Comparative study of sperms motility analysis with CASA by using leja and microscope slide

Dian Ratnawati, Muchamad Luthfi

Abstract


The aim of this study was to compare the assessment of spermatozoa motility by using leja and microscope slide (MS). Fresh semen of four Ongole crossbred (PO) bulls were collected by using an artificial vagina. The semen with 70% sperms motility was diluted into into 30 million/ml concentration and assessed for its motility by using CASA (SCA 5.2 Microptic). The measured parameters in this study were sperms motility, progressive sperm motility, curve linear velocity (VCL), straight linear velocity (VSL), average pathway velocity (VAP), linearity (LIN), straightness (STR), wobble (WOB), hyperactivity (H), lateral head amplitude (ALH) and beat cross frequency (BCF). The data were analyzed by using independent simple t-test (IBM SPSS statistics 24). The results showed a hyperactive spermatozoa when analyzed by using leja was at 7.3%, higher than assessed with Microscope slide (2.8%). Meanwhile, other motility parameters (motility, progressive motility, VCL, VSL, VAP, LIN, STR, WOB, ALH and BCF) did not show any difference. Microscope slides can be used as a means of supporting sperms motility assesment by using CASA and more efficient.


Keywords


Ledja; Microscope slide; Sperms motility; CASA

Full Text:

PDF

References


Arifiantini, R. I., Purwantara, B., & Riyadhi, M. (2010). Occurrence of sperm abnormality of beef cattle at several artificial insemination centers in Indonesia. Animal Production, 12(1), 44–49.

Barth, A., & Oko, R. (1989). Abnormal Morphology of Boine Spermatozzoa. USA: Iowa State University Press.

Broekhuijse, M. L. W. J., Šostarić, E., Feitsma, H., & Gadella, B. M. (2011). Additional value of computer assisted semen analysis (CASA) compared to conventional motility assessments in pig artificial insemination. Theriogenology, 76(8), 1473–1486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2011.05.040

Chrenek, P., Makarevich, a V, Ostro, A., & Bulla, J. (2008). Comparison of different evaluation chambers for analysis of rabbit spermatozoa motility parameters using casa system. Slovak Journal of Animal Science, 41(2), 60–66.

Contri, A., Valorz, C., Faustini, M., Wegher, L., & Carluccio, A. (2010). Effect of semen preparation on casa motility results in cryopreserved bull spermatozoa. Theriogenology, 74(3), 424–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.02.025

Gączarzewicz, D. (2015). Influence of chamber type integrated with computer-assisted semen analysis (CASA) system on the results of boar semen evaluation. Polish Journal of Veterinary Sciences, 18(4), 817–824. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjvs-2015-0106

Gloria, A., Carluccio, A., Contri, A., Wegher, L., Valorz, C., & Robbe, D. (2013). The effect of the chamber on kinetic results in cryopreserved bull spermatozoa. Andrology, 1(6), 879–885. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2047-2927.2013.00121.x

Kraemer, M., Fillion, C., Martin-Pont, B., & Auger, J. (1998). Factors influencing human sperm kinematic measurements by the Celltrak computer-assisted sperm analysis system. Human Reproduction, 13(3), 611–619. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/13.3.611

Krause, W. (1995). Computer-assisted semen analysis systems: comparison with routine evaluation and prognostic value in male fertility and assisted reproduction. Human Reproduction, 10(suppl 1), 60–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/10.suppl_1.60

Lenz, R. W., Kjelland, M. E., VonderHaar, K., Swannack, T. M., & Moreno, J. F. (2011). A comparison of bovine seminal quality assessments using different viewing chambers with a computer-assisted semen analyzer1. Journal of Animal Science, 89(2), 383–388.

https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2010-3056

Perumal, P., Srivastava, S. K., Ghosh, S. K., & Baruah, K. K. (2014). Computer-assisted sperm analysis of freezable and nonfreezable mithun (bos frontalis) semen. Journal of Animals, 2014, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/675031

Ratnawati, D. (2017). Beberapa Parameter Motilitas Spermatozoa Semen Cair Pada Tiga Bangsa Sapi Lokal Dengan Tiga Pengencer Berbeda Selama Simpan Dingin. Universitas Brawijaya.

Rurangwa, E., Kime, D., Ollevier, F., & Nash, J. (2004). The measurement of sperm motility and factors affecting sperm quality in cultured fish. Aquaculture, 234(1–4), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2003.12.006

Sarastina, Susilawati, & Ciptadi, G. (2006). Analysis of sperms motility in various of cattle breed by using computer assisted semen analysis (casa). Journal Cattle Tropical, 6(2), 1–12.

Susilawati, T. (2011). Spermatology (1st ed.). Malang: UB Press.

Vested, A., Ramlau-Hansen, C. H., Bonde, J. P., Thulstrup, A. M., Kristensen, S. L., & Toft, G. (2011). A comparison of conventional and computer-assisted semen analysis (CRISMAS software) using samples from 166 young Danish men. Asian Journal of Andrology, 13(3), 453–458. https://doi.org/10.1038/aja.2011.14




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21776/ub.jiip.2020.030.02.03

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.