New Artificial Insemination Technologies for Swine

Bortolozzo, Fernando Pandolfo; Menegat, Mariana Boscato; Mellagi, Ana Paula Gonçalves; Bernardi, Mari Lourdes; Wentz, Ivo

doi:10.1111/rda.12544

Cited by 54 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…La inseminación artificial (IA) se ha utilizado ampliamente en la producción porcina, principalmente debido a la rápida distribución de genes de machos genéticamente superiores (1). Aproximadamente el 66% de la cabaña comercial brasileña es inseminada artificialmente (2); sin embargo, existe evidencia empírica de que este porcentaje podría llegar a más del 90%, demandando una producción anual de 9.5 millones de dosis de semen de alta calidad (DS).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

“…Artificial insemination (AI) has been widely used in swine production mostly because of rapid distribution of genes from genetically superior males (1). Approximately 66% of the commercial Brazilian herd is artificially inseminated (2); however, there is empirical evidence that this percentage could reach over 90%, demanding an annual production of 9.5 million high quality semen doses (SD).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contaminantes bacterianos y perfil de susceptibilidad del semen porcino en centros de recogida em Brasil

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To assess the microbiological profile in seven Boar Studs (BS) in Southern Brazil, as well as evaluate antimicrobial susceptibility response to most commonly found microorganisms in BS. Materials and methods. Bacteriologic analysis was carried out in samples from the water purification system, semen extender, raw and stored semen, lab benches, and other working surfaces. Results. Growth of a mixed bacterial population was observed in water samples from all but one BS. Approximately 85% of the BS had significant contamination on their working surfaces with at least one bacterial contaminant. A total of 86% of raw semen samples were contaminated with one or more different bacteria, while 100% of the boar studs provided contaminated samples. Bacterial susceptibility to antimicrobial agents varied from over 80% for gentamycin, neomycin and ceftiofur to 40% or less for penicillin and lincomycin. Conclusions. The identification of the critical points provides necessary support to devise better strategies to minimize contamination in BS. Also, assessing the level of antimicrobial drug resistance offers accurate information to formulate more efficient antibacterial protocols that closely observe the rational use of antibiotics.Keywords: Boar semen; bacterial contamination; antimicrobial susceptibility (Source: DeSC, CAB). RESUMENObjectivo. Evaluar el perfil microbiológico de siete centros de recogida de semen porcino (BS) en el sur de Brasil, así como evaluar la susceptibilidad antimicrobiana a la mayoría de los microorganismos encontrados en los BS. Materiales y métodos. El análisis bacteriológico se realizó en muestras del sistema de purificación de agua, diluyentes de semen, semen crudo y almacenado, bancos de laboratorio y otras superficies de trabajo. Resultados. El crecimiento de una población bacteriana mixta se observó en muestras de agua de todas las BS excepto una. Aproximadamente el 85% de la BS tenía contaminación significativa en sus superficies de trabajo con al menos un contaminante bacteriano. Un total de 86% de muestras de semen crudo fueron contaminadas con una o más bacterias diferentes, mientras que el 100% de BS proporcionaron muestras contaminadas. La susceptibilidad Bacterial Contaminants and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Profile of Boar Semen in Southern Brazil StudsContaminantes bacterianos y perfil de susceptibilidad del semen porcino en centros de recogida em Brasil

show abstract

Section: Introductionunclassified

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contaminantes bacterianos y perfil de susceptibilidad del semen porcino en centros de recogida em Brasil

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Instead, the chance of distributing a good genetic resource across countries and particularly, enabling locally raised sows to be bred with semen having the best estimated breeding values available in Europe is very real. Use of AI for breeding pigs has become instrumental for facilitating global improvements in fertility, genetics, labour, and herd health (Bortolozzo et al, 2015;Knox, 2016). The differences in number of piglets born live between boars of the two breed types in this study were not significant (Table 1), instead, it is the value for Pietrain boars that stood out over the other categories.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%

Success drivers of pig artificial insemination based on imported fresh semen

Vincent¹,

Rugira²,

Dâ€TMAndre³

2018

Int. J. Livest. Prod.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was conducted to assess the factors that affect pig litter size, proportion of live pigs at birth, number of inseminations per conception, and efficiency of artificial insemination. The main factors assessed were sow breed (n = 2), sire breed (n = 3), sow parity (n = 7) and insemination method (n = 2). The sow breeds used were Landrace, LL (n = 27) and Landrace × Pietran crossbreds, LP (n = 37); boar breeds used were Landrace (LL), Pietran (PP) and Landrace × Pietran crossbreds (LP). Sows were randomly inseminated either by boar or artificially, with semen freshly imported from Belgium to Rwanda. Landrace (LL) sows had significantly smaller (P<0.05) litter sizes at birth (9.04±0.72) compared to LP sows (11.49±0.45). On the other hand, the litter size for LL (9.04±0.58) and LP (11.49±0.67) sires did not differ, while PP sires had the highest (P<0.05) litter size (13.37±1.43). Interestingly, the method of insemination, whether use of a boar or artificially did not (P>0.05) affect the number of inseminations per conception, litter size, and proportion of piglets born live. Sow parity was found to have a linear relationship with a mean litter size at birth of 6.9±0.43 piglets for primiparous sows and 15.2±1.12 piglets for a sow of parity 7. However, the number of piglets born dead increased with parity, peaking at 3.0±0.66 (parity 7), while it was only 0.2±0.2 for parity 1. Therefore, the LP crossbred sows and Pietran sires are recommended. Artificial insemination should be promoted since it performed as well as natural insemination but provides other advantages such as African swine fever and inbreeding prevention, and avoids boar management costs.

show abstract

“…Artificial insemination (AI) is the main method for sow reproduction (Bortolozzo et al, 2015; Knox, 2016; Riesenbeck, 2011). More than 90% of swine AI worldwide are carried out with extended liquid semen stored up to 5 days (Johnson, Weitze, Fiser, & Maxwell, 2000; Khalifa et al., 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insemination of sows with seminal doses prepared by a two‐step hypothermic dilution does not impair the reproductive performance at farm

Soler‐Llorens

Mendoza

Miguel

et al. 2020

Reprod Domestic Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reproduction in swine is mostly carried out through artificial insemination (AI). For this purpose, AI studs collect the ejaculates, analyse the sperm quality, dilute and package to produce seminal doses and ship them to sow farms to carry out the AI. Temperature is controlled during the process to avoid sperm damage. Semen is diluted in the extender in a one‐step or a two‐step process where the second can be isothermic (approximately 32°C) or hypothermic (room temperature 21–22°C). Both techniques are currently performed, and the latter could reduce time and costs, but the literature available comparing the processes is scarce and presents discrepancies. To date, there are no studies about its impact in fertility. This study compared hypothermic two‐step dilution (HTSD) and isothermic two‐step dilution (ITSD) in laboratory and field trial to elucidate whether HTSD has any effect. Ejaculates from 72 boars in nine AI studs were split and processed with both techniques using a high‐performance extender and evaluated in laboratory. Four farms inseminated 345 sows with samples of four of these AI studs, and their fertility and prolificacy were registered. Results show no significant differences between doses prepared by HTSD and ITSD technique, having no impact in laboratory results (percentage of motile sperm, short hypoosmotic swelling test (sHOST) and short osmotic resistance test (sORT), viable sperm, damaged acrosomes, sperm under early apoptosis, high mitochondrial membrane potential (p > .1), fertility (92.2% versus 94.1%, p = .45) or farrowing rate (15.8 ± 0.3 versus 16.1 ± 0.3 p = .46). In conclusion, our results suggest that HTSD of semen on extender could be safely implemented in AI studs under the conditions tested.

show abstract

New Artificial Insemination Technologies for Swine

Cited by 54 publications

References 31 publications

Contaminantes bacterianos y perfil de susceptibilidad del semen porcino en centros de recogida em Brasil

Contaminantes bacterianos y perfil de susceptibilidad del semen porcino en centros de recogida em Brasil

Success drivers of pig artificial insemination based on imported fresh semen

Insemination of sows with seminal doses prepared by a two‐step hypothermic dilution does not impair the reproductive performance at farm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About