Additional value of computer assisted semen analysis (CASA) compared to conventional motility assessments in pig artificial insemination

Theriogenology

Volumn 76, Issue 8, 2011, Pages

  Broekhuijse, M L W J ^a,b   Sostaric E ^a   Feitsma, H ^c   Gadella, B M ^a  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b Varkens KI Nederland   (Netherlands)

^c Institute for Pig Genetics BV   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Artificial insemination; Boar; Computer assisted semen analysis; Fertility; Sperm motility; Standardisation procedure

Indexed keywords

SUIDAE;

EID: 80053562551     PISSN: 0093691X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2011.05.040     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Verstegen J., Iguer-ouada M., Onclin K. Computer assisted semen analyzers in andrology and veterinary practice. Theriogenology 2002, 57:149-179.
2. Deibel F.C., Smith J.E., Crabo B.G., Graham E.F. Evaluation of six assays of sperm quality by means of their accuracy, precision and sensitivity in separating known induced levels of damage. Proc 8th Int Congr Anita Reprod Artif Insem 1976, 4:888-891.
3. Chong A.P., Walters C.A., Weinrieb S.A. The neglected laboratory test. The semen analysis. J Androl 1983, 4:280-282.
4. Jeqnier A.M., Ukombe E.B. Errors inherent in the performance of routine semen analysis. Br J Urol 1983, 55:434-436.
5. Mortimer D., Shu M.A., Tan R. Standardization and quality control of sperm concentration and sperm motility counts in semen analysis. Human Reprod 1986, 1(5):299-303.
6. Amann R.P. Can the fertility potential of a semen sample be predicted accurately?. J Androl 1989, 10:89-98.
7. Knuth U.A., Neuwinger J., Nieschlag E. Bias of routine semen analysis by uncontrolled changes in laboratory environment-detection by long term sampling of monthly means for quality control. Int J Androl 1989, 12:375-383.
8. Dunphy B.C., Neal L.M., Cook I.D. The clinical value of conventional semen analysis. Fertil Steril 1989, 5l:324-329.
9. Rozeboom K.J. Evaluating boar semen quality 2000, Animal Science Facts; Reviewed by W.L. Flowers, Department of Animal Science, North Carolina St. University and W. Singleton, Department of Animal Science, Purdue University.
10. Dott H.M., Foster G.C. The estimation of sperm motility in semen, on a membrane slide, by measuring the area change frequency with an image analyzing computer. J Reprod Fertil 1979, 55:161-166.
11. Lenzi A. Computer-aided semen analysis (CASA) 10 years later: a test-bed for the European scientific andrological community. Int J Androl 1997, 20:1-2.
12. Comhaire F.H., Huysse S., Hinting A., Vermeulen L., Schoonjans F. Objective semen analysis: Has the target been reached?. Hum Reprod 1992, 7:237-241.
13. Holt W., Watson P., Curry M., Holt C. Reproducibility of computer-aided semen analysis: Comparison of five different systems used in a practical workshop. Fertil Steril 1994, 62:1277-1282.
14. Smith S.C., England G.C.W. Effect of technical settings and semen handling upon motility characteristics of dog spermatozoa measured by computer-aided sperm analysis. J Reprod Fertil 2001, 57:151-159.
15. Rijsselaere T., Van Soom A., Maes D., de Kruif A. Effect of technical settings on canine semen motility parameters measured by the Hamilton-Thorne analyser. Theriogenology 2003, 60:1553-1568.
16. Rijsselaere T., Van Soom A., Tanghe S., Coryn M., Maes D., de Kruif A. New techniques for the assessment of canine semen quality: a review. Theriogenology 2005, 64:706-719.
17. Tejerina F., Buranaamnuay K., Saravia F., Wallgren M., Rogriguez-Martinez H. Assessment of motility of ejaculated, liquid stored boar spermatozoa using computerized instruments. Theriogenology 2008, 69:1129-1138.
18. Larsen L., Scheike T., Jensen T.K., Bonde J.P., Ernst E., Hjollund N.K., Zhou Y., Skakkebæk N.E., Giwercman A. Computer-assisted semen analysis parameters as predictors for fertility of men from the general population. Hum Reprod 2000, 15:1562-1567.
19. Iguer-ouada M., Verstegen J.P. Evaluation of the "Hamilton Thorne computer-based automated system" for dog semen analysis. Theriogenology 2001, 55:733-749.
20. Krause W. Computer-assisted semen analysis systems: comparison with routine evaluation and prognostic value in male fertility and assisted reproduction. Hum Reprod 1995, 10:60-66.
21. Farrell P., Trouern-Trend V., Foote R.H., Douglas-Hamilton D. Repeatability of measurements on human, rabbit, and bull sperm by computer-assisted sperm analysis when comparing individual fields and means of 12 fields. Fertil Steril 1995, 64:208-210.
22. Farrell P.B., Foote R.H., Mc Ardle M.M., Trouern-Trend V.L., Tardif A.L. Media and dilution procedures tested to minimize handling effects on human, rabbit, and bull sperm for computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA). J Androl 1996, 17:293-300.
23. Abaigar T., Holt W.V., Harrison R.A., del Barrio G. Sperm subpopulations in boar (Sus scrofa) and gazelle (Gazella dama mhorr) semen as revealed by pattern analysis of computer-assisted motility assessments. Biol Reprod 1999, 60:32-41.
24. Hoflack G., Opsomer G., Rijsselaere T., Van Soom A., Maes D., de Kruif A., Duchateau L. Comparison of computer-assisted sperm motility analysis parameters in semen from Belgian Blue and Holstein-Friesian bulls. Reprod Domest Anim 2007, 42:153-161.
25. Davis D.O., Katz D.F. Computer-aided sperm analysis: technology at a crossroads. Fertil Steril 1993, 59:953-955.
26. Tardif S., Laforest J.P., Cormier N., Bailey J.L. The importance of porcine sperm parameters on fertility in vivo. Theriogenology 1999, 52:447-459.
27. Holt C., Holt W.V., Moore H.D.M., Reed H.C.B., Curnock R.M. Objectively measured boar sperm motility parameters correlate with the outcomes of on-farm inseminations: results of two fertility trials. J Androl 1997, 18:312-323.
28. Gadea J., Sellés E., Marco M.A. The predictive value of porcine seminal parameters on fertility outcome under commercial conditions. Reprod Domest Anim 2004, 39:1-6.
29. Gadea J. Sperm factors related to in vitro and in vivo porcine fertility. Theriogenology 2005, 63:431-444.
30. Juonala T., Lintukangas S., Nurttila T., Andersson M. Relationship between semen quality and fertility in 106 AI boars. Reprod Dom Anim 1998, 33:155-158.
31. Popwell J.M., Flowers W.L. Variability in relationships between semen quality and estimates of in vivo and in vitro fertility in boars. Anim Reprod Sci 2004, 81:97-113.
32. Hansen C., Vermeiden T., Vermeiden J.P.W., Simmet C., Day B.C., Feitsma H. Comparison of FACSCount AF system, Improved Neubauer hemocytometer, Corning 254 photometer, SpermVision, UltiMate and NucleoCounter SP-100 for determination of sperm concentration of boar semen. Theriogenology 2006, 66:2188-2194.
33. Schönhärl G., Krause W. The use of computer-assisted semen analysis (CASA) in the andrological laboratory. Hautarzt 1991, 42:556-558.
34. Klimowicz M.D., Nizanksi W., Batkowski F., Savic M.A. The comparison of assessment of pigeon semen motility and sperm concentration by conventional methods and the CASA system (HTM IVOS). Theriogenology 2008, 70:77-82.
35. Birks A.G., Izzard H., Morroll D.R., Prior J.R., Troup S.A., Lieberman B.A., Matson P.L. The routine assessment of sperm motility at room temperature and 37 degrees C. Int J Androl 1994, 17:289-291.
36. Kraemer M., Fillion C., Martin-Pont B., Auger J. Factors influencing human sperm kinematic measurements by the celltrack computer-assisted sperm analysis system. Hum Reprod 1998, 13:611-619.
37. Contri A., Valorz C., Faustini M., Wegher L., Carluccio A. Effect of semen preparation on casa motility results in cryopreserved bull spermatozoa. Theriogenology 2010, 74:424-435.
38. Davis R.O., Katz D.F. Operational standards for CASA instruments. J Androl 1993, 14:385-394.
39. Varner D.D., Vaughan S.D., Johnston L. Use of a computerized system for evaluation of equine spermatozoa1 motility. Am J Vet Res 1991, 52:224-228.
40. Collins A.M., Donoghue A.M. Viability assessment of honey bee, Apis mellifera, sperm using dual fluorescent staining. Theriogenology 1999, 51:1513-1523.
41. Ginsburg K.A., Armant D.R. The influence of chamber characteristics on the reliability of sperm concentration and movement measurements obtained by manual and videomicrographic analysis. Fertil Steril 1990, 53:882-887.
42. Le Lannou D., Griveau J.F., Le Pichon J.P., Quero J.C. Effects of chamber depth on the motion pattern of human spermatozoa in semen or in capacitating medium. Hum Reprod 1992, 7:1417-1421.
43. Bailey E., Fenning N., Chamberlain S., Devlin L., Hopkisson J., Tomlinson M. Validation of sperm counting andrology methods using limits of agreement. J Androl 2007, 28:364-373.
44. Segre G., Silberberg A. Behavior of macroscopic rigid spheres in Poiseuille flow. J Fluid Mech 1961, 14:136-157.
45. Douglas-Hamilton D.H., Smith N.G., Kuster C.E., Vermeiden J.P.W., Althouse G.C. Capillary-Loaded Particle Fluid Dynamics: Effect on Estimation of Sperm Concentration. J Androl 2005, 26:115-122.
46. Douglas-Hamilton D.H., Smith N.G., Kuster C.E., Vermeiden J.P.W., Althouse G.C. Particle Distribution in Low-Volume Capillary-Loaded Chambers. J Androl 2005, 26:107-114.
47. Davis R.O., Katz D.F. Standardization and comparability of CASA instruments. J Androl 1992, 13:81-86.
48. Neuwinger J., Knuth U.A., Nieschlag E. Evaluation of the Hamilton-Thorn 2030 motility analyser for routine semen analysis in an infertility clinic. Int J Androl 1990, 13:100-109.
49. Farrell P.B., Trouern-Trend V., Foote R.H., Douglas-Hamilton D. Repeatability of measurements on human, rabbit, and bull sperm by computer-assisted sperm analysis when comparing individual fields and means of 12 fields. Fertil Steril 1995, 64:208-210.
50. Janett F., Fuschini E., Keo S., Hässig M., Thun R. Seasonal changes of semen quality in the boar. Reprod Domest Anim 2005, 40:356.
51. Cameron R.K., Blackshaw A.W. The effect of elevated ambient temperature on spermatogenesis in the boar. J Reprod Fertil 1980, 59:173-179.
52. Stone B.A. Heat induced infertility of boars: the interrelationship between depressed sperm output and fertility and an estimation of the critical air temperature above which sperm output is impaired. Anim Reprod Sci 1982, 4:283-299.
53. Malmgren L. Experimentally induced testicular alterations in boars: sperm morphology changes in mature and peripuberal boars. Zbl Vet Med 1989, 36:3-14.
54. Rivera M.M., Quintero-Moreno A., Barrera X., Palomo M.J., Rigau T., Rodríguez-Gil J.E. Natural Mediterranean photoperiod does not affect the main parameters of boar-semen quality analysis. Theriogenology 2005, 64:934-946.
55. Bartness T.M., Golman B.D. Mammalian pineal melatonin: a clock for all seasons. Experientia 1989, 45:939-945.
56. Samper J.C. Equine breeding management and artificial insemination 2000, 1-140. WB Saunders, Philadelphia.
57. Krause W., Viethen G. Quality assessment of computer-assisted semen analysis (CASA) in the andrology laboratory. Andrologia 1999, 31:125-129.
58. Kolibianakis E.M., Tarlatzis B.C., Bontis J., Papadimas J., Spanos E., Mantalenakis S. Evaluation of Hamilton-Thorn Automated Semen Analysis system. Sys Biol Reprod Med 1992, 28:213-222.
59. Knuth U.A., Yeung C.H., Nieschlag E. Computerized semen analysis: objective measurement of semen characteristics is biased by subjective parameter setting. Fertil Steril 1987, 48:118-124.
60. Morris A.R., Coutts J.R., Robertson L. A detailed study of the effects of video frame rates of 25, 30 and 60 Hz on human sperm movement characteristics. Hum Reprod 1996, 11:304-310.