Morphometric differences in sperm subpopulations in frozen-thawed semen of two bovine subspecies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15359/ru.39-1.10Keywords:
Biology, cattle, spermatozoa, subspecies, morphometry analysis, subpopulationAbstract
[Objetive] The objective was to characterize different sperm subpopulations based on morphometric parameters of frozen-thawed semen in two bovine subspecies using a CASA system. [Methodology] The experiment was carried out at the Costa Rica Institute of Technology from May to December 2023. Spermatozoa from 10 bulls (five animals of each subspecies, Bos taurus and Bos indicus) were evaluated after thawing of the semen doses by an ISAS®v1, Computer-Assisted Sperm Analysis (CASA)-Morph system. Sub-populations of head morphometric spermatozoa were characterized using multivariate procedures such as principal components (PCs) analysis and clustering methods (k-means model) [Results] The ejaculate of male exhibits significant heterogeneity and comprises diverse sperm subpopulations with differing morphometric patterns. Three different sperm subpopulations were identified from three PCs: head size, head shape, and symmetry of the sperm head and the degree to which it was pyriform. The proportions of the different sperm subpopulations varied in the two-bovine subspecies; Bos taurus and Bos indicus. Results indicated that subpopulations SP1, SP2, and SP3 were different for PC criteria and these differences were relevant. The variability in sperm morphometry assessments underscores the need to standardize semen evaluation protocols [Conclusions] These findings highlight the importance of knowing the diversity in sperm morphometry between subspecies to both improve in vitro evaluation tests and to distinguish subspecies.
Downloads
References
Andraszek, K., Banaszewska, D., Szeleszczuk, O., Kuchta‐gładysz, M., & Grzesiakowska, A. (2020). Morphometric Characteristics of the Spermatozoa of Blue Fox (Alopex lagopus) and Silver Fox (Vulpes vulpes). Animals , 10(10), 1927. https://doi.org/10.3390/ANI10101927
Awad, M. M. (2011). Effect of some permeating cryoprotectants on CASA motility results in cryopreserved bull spermatozoa. Animal Reproduction Science, 123(3-4), 157-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2011.01.003
Banaszewska, D., Andraszek, K., Czubaszek, M., & Biesiada–Drzazga, B. (2015). The effect of selected staining techniques on bull sperm morphometry. Animal Reproduction Science, 159, 17-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2015.06.019
Barquero, V., Roldan, E. R. S., Soler, C., Yániz, J. L., Camacho, M., & Valverde, A. (2021). Predictive Capacity of Boar Sperm Morphometry and Morphometric Sub-Populations on Reproductive Success after Artificial Insemination. Animals, 11(4), 920. https://doi.org/10.3390/ANI11040920
Barth, A. D. (2018). Review: The use of bull breeding soundness evaluation to identify subfertile and infertile bulls. Animal, 12, s158-s164. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731118000538
Beletti, M. E., Costa, L. da F., & Viana, M. P. (2005). A comparison of morphometric characteristics of sperm from fertile Bos taurus and Bos indicus bulls in Brazil. Animal Reproduction Science, 85(1-2), 105-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2004.04.019
Boersma, A. A., Braun, J., & Stolla, R. (1999). Influence of Random Factors and Two Different Staining Procedures on Computer‐assisted Sperm Head Morphometry in Bulls. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 34(2), 77-82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.1999.tb01387.x
Buchelly Imbachí, F., Zalazar, L., Pastore, J. I., Nicolli, A., Ledesma, A., Hozbor, F. A., Cesari, A., & Ballarin, V. (2022). Clustering and classification software for sperm subpopulation analysis. Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering: Imaging & Visualization, 10(6), 585-598. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681163.2021.2012831
Caldeira, C., Hernández-Ibánez, S., Vendrell, A., Valverde, A., García-Molina, A., Gallego, V., Asturiano, J. F., & Soler, C. (2022). Characterisation of European eel (Anguilla anguilla) spermatozoa morphometry using Trumorph tool in fixed and non-fixed samples. Aquaculture, 553, 738047. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AQUACULTURE.2022.738047
Castellini, C., Dal Bosco, A., Ruggeri, S., Collodel, G., Bosco, A. D., Ruggeri, S., & Collodel, G. (2011). What is the best frame rate for evaluation of sperm motility in different species by computer-assisted sperm analysis? Fertility and Sterility, 96(1), 24-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.04.096
Cheah, Y., & Yang, W. (2011). Functions of essential nutrition for high quality spermatogenesis. Advances in Bioscience and Biotechnology, 2(4), 182-197. https://doi.org/10.4236/abb.2011.24029
Franken, D. R. (2015). How accurate is sperm morphology as an indicator of sperm function? Andrologia, 47(6), 720-723. https://doi.org/10.1111/AND.12324
Gallagher, M. T., Smith, D. J., & Kirkman-Brown, J. C. (2018). CASA: Tracking the past and plotting the future. Reproduction, Fertility and Development, 30(6), 867-874. https://doi.org/10.1071/RD17420
Garcia-Herreros, M., Aparicio, I. M., Baron, F. J., Garcia-Marin, L. J., & Gil, M. C. (2006). Standardization of sample preparation, staining and sampling methods for automated sperm head morphometry analysis of boar spermatozoa. International Journal of Andrology, 29(5), 553-563. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2605.2006.00696.x
García-Molina, A., Navarro, N., Cerveró, C., Sadeghi, S., Valverde, A., Roldan, E. R. S., Bompart, D., Garrido, N., & Soler, C. (2023). Effect of incubation and analysis temperatures on sperm kinematics and morphometrics during human semen analysis. Revista Internacional de Andrología, 21(2), 100350. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ANDROL.2023.100350
Giaretta, E., Munerato, M., Yeste, M., Galeati, G., Spinaci, M., Tamanini, C., Mari, G., & Bucci, D. (2017). Implementing an open-access CASA software for the assessment of stallion sperm motility: Relationship with other sperm quality parameters. Animal Reproduction Science, 176, 11-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2016.11.003
Gravance, C. G., Casey, M. E., & Casey, P. J. (2009). Pre-freeze bull sperm head morphometry related to post-thaw fertility. Animal Reproduction Science, 114(1-3), 81-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2008.09.014
Holt, W., & Van Look, K. (2004). Concepts in sperm heterogeneity, sperm selection and sperm competition as biological foundations for laboratory tests of semen quality. Reproduction, 127 (5), 527-535. https://doi.org/10.1530/rep.1.00134
Hook, K. A., & Fisher, H. S. (2020). Methodological considerations for examining the relationship between sperm morphology and motility. Molecular Reproduction and Development, 87(6), 633-649. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrd.23346
Kaiser, H. F. (1958). The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 23, 187-200. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289233
Kaufman, Leonard., & Rousseuw, P. J. (1991). Finding Groups in Data: An Introduction to Cluster Analysis. Biometrics, 47(2), 788. https://doi.org/10.2307/2532178
Kramer, E. M., Enelamah, J., Fang, H., & Tayjasanant, P. A. (2024). Karyotype depends on sperm head morphology in some amniote groups. Frontiers in Genetics, 15, 1396530. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2024.1396530
Madhusoodan, A. P., Sejian, V., Rashamol, V. P., Savitha, S. T., Bagath, M., Krishnan, G., & Bhatta, R. (2019). Resilient capacity of cattle to environmental challenges – An updated review. Journal of Animal Behaviour and Biometeorology, 7(3), 104-118. https://doi.org/10.31893/2318-1265jabb.v7n3p104-118
Maroto-Morales, A., García-Álvarez, O., Ramón, M., Martínez-Pastor, F., Fernández-Santos, Mr., Soler, Aj., & Garde, J. (2016). Current status and potential of morphometric sperm analysis. Asian Journal of Andrology, 18(6), 863. https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682X.187581
Martínez-Fresneda, L., O’Brien, E., Velázquez, R., Toledano-Díaz, A., Martínez-Cáceres, C. M., Tesfaye, D., Schellander, K., García-Vázquez, F. A., & Santiago-Moreno, J. (2019). Seasonal variation in sperm freezability associated with changes in testicular germinal epithelium in domestic (Ovis aries) and wild (Ovis musimon) sheep. Reproduction, Fertility, and Development, 31(10), 1545-1557. https://doi.org/10.1071/RD18511
Martínez-Pastor, F. (2022). What is the importance of sperm subpopulations? Animal Reproduction Science, 246, 106844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2021.106844
Mortimer, S. T., & De Jonge, C. J. (2018). CASA—Computer-Aided Sperm Analysis. Encyclopedia of Reproduction, 5, 59-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-801238-3.64935-8
Palacin, I., Santolaria, P., Alquezar-Baeta, C., Soler, C., Silvestre, M., & Yániz, J. (2020). Relationship of sperm plasma membrane and acrosomal integrities with sperm morphometry in Bos taurus. Asian Journal of Andrology, 22(6), 578. https://doi.org/10.4103/aja.aja_2_20
Petrunkina, A. M., Waberski, D., Günzel-Apel, A. R., & Töpfer-Petersen, E. (2007). Determinants of sperm quality and fertility in domestic species. Reproduction, 134, 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1530/REP-07-0046
Ramón, M., Jiménez-Rabadán, P., García-Álvarez, O., Maroto-Morales, A., Soler, A., Fernández-Santos, M., Pérez-Guzmán, M., & Garde, J. (2014). Understanding Sperm Heterogeneity: Biological and Practical Implications. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 49, 30-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/rda.12404
Rubio‐Guillén, J., González, D., Garde, J., Esteso, M., Fernández‐Santos, M., Rodríguez‐Gíl, J., Madrid‐Bury, N., & Quintero‐Moreno, A. (2007). Effects of Cryopreservation on Bull Spermatozoa Distribution in Morphometrically Distinct Subpopulations. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 42(4), 354-357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.2006.00788.x
Sampaio, W. V., Oliveira, K. G., Leão, D. L., Caldas-Bussiere, M. C., Queiroz, H. L., Paim, F. P., Santos, R. R., & Domingues, S. F. S. (2017). Morphologic analysis of sperm from two neotropical primate species: comparisons between the squirrel monkeys Saimiri collinsi and Saimiri vanzolinii. Zygote, 25(2), 141-148. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0967199416000411
Santolaria, P., Vicente-Fiel, S., Palacín, I., Fantova, E., Blasco, M. E., Silvestre, M. A., & Yániz, J. L. (2015). Predictive capacity of sperm quality parameters and sperm subpopulations on field fertility after artificial insemination in sheep. Animal Reproduction Science, 163, 82-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2015.10.001
Saranholi, D. A. C., Paula, R. R. de, Pytilak, E., Afonso, F., Canela, L. F., Almeida, A. B. M. de, Hidalgo, M. M. T., Martins, M. I. M., Blaschi, W., & Barreiros, T. R. R. (2021). Comparison of seminal characteristics of Aberdeen Angus, Holstein and Nelore bulls before and after cryopreservation. Research, Society and Development, 10(16), e408101623382. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v10i16.23382
Soler, C., Alambiaga, A., Martí, M. A., García-Molina, A., Valverde, A., Contell, J., & Campos, M. (2017a). Dog sperm head morphometry: its diversity and evolution. Asian Journal of Andrology, 19(2), 149-153. https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682X.189207
Soler, C., Contell, J., Bori, L., Sancho, M., García-Molina, A., Valverde, A., & Segarvall, J. (2017b). Sperm kinematic, head morphometric and kinetic-morphometric subpopulations in the blue fox (Alopex lagopus). Asian Journal of Andrology, 19(2), 154-159. https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682X.188445
Soler, C., Cooper, T., Valverde, A., & Yániz, J. (2016). Afterword to Sperm morphometrics today and tomorrow special issue in Asian Journal of Andrology. Asian Journal of Andrology, 18(6), 895-897. https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682X.188451
Soler, C., Gadea, B., Soler, A., Fernández-Santos, M., Esteso, M., Núñez, J., Moreira, P., Núñez, M., Gutiérrez, R., Sancho, M., & Garde, J. (2005). Comparison of three different staining methods for the assessment of epididymal red deer sperm morphometry by computerized analysis with ISAS®. Theriogenology, 64(5), 1236-1243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2005.02.018
Soler, C., García-Molina, A., Contell, J., Silvestre, M. A., & Sancho, M. (2015). The Trumorph℗® system: The new univ the morphology of living sperm. Animal Reproduction Science, 158, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ANIREPROSCI.2015.04.001
Soler, C., Valverde, A., Bompart, D., Fereidounfar, S., Sancho, M., Yániz, J., Garcia-Molina, A., & Korneenko-Zhilyaev, Yu. A. (2017c). New methods of semen analysis by CASA. Sel’skokhozyaistvennaya Biologiya, 52(2), 232-241. https://doi.org/10.15389/agrobiology.2017.2.232eng
Spencer, N. H. (2013). Essentials of multivariate data analysis. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b16344
Taylor, JeremyF., Schnabel, RobertD., & Sutovsky, P. (2018). Review: Genomics of bull fertility. animal, 12, s172-s183. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731118000599
Terán, E., Azcona, F., Ramón, M., Molina, A., Dorado, J., Hidalgo, M., Ross, P., Goszczynski, D., & Demyda‐Peyrás, S. (2021). Sperm morphometry is affected by increased inbreeding in the Retinta cattle breed: A molecular approach. Molecular Reproduction and Development, 88(6), 416-426. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrd.23475
Thurston, L. M., Siggins, K., Mileham, A. J., Watson, P. F., & Holt, W. V. (2002). Identification of Amplified Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism Markers Linked to Genes Controlling Boar Sperm Viability Following Cryopreservation1. Biology of Reproduction, 66(3), 545-554. https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod66.3.545
Toner, J. P., Mossad, H., Grow, D. R., Morshedi, M., Swanson, R. J., & Oehninger, S. (1995). Value of sperm morphology assessed by strict criteria for prediction of the outcome of artificial (intrauterine) insemination. Andrologia, 27(3), 143-148. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1439-0272.1995.TB01085.X
Valverde, A., Arenán, H., Sancho, M., Contell, J., Yániz, J., Fernández, A., & Soler, C. (2016). Morphometry and subpopulation structure of Holstein bull spermatozoa: variations in ejaculates and cryopreservation straws. Asian Journal of Andrology, 18(6), 851. https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682X.187579
Valverde, A., Madrigal-Valverde, M., Castro-Morales, O., Gadea-Rivas, A., Johnston, S., & Soler, C. (2019a). Kinematic and head morphometric characterisation of spermatozoa from the Brown Caiman (Caiman crocodilus fuscus). Animal Reproduction Science, 207, 9-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ANIREPROSCI.2019.06.011
Valverde Abarca, A., Castro-Morales, O., & Madrigal-Valverde, M. (2019b). Sperm kinematics and morphometric subpopulations analysis with CASA systems: a review. Revista de Biología Tropical, 67(6), 1473-1487. https://doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v67i6.35151
Vicente-Fiel, S., Palacín, I., Santolaria, P., Hidalgo, C. O., Silvestre, M. A., Arrebola, F., & Yániz, J. L. (2013). A comparative study of the sperm nuclear morphometry in cattle, goat, sheep, and pigs using a new computer-assisted method (CASMA-F). Theriogenology, 79(3), 436-442. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.THERIOGENOLOGY.2012.10.015
Villaverde-Morcillo, S., Soler, A. J., Esteso, M. C., Castaño, C., Miñano-Berna, A., Gonzalez, F., & Santiago-Moreno, J. (2017). Immature and mature sperm morphometry in fresh and frozen-thawed falcon ejaculates. Theriogenology, 98, 94-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2017.04.051
Víquez, L., Barquero, V., Soler, C., Roldan, E. R. S., & Valverde, A. (2020). Kinematic Sub-Populations in Bull Spermatozoa: A Comparison of Classical and Bayesian Approaches. Biology, 9(6), 138. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology9060138
Waberski, D., Suarez, S. S., & Henning, H. (2021). Assessment of sperm motility in livestock: Perspectives based on sperm swimming conditions in vivo. Animal Reproduction Science, 246, 106849. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2021.106849
Yániz, J. L., Palacín, I., Caycho, K. S., Soler, C., Silvestre, M. A., & Santolaria, P. (2018). Determining the relationship between bull sperm kinematic subpopulations and fluorescence groups using an integrated sperm quality analysis technique. Reproduction. Fertilility and Development, 30(6), 919-923. https://doi.org/10.1071/rd17441
Yániz, J. L., Soler, C., & Santolaria, P. (2015). Computer assisted sperm morphometry in mammals: A review. Animal Reproduction Science, 156, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ANIREPROSCI.2015.03.002
Yániz, J., Vicente-Fiel, S., Soler, C., Recreo, P., Carretero, T., Bono, A., Berné, J., & Santolaria, P. (2016). Comparison of different statistical approaches to evaluate morphometric sperm subpopulations in men. Asian Journal of Andrology, 18(6), 819-823. https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682X.186872
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Shared by Journal and Authors (CC-BY-NC-ND)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors guarantee the journal the right to be the first publication of the work as licensed under a Creative Commons License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
2. Authors can set separate additional agreements for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in the journal (eg, place it in an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
3. The authors have declared to hold all permissions to use the resources they provided in the paper (images, tables, among others) and assume full responsibility for damages to third parties.
4. The opinions expressed in the paper are the exclusive responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the editors or the Universidad Nacional.
Uniciencia Journal and all its productions are under Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Unported.
There is neither fee for access nor Article Processing Charge (APC)
