Effect of Sperm Preparation Methods on In-vitro Fertilization of Goat Oocytes

Authors

  • Hawanagoudar Vinutha M.V.Sc. Scholar, Department of Animal Reproduction Gynaecology & Obstetrics, Veterinary College, Bidar-585401, KVAFSU, Karnataka, India.
  • Rajeshwar Gangaram Bijurkar Department of Veterinary Clinical Complex, Veterinary College, Bidar-585401, KVAFSU, Karnataka, India
  • Manik Kishanrao Tandle Department of Animal Reproduction Gynaecology & Obstetrics, Veterinary College, Bidar-585401, KVAFSU, Karnataka, India
  • Shrikant Kulkarni Department of Veterinary Physiology and Biochemistry, Veterinary College, Bidar-585401, KVAFSU, Karnataka, India
  • Prashantkumar Waghe Department of Veterinary Pharmacology and Toxicology, Veterinary College, Bidar-585401, KVAFSU, Karnataka, India
  • Doddagoudar Venkanagouda Department of Animal Reproduction Gynaecology & Obstetrics, Veterinary College, Bidar-585401, KVAFSU, Karnataka, India
  • Malasri Gond Department of Animal Reproduction Gynaecology & Obstetrics, Veterinary College, Bidar-585401, KVAFSU, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48165/ijvsbt.22.2.14

Keywords:

Goat oocytes, In-vitro Fertilization, Percoll, Swim up, Sperm preparation.

Abstract

The present study was undertaken to evaluate the effect of different sperm preparation methods, viz., Percoll density gradient, Swim up and Simple Washing by centrifugation, on in-vitro fertilization (IVF) of goat oocytes. Ovaries obtained from slaughtered goats were used to recover cumulus–oocyte complexes (COCs) by the slicing method, and oocytes were graded based on cumulus cell layers and cytoplasmic characteristics. Grade A and B oocytes were selected for in-vitro maturation (IVM) and then subjected to IVF using spermatozoa processed through the three preparation methods. Fertilization efficiency was assessed after in-vitro culture. Among the treatments, percoll density gradient yielded the highest cleavage rate (51.11 ± 3.15%), followed by swim up (45.47 ± 4.27%) and simple washing (38.56 ± 3.98%) (p<0.05). These findings indicate that sperm preparation technique significantly influences IVF outcome in goats, emphasizing the importance of sperm functional quality over numerical sperm recovery.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anzar M, Graham EF, Iqbal N. Post-thaw plasma membrane integrity of bull spermatozoa separated with a Sephadex ion-exchange column. Theriogenology. 1997;47:845-856.

Atalla H, Demir K, Yagcioglu S, Arici R, Ersoy N, Eser A, et al. The effect of swim-up and Percoll gradient separation on ram sperm parameters, DNA integrity and embryo development. Rev Med Vet. 2019;170(4-6):87-94.

Ben L, Yan C, Si-jiu Y. Effect of swim-up and Percoll treatment on sperm quality and in vitro embryo development in yak. J Integr Agric. 2013;12(12):2235-2242.

Dode MAN, Rodovalho NC, Ueno VT, Fernandes CE. The effect of sperm preparation and co-incubation time on in vitro fertilization of Bos indicus oocytes. Anim Reprod Sci. 2002;69:15-23.

Graham JK, Moce E. Fertility evaluation of frozen-thawed semen. Theriogenology. 2005;64:492-504.

Henkel RR, Schill WB. Sperm preparation for ART. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2003;1:108.

Jaakma U, Zhang BR, Larsson B, Niwa K, Rodriguez-Martinez H. Effects of sperm treatments on the in vitro development of bovine oocytes in semi-defined and defined media. Theriogenology. 1997;48(5):711-720.

Kharche SD, Yadav EN, Goel AK, Jindal SK, Sinha NK. Influence of culture media on in vitro fertilization of goat oocytes. Indian J Anim Sci. 2008;78:1075-1077.

Khatun M, Bhuiyan MMU, Ahmed JU, Haque A, Rahman MB, Shamsuddin M. In vitro maturation and fertilization of prepubertal and pubertal Black Bengal goat oocytes. J Vet Sci. 2011;12(1):75-82.

Luo J, Wang W, Sun S. Research advances in reproduction for dairy goats. Asian Australas J Anim Sci. 2019;32(8):1284-1295.

Mara L, Sanna D, Casu S, Dattena M, Mayorga-Munoz IM. Blastocyst rate of in vitro embryo production in sheep is affected by season. Zygote. 2013;22:366-371.

Matas C, Coy P, Romar R, Marco M, Gadea J, Ruiz S. Effect of sperm preparation method on in vitro fertilization in pigs. Reproduction. 2003;125(1):133-141.

Mehmood A, Anwar M, Saqlan SM. Motility, acrosome integrity, membrane integrity and oocyte cleavage rate of sperm separated by swim-up or Percoll gradient method from frozen-thawed buffalo semen. Anim Reprod Sci. 2009;111:141-148.

Mehta A, Sigman M. Identification and preparation of sperm for ART. Urol Clin North Am. 2014;41:169-180.

Mortimer D. Sperm recovery techniques to maximize fertilizing capacity. Reprod Fertil Dev. 1994;6:25-31.

Palomo MJ, Mogas T, Paramio MT. Effect of semen preparation on IVF of pre-pubertal goat oocytes. Theriogenology. 1999;51:927-940.

Rahman MM, Rahman MM, Juyena NS, Bhuiyan MMU. Optimization of in vitro fertilization technique for oocytes of indigenous zebu cows. J Anim Reprod Biotechnol. 2020;35:142-148.

Rho GJ, Hahnel AC, Betteridge KJ. Comparisons of oocyte maturation times and of three methods of sperm preparation for their effects on the production of goat embryos in vitro. Theriogenology. 2001;56:503-516.

Singh AP, Kumar D, Gopalakrishna R, Ranjan RS, Pandey SK, Sarkhel BC. Comparison of culture media for their effects on development of caprine IVF embryos using fresh and cryopreserved semen. Indian J Anim Res. 2016;50(6):846-850.

Souza-Fabjan JMG, Leal GR, Monteiro CAS, Batista RITP, Barbosa NO, Freitas VJF. In vitro embryo production in small ruminants: what is still missing? Anim Reprod. 2023;20(3):e20230055.

Ward F, Rizos D, Boland MP, Lonergan P. Effect of reducing sperm concentration during IVF on the ability to distinguish between bulls of high and low field fertility. Theriogenology. 2003;59:1575-1584.

Watson PF. The causes of reduced fertility with cryopreserved semen. Anim Reprod Sci. 2000;60-61:481-492.

Published

2026-03-10

How to Cite

Vinutha, H., Bijurkar, R. G., Tandle, M. K., Kulkarni, S., Waghe, P., Venkanagouda, D., & Gond, M. (2026). Effect of Sperm Preparation Methods on In-vitro Fertilization of Goat Oocytes . Indian Journal of Veterinary Sciences and Biotechnology, 22(2), 77-80. https://doi.org/10.48165/ijvsbt.22.2.14