Can external quality control improve pig AI efficiency?

• Published in: Theriogenology 2008-11, Vol.70 (8), p.1346-1351
• Main Authors: Waberski, D., Petrunkina, A.M., Töpfer-Petersen, E.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Agriculture - organization & administration; AI station; Animals; artificial insemination; Boar; Female; Fertilization in Vitro - veterinary; Insemination, Artificial - veterinary; Male; male fertility; processing technology; Quality Control; semen; semen analysis; semen evaluation; semen processing; Semen quality; sperm quality; spermatozoa; storage; swine; Swine - physiology; testing
• ISSN: 0093-691X; 1879-3231
• DOI: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.06.006

External quality control programmes carried out by central laboratories have been long established in human andrology with the aim of enhancing the accuracy and reproducibility of semen assessment. Compared to human, demands on boar semen assessment in AI stations are more complex, with the need both to identify boars with poor ejaculate quality and to monitor individual boar differences for semen storage. Additionally, appropriate assessment serves as a control instrument to ensure the security and efficiency of semen processing. Despite current limitations regarding the ability of sperm assays to estimate the potential fertility of males, it is evident that boar fertility is related to certain conventional semen tests, e.g. sperm morphology. In central studies carried out on stored semen from 11 AI stations, flow cytometric assessment of plasma and acrosome membrane integrity proved to be more sensitive in detecting sperm damage associated with ageing and temperature stress as compared to light microscopy. Membrane integrity of stored semen differed between AI stations indicating significant influences of semen processing on sperm quality. Thus external control of semen quality in reference laboratories may be useful to monitor the efficiency of internal semen quality control in individual AI stations, to identify males with lower semen quality and/or poor response to semen storage, and to verify the precision of sperm counting. The possibility that central laboratories with sufficient resources may be able to identify functionally different responding sperm subpopulations for better estimation of fertility is discussed. Ideally, external quality control schemes for AI stations would comprise application of validated tests with high relevance for fertility (including bacterial status), analysis of semen processing on the AI station, and training courses for laboratory personnel.