the use of cationic antimicrobial peptides to replace antibiotics in semen extenders. Theriogenology 2016, 85, 39–46.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2015.07.01626264695Search in Google Scholar

24. Okazaki T, Mihara T, Fujita Y, Yoshida S, Teshima H, Shimada M: Polymyxin B neutralizes bacteria-released endotoxin and improves the quality of boar sperm during liquid storage and cryopreservation. Theriogenology 2010, 74, 1691–1700.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.05.01920615528Search in Google Scholar

25. Kaur K. and Prabha V: Sperm Impairment by sperm agglutinating factor isolated from Escherichia coli: receptor specific interactions. Biomed Res Int 2013, 1, 2, 548-497.10.1155/2013/548497373038523956989Search in Google Scholar

26. Pirnay JP, Matthijs S, Colak H, Chablain P, Bilocq F, Van Eldere J: Global Pseudomonas aeruginosa biodiversity as reflected in a Belgian river. Environ Microbiol 2005, 7, 7, 969-80.10.1111/j.1462-2920.2005.00776.x15946293Search in Google Scholar

27. Heck LW, Morihara K, Abrahamson DR: Degradation of soluble laminin and depletion of tissue-associated basement membrane laminin by Pseudomonas aeruginosa elastase and alkaline protease. Infect Immun 1986, 54, 1, 149-53.10.1128/iai.54.1.149-153.19862601293093382Search in Google Scholar

28. Lamont IL and Martin LW: Identification and characterization of novel pyoverdine synthesis genes in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Microbiology 2003, 149, 4, 833-842.10.1099/mic.0.26085-012686626Search in Google Scholar

29. Jimenez PN, Koch G, Thompson JA, Xavier KB, Cool RH, Quax WJ: The multiple signalling systems regulating virulence in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 2012, 76, 1, 46-65.10.1128/MMBR.05007-11329442422390972Search in Google Scholar

30. Schulze M, Ammon C, Rüdiger K, Jung M, Grobbel M: Analysis of hygienic critical control points in boar semen production. Theriogenology 2015, 83, 430–437.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2014.10.00425459424Search in Google Scholar