2014
DOI: 10.4067/s0717-95022014000200057
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Selección Espermática en Semen Congelado/Descongelado de Equino: Evaluación de las Membranas Plasmática, Acrosomal y Potencial de Membrana Mitocondrial

Abstract: RESUMEN:Los procedimientos de criopreservación inducen cambios morfofuncionales en los espermatozoides. Es importante post descongelación espermática utilizar procedimientos de selección que permitan recuperar espermatozoides altamente funcionales. El objetivo del presente estudio fue comparar la eficiencia del Swim-up y Equipure® en la selección de espermatozoides funcionales en semen descongelado de equino. Semen de 4 potros reproductores Criollos Chilenos (A, B, C y D), fueron descongelados separadamente y … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In donkeys, as in other mammalian species, a high inter- and intra-male variability in the ability of sperm to withstand cryopreservation has been reported [ 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ], leading to the classification of males/ejaculates as of “good” (GFE) or “poor” (PFE) freezability [ 17 , 31 , 35 , 36 ]. Differences in the composition of SP surrounding sperm among individuals and ejaculates could explain such differences [ 37 , 38 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In donkeys, as in other mammalian species, a high inter- and intra-male variability in the ability of sperm to withstand cryopreservation has been reported [ 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ], leading to the classification of males/ejaculates as of “good” (GFE) or “poor” (PFE) freezability [ 17 , 31 , 35 , 36 ]. Differences in the composition of SP surrounding sperm among individuals and ejaculates could explain such differences [ 37 , 38 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Yet, the removal of SP increases the degree of sperm susceptibility to oxidative damage, as the enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidants that this fluid contains are also removed [ 29 , 31 , 32 ]. Moreover, in horses, as in other mammalian species, there is great variability between, and even within, stallions in the ability of their sperm to withstand cryopreservation [ 27 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 ], leading to the classification of ejaculates/stallions as having good freezability (GFE) or poor freezability (PFE) [ 28 , 30 , 35 , 38 ]. This variability could be related to differences in the composition of SPs and the activity exerted by their antioxidants [ 39 , 40 , 41 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Yet, removal of SP increases the degree of sperm susceptibility to oxidative damage as the enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidants that this fluid contains are also removed [25][26][27]. Moreover, in horses, as in other mammalian species, there is great variability between, and even within, stallions in the ability of their sperm to withstand cryopreservation [28][29][30][31][32][33], leading to the classification of males/ejaculates as with "poor" (PFE) or "good" (GFE) cryotolerance [30,[34][35][36]. This variability could be related to differences in the composition of SP and the activity exerted by their antioxidants [37][38][39].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%