Optimization of post-cervical artificial insemination in gilts: Effect of cervical relaxation procedures and catheter type

Caravaca, Iván Hernández; Llamas-López, Pedro José; Izquierdo-Rico, M. J.; Soriano‐Úbeda, Cristina; Matás, Carmen; Gardón, Juan Carlos; García–Vázquez, Francisco Alberto

doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2016.11.027

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Intrauterine insemination deposits the semen into the uterine body and, in the case of liquid‐stored semen, allows for insemination with a third of the sperm quantity used by conventional insemination (Casas, Sancho, Briz, et al, ; Knox, ; Mezalira, Dallanora, Bernardi, Wentz, & Bortolozzo, ; Watson & Behan, ). While most intrauterine‐insemination catheters prove difficult to pass through the cervix of gilts and young sows, specific devices have been designed that demonstrate higher success (Hernández‐Caravaca et al, ).…”

Section: Factors Affecting Artificial Insemination With Cryopreservedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial insemination with frozen‐thawed boar sperm

Yeste

Rodríguez-Gil

Bonet

2017

Molecular Reproduction Devel

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Artificial insemination with frozen-thawed semen in pigs is not a routine technique; its use is restricted to specific cases, such as preservation of valuable genetic material (germplasm banks), safety strategies in case of natural disasters, long-distance transport of sperm, and in combination with sex-sorting. Cryoinjuries resulting from freeze-thawing protocols are a major concern with regard to the fertilization capacity of the treated sperm, which is lower than that of liquid-stored semen. Here, we provide an overview of artificial insemination using cryopreserved sperm, and summarize the factors that influence cryopreservation success before, during, and after freeze-thaw (i.e., sperm selection before starting the cryopreservation process, holding time, use of cryoprotectants, and rates of freezing and thawing) and that are driving the identification of biomarkers to predict sensitivity to cryodamage. Three different artificial insemination techniques (conventional or intracervical; intrauterine; and deep intrauterine) are also discussed with regards to their relevance when using frozenthawed semen. Finally, we review the use of additives to freezing and thawing media, given reports that they may maintain and improve the quality and fertilizing capacity of frozen-thawed sperm. In sum, artificial insemination with frozen-thawed boar sperm can provide reasonable fertility outcomes, if freezable ejaculates, specific additives, and appropriate insemination techniques are used.State-of-the-art of artificial insemination with frozenthawed sperm still suffers from the negative impact that cryopreservation has on the sperm itself.

show abstract

Section: Factors Affecting Artificial Insemination With Cryopreservedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial insemination with frozen‐thawed boar sperm

Yeste

Rodríguez-Gil

Bonet

2017

Molecular Reproduction Devel

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the past few decades PCAI has emerged as one of the most successful reproductive biotechnology methods, and it is now used in a great number of countries [23]. However, its application is mostly limited to multiparous sows since its efficiency is reduced in primiparous [16] and nulliparous females [17]. In previous studies [18], it was demonstrated that the main problem using PCAI in nulliparous animals is crossing the cranial part of the cervix.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The application success rate of the new insemination method (Dp-CAI) was close to 90%, which contrasts with the low level reached when PCAI is used in gilts, which ranges between 20% and 60% depending on the device and treatment used [17]. One of the main differences between the two techniques used in gilts (PCAI vs. Dp-CAI) is the length of the inner cannula, which in PCAI measures 16 cm from the cervical tip, compared with the 8 cm of Dp-CAI.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First reports described a medium to high level of difficulty in inserting the PCAI device into the uterus of 30% to 45% of primiparous females [15], being impossible in ~ 13% of cases [16]. In the case of nulliparous females, full success was attained only in ~ 20% of cases using a PCAI multiparous device, although this low success rate increased to ~ 60% at the first attempt using a catheter specifically designed for PCAI in nulliparous females [17], still far from the success rate in multiparous sows.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A new device for deep cervical artificial insemination in gilts reduces the number of sperm per dose without impairing final reproductive performance

Llamas-López

López‐Úbeda

López³

et al. 2019

J Animal Sci Biotechnol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the reproductive performance of a new artificial insemination (AI) device specifically designed for gilts (Deep cervical AI, Dp-CAI) by means of which the sperm is deposited deeply in the cervix (8 cm more cranial than in traditional cervical insemination-CAI). New AI techniques have arisen in recent decades in the porcine industry, such as post-cervical artificial insemination (PCAI), which involves depositing the sperm in the body of the uterus [through a catheter (outer tube)-cannula (inner tube)] rather than by CAI. Although the PCAI method has been successfully applied in farm conditions to reduce sperm doses without impairing the reproductive performance, this technique has limitations in gilts mainly because of the difficulty involved in introducing the inner cannula through the cranial part of the cervix. For this reason, the Dp-CAI method described herein may be considered as an alternative to CAI and PCAI methods in gilts.ResultsGilts were divided in two experimental groups: 1) Dp-CAI: gilts (n = 1166) inseminated using 1.5 × 109 sperm/45 mL; 2) CAI (as a control group): gilts (n = 130) inseminated using 2.5 × 109 sperm/85 mL. The Dp-CAI method was successfully applied in 88.90% of the gilts, with no differences detected between gilts with 1 or 2 previous oestrus cycles, although the catheter could be introduced more deeply in 2 oestrus gilts (P < 0.05). As the length of the insemination device that could not be introduced increased (at the moment of insemination), so the success rate of the Dp-CAI device fell, as did the total number of piglets born. When the reproductive output in CAI and Dp-CAI was compared, none of the parameters analysed [pregnancy and farrowing rates (%), and number of piglets born (total and live)] showed significant differences.ConclusionsThe use of the Dp-CAI technique provides a new AI method as an alternative to CAI and PCAI for pigs. The device, especially designed for gilts, was used with a high degree of success reducing conventional sperm doses without impairing reproductive parameters.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40104-019-0313-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…Cryopreservation-specific protocols for freezethaw, including vitrification, must be defined for each species (Yeste, 2016). Finally, insemination requires the development of specific catheters (Hernández-Caravaca et al, 2017).…”

Section: Assisted Reproduction In Animal Speciesmentioning

confidence: 99%