Assessment of antioxidants for preservation of crossbred bull semen in Tris based extender

Abstract

Present study was aimed to improve poor quality crossbred bulls semen, as occurrence of poor quality ejaculates are one of the major problems in crossbred bulls. Antioxidants and its combination was tried to overcome such problems. Vitamin E, Vitamin C and Vitamin E+C were supplemented at dose rate of 1mg, 5 mM and 1mg + 5mM per ml respectively in split ejaculates to evaluate semen quality during preservation at refrigerated temperature and cryopreservation. The results showed that semen characteristics were better in antioxidant supplemented ejaculates. Total sperm abnormality were significantly lower (p<0.05) in antioxidant supplemented group. The seminal characteristics of crossbred bull semen showed significantly better (p<0.05) performance on preservation, when fortified with Vitamin E as compared to Vitamin C alone as well as Vitamin E and C in combination. The performance of semen additives, were supportive to semen characteristics especially for Vitamin E, moreover fortification with Vitamin E+C was slightly superior to Vitamin C. It can be concluded that fortification of Vitamin E has beneficial role in semen quality improvement followed by Vitamin E+C and Vitamin C.

Role of Catalase as Semen Additive in Cryopreservation of Cattle Bull Semen

“…The evaluation of acrosomal integrity is important for determination of semen quality as enzyme necessary for fertilization present in the acrosomal cap. The per cent acrosomal integrity in diluted semen was reported as 85.77 ± 0.01 in crossbred bull (Rao et al, 2017) and 80.17 ± 3.26 in buffalo bull (Lone et al, 2017). In the present study the values of per cent acrosomal integrity of diluted semen of control group (Table 1) was 79.7 ± 1.52, which was in agreement with the finding of Lone et al, (2017), it was less than the finding of Rao et al, (2017).…”

“…In the present study the values of per cent live spermatozoa in diluted semen of control group (Table 1) was 74.4 ± 1.82, which was in agreement with the findings of Keshava (1996) and Abdel-khalek et al, (2008). The per cent spermatozoa in post thaw semen was reported as 60.76 ± 0.68, 57.64 ± 0.78 (Bhalde et al, 1991), 56.24 ± 0.01 (Rao et al, 2017) and 66-73 per cent (Abdel-khalek et al, 2008). In the present study the values of per cent live spermatozoa of post thaw semen of control group (Table 1) was 50.8 ± 1.17 which was less than reported by Bhalde et al, (1991), Rao et al, (2017) and Abdel-khalek et al, (2008).…”

“…The per cent spermatozoa in post thaw semen was reported as 60.76 ± 0.68, 57.64 ± 0.78 (Bhalde et al, 1991), 56.24 ± 0.01 (Rao et al, 2017) and 66-73 per cent (Abdel-khalek et al, 2008). In the present study the values of per cent live spermatozoa of post thaw semen of control group (Table 1) was 50.8 ± 1.17 which was less than reported by Bhalde et al, (1991), Rao et al, (2017) and Abdel-khalek et al, (2008). Decreasing proportion of live spermatozoa in post thaw semen may be due to cryo damage caused to formation of ice crystals in extra and intracellular environment, increasing solute concentration (Mazur, 1984) and sperm susceptibility for freezing and thawing temperature, ROS production and lipid peroxidation (Bucak et al, 2008) In the present study in catalase added group the value of per cent live spermatozoa of diluted semen was 77.…”

“…The per cent acrosomal integrity in post thaw semen was reported as 56.24 ± 0.01 in crossbred bull (Rao et al, 2017), 36.25 ± 0.91 in murrah buffalo bull (Sandeep et al, 2015), 31.5 ± 1.3 in crossbred bull (Paudel et al, 2010). In the present study the values of per cent acrosomal integrity of post thaw semen of control group (Table 1) was 53.9 ± 0.94 which was in agreement with the finding of Rao et al, (2017), however it was higher than the finding of Sandeep et al, (2015) and Paudel et al, (2010).…”

“…The per cent sperm abnormalities in diluted semen was observed as 4.91 ± 0.14 in bhadawari bull (Mittal et al, 2014) 7.28 ± 0.02 in crossbred bull (Rao et al, 2017) and 9.14 ± 0.09 in cattle bull (Gupta et al, 1990). In the present study the values of per cent sperm abnormalities in diluted semen of control group (Table 1) was 7.2 ± 0.63, which was in agreement with the finding of Rao et al, (2017), however it was higher than as reported by Mittal et al, (2014) while it was lower than as reported by Gupta et al, (1990).…”