2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2019.02.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Post-cervical artificial insemination in porcine: The technique that came to stay

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
20
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
1
20
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…detected in the testis and epididymis [33], but to the best of our knowledge, shedding of virus in ejaculated semen has not been determined before. Porcine semen contaminated with PCMV poses a risk for breeding herds because AI technology can lead to fast spread with various sow population and also huge loss of disease-free status tissues and organs used for xenotransplantation [34]. Single layer centrifugation (SLC) method is easier to use, with timesaving compared with density gradient centrifugation, which can be used to remove bacteria and viruses, which was proved can remove more than 99% of PCV2 from semen [35].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…detected in the testis and epididymis [33], but to the best of our knowledge, shedding of virus in ejaculated semen has not been determined before. Porcine semen contaminated with PCMV poses a risk for breeding herds because AI technology can lead to fast spread with various sow population and also huge loss of disease-free status tissues and organs used for xenotransplantation [34]. Single layer centrifugation (SLC) method is easier to use, with timesaving compared with density gradient centrifugation, which can be used to remove bacteria and viruses, which was proved can remove more than 99% of PCV2 from semen [35].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, IDs with 1-2 billion sperm cells in a volume of 40-50 mL are used for IUAI (BORTOLOZZO et al, 2015;WABERSKI et al, 2019). The advantages of IUAI compared to CAI are reported to be the reduction in the number of sperm cells and the volume of IDs, allowing the production of a greater number of IDs per ejaculate and optimizing the use of boars of higher genetic index (WATSON & BEHAN, 2002;DALLANORA et al, 2004;HERNÁNDEZ-CARAVACA et al, 2012;GARCÍA-VÁZQUEZ et al, 2019b), shorter time to perform the insemination (MARTINEZ et al, 2002;WATSON & BEHAN, 2002), and a reduction in the costs of boar acquisition and maintenance (DIEHL et al, 2006). IUAI is consolidated and has been applied successfully to more than 90% of pluriparous sows (WATSON & BEHAN, 2002;DALLANORA et al, 2004;MEZALIRA et al, 2005;BENNEMANN et al, 2007), to approximately 86% of primiparous sows (SBARDELLA et al, 2014) and is widespread in the production systems for these categories.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite that, there are limitations to recommending IUAI in gilts, the most significant challenge being the difficulty of cannula insertion through the cervix (HERNÁNDEZ-CARAVACA et al, 2017;GARCÍA-VÁZQUEZ et al, 2019b). Thus, there is still a need to perform both AI techniques (CAI and IUAI) in the farm routine and to produce two semen dose sizes in the boar studs (BORTOLOZZO et al, 2015;GARCÍA-VÁZQUEZ et al, 2019b). Considering that gilts represent a significant number of animals in the breeding herd (BORTOLOZZO & WENTZ, 2006), the use of IUAI could consolidate advantages observed in pluriparous sows and allow standardization of the AI technique used on farms and the semen dose production in boar studs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations