Using transrectal ultrasound-guided massage of the accessory sex glands for buck semen collection yields semen with greater cryoresistance than electroejaculation alone during the breeding season

Abstract

The cryoresistance of bucks’ semen collected by transrectal ultrasound-guided massage of the accessory sex glands (TUMASG) and electroejaculation (EE) was compared during the breeding season (Study 1) or the late non-breeding season (Study 2). Semen was collected from 10 Gabon bucks with both methods in each season and then frozen according to a standardized protocol. The time required for ejaculation, the number of electrical pulses applied, the sum of the electrical pulses applied∗voltage and the total number of vocalizations emitted during the collection by each animal were recorded. In Study 1, TUMASG required a longer time (P = 0.0006) but fewer electrical pulses and a lower sum of pulses∗voltage than EE (P < 0.0001 for both comparisons). Bucks vocalized fewer times during TUMASG than during EE (P < 0001). Semen collected with TUMASG had greater sperm concentration, sperm mass motility, total number of motile sperm and of sperm with progressive motility, and tended to have greater total number of sperm with functional membrane than semen collected with EE (P = 0.02; P = 0.003; P = 0.02; P = 0.02; P = 0.06, respectively). After the freezing-thawing process, sperm collected with TUMASG had a greater quality of the motility, a total number of motile sperm and sperm with progressive motility, a greater percentage of motile sperm and sperm with functional membrane, and tended to have a greater total number of sperm with normal morphology than semen collected with EE (P = 0.04; P = 0.04; P = 0.03; P = 0.02; P = 0.04; P = 0.06, respectively). In Study 1 sperm collected with TUMASG had greater cryoresistance for almost all the variables considered than when it was collected with EE. In Study 2, the number of electrical pulses and the sum of pulses∗voltage were greater with EE than with TUMASG (P < 0001; P = 0.0002, respectively). There were no differences in any sperm variable in fresh or thawed samples collected with TUMASG or EE. However, the other seminal characteristics evaluated did not differ according to the method, and there were no differences in the cryoresistance of any variable. Overall, TUMASG affected animal welfare less than EE and was suitable for collecting semen of good quality with high cryoresistance during the breeding season in buck.