Semen Collection and Spermatozoa Characteristics in the Kea Parrot (Nestor notabilis)

Abstract

We describe the seminal characteristics of the kea parrot (Nestor notabilis), an endangered species endemic to the South Island of New Zealand. Semen was collected in the full breeding season from 6 birds in the collection of an amateur aviculturist. The manual massage technique was used. A total of 25 ejaculates was collected and evaluated for volume, degree of contamination, and spermatozoa concentration; motility and kinetic parameters were assessed on diluted samples (modified Tyrode's Albumin Lactate Pyruvate, pH 8.2, temperature 37.5°C) with a computer-aided sperm analyzer. Four ejaculates were not analyzed because of an excessively high degree of contamination. Semen color ranged from transparent or turbid yellow to whitish. The geometric mean of spermatozoa number/ejaculate was 765.9 ± 2084.7 × 10. Total and progressive motility were 71.7% ± 20.0% and 59.8% ± 22.0%, respectively. Great variability was observed both among birds and among different ejaculates of the same subject. The seminal characteristics of kea are worth further investigation, with the aim of relating semen quality to fertility and defining a minimum inseminating dose for breeding purposes. A deeper knowledge of male reproductive biology also can increase the success of breeding programs and enable the use of the kea as a model species for other more threatened species, such as the kaka ( Nestor meridionalis ) and the kakapo (Strigops habroptila).

Differences in sperm swimming speed and morphology between the three genetic morphs in the ruff sandpiper

“…Previous studies described that non-passerine sperm moves with regular helical (dextral) waves (Ballowitz, 1888; Humphreys, 1972; Vernon & Woolley, 1999) or via counter-clockwise turning of the entire sperm body (Bird & Laguë, 1977). Given the few descriptions and the lack of video recordings of non-passerine sperm movements (e.g., Cheng et al, 2002; Denk et al, 2005; Dogliero et al, 2017; Fischer et al, 2014; Gloria et al, 2014), it remains to be seen whether the way ruff sperm propel is unique to this species, or typical for other Scolopacids, shorebirds or Charadriiformes in general. Clearly, the directional movement of ruff sperm is distinct from the smooth, snake-like, movements of sperm of non-avian taxa (e.g., human or sea-urchin Psammechinus miliaris (Cosson et al, 2015; Gillies et al, 2009; Gray, 1955; Saggiorato et al, 2017; Smith et al, 2009), but see squid sperm (Bishop, 1958)).…”

Hidden impacts of conservation management on fertility of the critically endangered kākāpō

“…Methods such as habitat restoration and predator control are used to enhance survival, but it is often problems with reproductive output which most limit recovery ( Bunin, Jamieson & Eason, 1997 ; Gage et al, 2006 ; Comizzoli & Holt, 2019 ) and can have wide-ranging implications ( Findlay, Holland & Wong, 2019 ). Management techniques used to address these problems include translocations, supplementary feeding and artificial insemination ( Lloyd & Powlesland, 1994 ; Castro et al, 2003 ; Houston et al, 2007 ; Armstrong & Seddon, 2008 ; Blanco et al, 2009 ; Heber et al, 2012 ; Dogliero et al, 2017 ; Schneider et al, 2019 ). However, there has been little study of whether the conservation actions used to promote population growth of threatened species can in fact themselves impact productivity.…”