Effect of semen collection method on sperm motility of gray wolves (Canis lupus) and domestic dogs (C. l. familiaris)

Bruce W Christensen, Cheryl S. Asa, Chong Wang, Lindsey Vansandt, Karen Bauman, Margaret Callahan, Jackie K. Jens, N. Matthew Ellinwood

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Genetic management of Mexican gray wolves includes semen banking, but due to the small number of animals in the population and handling restrictions, improvements in semen collection and cryopreservation rely on results from studies of domestic dogs. Semen collection from wolves requires anesthesia and electroejaculation, which introduce potentially important variables into species comparisons, as dog semen is typically collected manually from conscious animals. To investigate possible effects of collection method on semen quality, we compared semen collection by the traditional manual method and by electroejaculation (EE) in a group of dogs (n = 5) to collection by EE only in wolves (n = 7). Samples were divided into two aliquots: neat or diluted in Tris/egg yolk extender, with motility evaluated at intervals up to 24 h. There were no differences (P > 0.10) in sperm motility in either neat or extended samples at 24 h from EE dogs and wolves, although motility of the wolf neat samples declined more rapidly (P < 0.05). However, there were differences (P < 0.01) between EE and manually collected dog semen in motility at 24 h, in both the neat and extended samples. Therefore, general motility patterns of dog and wolf semen collected by EE were similar, especially when diluted with a Tris/egg yolk extender, but sperm collected from dogs by EE did not maintain motility as long as manually collected samples, perhaps related to the longer exposure of EE samples to more prostate fluid.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)975-980
Number of pages6
JournalTheriogenology
Volume76
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 15 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Canis lupus
Sperm Motility
Semen
sperm motility
semen
Dogs
wolves
dogs
Egg Yolk
methodology
egg yolk
sampling
Semen Analysis
Cryopreservation
banking
Spermatozoa
Prostate
cryopreservation
Anesthesia
anesthesia

Keywords

  • Canid
  • Dog
  • Electroejaculation
  • Prostate fluid
  • Semen collection
  • Wolf

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Animal Science and Zoology
  • Equine
  • Food Animals
  • Small Animals

Cite this

Effect of semen collection method on sperm motility of gray wolves (Canis lupus) and domestic dogs (C. l. familiaris). / Christensen, Bruce W; Asa, Cheryl S.; Wang, Chong; Vansandt, Lindsey; Bauman, Karen; Callahan, Margaret; Jens, Jackie K.; Ellinwood, N. Matthew.

In: Theriogenology, Vol. 76, No. 5, 15.09.2011, p. 975-980.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Christensen, Bruce W ; Asa, Cheryl S. ; Wang, Chong ; Vansandt, Lindsey ; Bauman, Karen ; Callahan, Margaret ; Jens, Jackie K. ; Ellinwood, N. Matthew. / Effect of semen collection method on sperm motility of gray wolves (Canis lupus) and domestic dogs (C. l. familiaris). In: Theriogenology. 2011 ; Vol. 76, No. 5. pp. 975-980.
@article{b105cc07f3c44a868fa95a274bb5a899,
title = "Effect of semen collection method on sperm motility of gray wolves (Canis lupus) and domestic dogs (C. l. familiaris)",
abstract = "Genetic management of Mexican gray wolves includes semen banking, but due to the small number of animals in the population and handling restrictions, improvements in semen collection and cryopreservation rely on results from studies of domestic dogs. Semen collection from wolves requires anesthesia and electroejaculation, which introduce potentially important variables into species comparisons, as dog semen is typically collected manually from conscious animals. To investigate possible effects of collection method on semen quality, we compared semen collection by the traditional manual method and by electroejaculation (EE) in a group of dogs (n = 5) to collection by EE only in wolves (n = 7). Samples were divided into two aliquots: neat or diluted in Tris/egg yolk extender, with motility evaluated at intervals up to 24 h. There were no differences (P > 0.10) in sperm motility in either neat or extended samples at 24 h from EE dogs and wolves, although motility of the wolf neat samples declined more rapidly (P < 0.05). However, there were differences (P < 0.01) between EE and manually collected dog semen in motility at 24 h, in both the neat and extended samples. Therefore, general motility patterns of dog and wolf semen collected by EE were similar, especially when diluted with a Tris/egg yolk extender, but sperm collected from dogs by EE did not maintain motility as long as manually collected samples, perhaps related to the longer exposure of EE samples to more prostate fluid.",
keywords = "Canid, Dog, Electroejaculation, Prostate fluid, Semen collection, Wolf",
author = "Christensen, {Bruce W} and Asa, {Cheryl S.} and Chong Wang and Lindsey Vansandt and Karen Bauman and Margaret Callahan and Jens, {Jackie K.} and Ellinwood, {N. Matthew}",
year = "2011",
month = "9",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/j.theriogenology.2011.05.003",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "76",
pages = "975--980",
journal = "Theriogenology",
issn = "0093-691X",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effect of semen collection method on sperm motility of gray wolves (Canis lupus) and domestic dogs (C. l. familiaris)

AU - Christensen, Bruce W

AU - Asa, Cheryl S.

AU - Wang, Chong

AU - Vansandt, Lindsey

AU - Bauman, Karen

AU - Callahan, Margaret

AU - Jens, Jackie K.

AU - Ellinwood, N. Matthew

PY - 2011/9/15

Y1 - 2011/9/15

N2 - Genetic management of Mexican gray wolves includes semen banking, but due to the small number of animals in the population and handling restrictions, improvements in semen collection and cryopreservation rely on results from studies of domestic dogs. Semen collection from wolves requires anesthesia and electroejaculation, which introduce potentially important variables into species comparisons, as dog semen is typically collected manually from conscious animals. To investigate possible effects of collection method on semen quality, we compared semen collection by the traditional manual method and by electroejaculation (EE) in a group of dogs (n = 5) to collection by EE only in wolves (n = 7). Samples were divided into two aliquots: neat or diluted in Tris/egg yolk extender, with motility evaluated at intervals up to 24 h. There were no differences (P > 0.10) in sperm motility in either neat or extended samples at 24 h from EE dogs and wolves, although motility of the wolf neat samples declined more rapidly (P < 0.05). However, there were differences (P < 0.01) between EE and manually collected dog semen in motility at 24 h, in both the neat and extended samples. Therefore, general motility patterns of dog and wolf semen collected by EE were similar, especially when diluted with a Tris/egg yolk extender, but sperm collected from dogs by EE did not maintain motility as long as manually collected samples, perhaps related to the longer exposure of EE samples to more prostate fluid.

AB - Genetic management of Mexican gray wolves includes semen banking, but due to the small number of animals in the population and handling restrictions, improvements in semen collection and cryopreservation rely on results from studies of domestic dogs. Semen collection from wolves requires anesthesia and electroejaculation, which introduce potentially important variables into species comparisons, as dog semen is typically collected manually from conscious animals. To investigate possible effects of collection method on semen quality, we compared semen collection by the traditional manual method and by electroejaculation (EE) in a group of dogs (n = 5) to collection by EE only in wolves (n = 7). Samples were divided into two aliquots: neat or diluted in Tris/egg yolk extender, with motility evaluated at intervals up to 24 h. There were no differences (P > 0.10) in sperm motility in either neat or extended samples at 24 h from EE dogs and wolves, although motility of the wolf neat samples declined more rapidly (P < 0.05). However, there were differences (P < 0.01) between EE and manually collected dog semen in motility at 24 h, in both the neat and extended samples. Therefore, general motility patterns of dog and wolf semen collected by EE were similar, especially when diluted with a Tris/egg yolk extender, but sperm collected from dogs by EE did not maintain motility as long as manually collected samples, perhaps related to the longer exposure of EE samples to more prostate fluid.

KW - Canid

KW - Dog

KW - Electroejaculation

KW - Prostate fluid

KW - Semen collection

KW - Wolf

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80051695695&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80051695695&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2011.05.003

DO - 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2011.05.003

M3 - Article

C2 - 21752444

AN - SCOPUS:80051695695

VL - 76

SP - 975

EP - 980

JO - Theriogenology

JF - Theriogenology

SN - 0093-691X

IS - 5

ER -