Comparative evaluation of different filtration techniques for improving the semen quality of crossbred bulls

Abstract

One humped and sixty split samples of 40 ejaculates from five triple crossbred bulls with or without filtration through Sephadex G-25 (12%, 0.6 ml), Sephadex G-50 (6%, 0.6 ml) and glass wool (100 mg, 2 cm) columns in 5 ml glass syringes. The mean initial motility in the unfiltered control and the filtrates of Sephadex G-25, G-50 and glass wool columns were 61.38±2.36, 75.0±1.87, 71.88±2.37 and 75.88±1.96 percent; sperm concentration (x107 /ml) 99.80±6.08, 78.02±5.53, 80.05±5.72 and 76.30±5.46, live sperm 70.78±1.98, 83.88±3.17, 81.10±1.59 and 83.68±1.31 percent; sperm head abnormalities 4.80V1.11, 2.62±0.77, 250±0.75 and 1.97±0.64, 0.85±0.28 and 0.75±0.22 percent; sperm tail abnormalities 10.83±1.27, 3.27±0.45, 4.45±0.48 and 3.93±0.59 perent, and sperm total abnormalities 17.25±2.12, 6.60±1.25, 7.80±1.22 and 6.65±1.22 per cent respectively. Significant differences (P<0.01) were observed between bulls, between collections; between treatments (control and 3 filtration techniques) and due to bull x collection interaction for all the parameters; whereas bull x treatment interaction effect was significant (P<0.05) only for motility and live sperm per-cent. In general the filtrates of all the columns were significantly superior to the control. The three filtrates, however, did not differ significantly with regard to sperm abnormalities, the Sephadex G-25 and glass wool were at par and both were superior to G-50 for motility and live sperm percentages. The sperm concentration was significantly reduced after filtration but the loss was compensated by good quality sperm, which filtered through. It is concluded that initial quality and hence usage of poor ejaculates could be improved effectively by filtration and this may be adopted as a routine procedure for semen of valuable sires.