Semen Characteristics and artificial insemination in rockhopper penguins (Eudyptes chrysocome chrysocome)

Abstract

This work was performed as part of a multi-year study to determine the cause of the low fertility in captive rockhopper penguins (Eudyptes chrysocome chrysocome) and attempt to increase the fertility through artificial insemination (AI). Semen collection and characterization was performed on 14 male rockhopper penguins. The samples were evaluated for volume, sperm concentration, and sperm quality (motility, forward motility, viability, and morphology). There was a large variation between individuals and between collections for each individual. Mean volume of ejaculate was 0.24 ml. Mean concentration was 47.09 × 10(6) sperm/ml. Mean number of sperm per collection was 6.57 × 10(6). The mean motility was 49.4%. Mean forward motility was 1.7. Mean percentage of living sperm was 88.9%. Mean percentage of sperm with normal morphology was 69.4%. AI was performed on a total of 10 females using pooled semen samples. The birds were also allowed to naturally mate. Ten eggs were laid and three fertile eggs were produced, one of them hatched but died within 24 hr. Paternity testing was performed using 12 microsatellite loci, but unfortunately due to insufficient variability, the paternity of the chick and two embryos could not be determined.

The use of semen evaluation and assisted reproduction in Spix's macaws in terms of species conservation

“…The fact that the majority of morphological abnormalities (50.2%) are located in the head region corresponds to findings in other avian species, such as passerines [Lüpold et al, 2009], emus [du Plessis andSoley, 2011], penguins [Waldoch et al, 2012], and psittacines [Stelzer et al, 2005[Stelzer et al, , 2009. The mean rate of 26.5% (range 6.0-55.0%) morphologically normal spermatozoa was low compared to 42-65% normal spermatozoa in three conure species (Aratinga acuticaudata, A. solsttialis, Guarouba guarouba) and 95% in blue-napped parrots [Stelzer et al, 2005].…”

“…Some of these problems might be solved by assisted reproduction [Blanco et al, ]. Semen donors might be evaluated and selected according to results of semen analysis offering better breeding options [Neumann et al, ]; semen collection and artificial insemination (AI) have been used in domestic fowl [Burrows and Quinn, ] and in falconry [Temple, ] for decades and have been described as useful tools in the conservation of rare avian species [Blanco et al, ; DOC, ; Waldoch et al, ]. In psittacines, semen collection via massage method and semen analysis have been performed in smaller species [Samour et al, ; Anderson et al, ; Samour, ; Stelzer et al, , ; Neumann et al, ], but rarely reported in larger parrots [Brock, ; DellaVolpe et al, ], and with only moderate success rates.…”

Semen characterization, seasonality of production, and in vitro sperm quality after chilled storage and cryopreservation in the king penguin (Aptenodytes patagonicus)

“…Seminal traits based on the two males in this study revealed that king penguins produce ejaculates of high quantity and quality compared with the two other penguin species where ejaculate characterization has been reported (Magellanic: O'Brien et al, ; rockhopper: Waldoch et al, , ). Specifically, the total sperm number per ejaculate for the king penguin (563.4 × 10 6 ) was 49‐ and 86‐fold higher than that of the Magellanic (11.4 × 10 6 ) and rockhopper (6.57 × 10 6 ) penguin, respectively.…”

“…Research on basic reproductive biology and sperm preservation is needed for each penguin species to enhance natural reproduction and successfully apply AI. Seminal traits have been reported for the Magellanic penguin ( Spheniscus magellanicus ) using semen from one male (O'Brien et al, ) and for the rockhopper penguin ( Eudyptes chrysocome chrysocome ; Waldoch et al, , ). Semen preservation has been reported in the former species (O'Brien et al, ), but similar information for the king penguin is not available.…”

Mining of key genes for cold adaptation from Pseudomonas fragi D12 and analysis of its cold-adaptation mechanism

“…Samtools v0.1.19 with the command mpileup and Bcftools v0.1.19+ were used to perform single-nucleotide variant calling ( Ramirez-Gonzalez et al, 2012 ; Etherington et al, 2015 ; Danecek et al, 2021 ). Rockhopper (2.0.3) was employed to predict operons, transcription start sites, and transcription stop sites ( Waldoch et al, 2012 ). RBSfinder (v1.0) was used for Shine–Dalgarno sequence prediction ( Florensa et al, 2022 ).…”