Aim:The present study was conducted to investigate the effect of species, breed and age on bacterial load in fresh and frozen semen of Cattle and Buffalo bull.Materials and Methods:Present study covered 56 cow and 10 buffalo bulls stationed at Central Semen Station Anjora, Durg (Chhattisgarh). Impact of breeds on bacterial load in semen was assessed using six breeds of cattle viz. Sahiwal, Gir, Red Sindhi, Tharparkar, Jersey and Holstein Friesian (HF) cross. Cow bulls were categorized into four different groups based on their age (<4 years, 4-5 years, 5-6 years and > 6 years) to study variation among age groups. Bacterial load was measured in fresh and frozen semen samples from these bulls using the standard plate count (SPC) method and count was expressed as colony forming unit (CFU) per ml of semen.Results:Higher bacterial load was reported in fresh (2.36 × 104 ± 1943 CFU/ml) and frozen (1.00 × 10 ± 90 CFU/ml) semen of cow bulls as compared to buffalo bulls (1.95 × 104 ± 2882 and 7.75 × 102 ± 160 CFU/ml in fresh and frozen semen, respectively). Jersey bull showed significantly higher bacterial count (p < 0.05) both in fresh (4.07 × 104 ± 13927 CFU/ml) and frozen (1.92 × 103 ± 178 CFU/ml) semen followed by HF cross, Sahiwal, Gir, Red Sindhi and Tharparkar bull. Bulls aged < 4 years and more than 6 years yielded increased bacterial load in their semen. Although a minor variation was reported between species and among age groups, no significant differences were measured.Conclusion:Bacterial load in semen did not differ significantly between species and age groups; however significant variation was reported among different breeds. Bulls of Jersey breed showed significantly higher bacterial load in semen as compared to the crossbred and indigenous bull.

Aim:The present investigation was conducted to locate the critical sources of bacterial contamination and to evaluate the standard sanitation protocol so as to improve the hygienic conditions during collection, evaluation, and processing of bull semen in the Semen Station.Materials and Methods:The study compared two different hygienic procedures during the collection, evaluation and processing of semen in Central Semen Station, Anjora, Durg. Routinely used materials including artificial vagina (AV) inner liner, cone, semen collection tube, buffer, extender/diluter, straws; and the laboratory environment like processing lab, pass box and laminar air flow (LAF) cabinet of extender preparation lab, processing lab, sealing filling machine, and bacteriological lab were subjected to bacteriological examination in two phases of study using two different sanitary protocols. Bacterial load in above items/environment was measured using standard plate count method and expressed as colony forming unit (CFU).Results:Bacterial load in a laboratory environment and AV equipments during two different sanitary protocol in present investigation differed highly significantly (p<0.001). Potential sources of bacterial contamination during semen collection and processing included laboratory environment like processing lab, pass box, and LAF cabinets; AV equipments, including AV Liner and cone. Bacterial load was reduced highly significantly (p<0.001) in AV liner (from 2.33±0.67 to 0.50±0.52), cone (from 4.16±1.20 to 1.91±0.55), and extender (from 1.33±0.38 to 0) after application of improved practices of packaging, handling, and sterilization in Phase II of study. Glasswares, buffers, and straws showed nil bacterial contamination in both the phases of study. With slight modification in fumigation protocol (formalin @600 ml/1000 ft3), bacterial load was significantly decreased (p<0.001) up to 0-6 CFU in processing lab (from 6.43±1.34 to 2.86±0.59), pass box (from 12.13±2.53 to 3.78±0.79), and nil bacterial load was reported in LAFs.Conclusion:Appropriate and careful management considering critical points step by step starting right from collection of semen to their processing can significantly minimize bacterial contamination.

No abstract

No abstract