Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T07:35:54.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Update on sexed semen technology in cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

G. E. Seidel Jr
G. E. Seidel Jr*
Affiliation:
Animal Reproduction and Biotechnology Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1683, USA
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The technology in current use for sexing sperm represents remarkable feats of engineering. These flow cytometer/cell sorters can make over 30 000 consecutive evaluations of individual sperm each second for each nozzle and sort the sperm into three containers: X-sperm, Y-sperm and unsexable plus dead sperm. Even at these speeds it is not economical to package sperm at standard numbers per inseminate. However, with excellent management, pregnancy rates in cattle with 2 million sexed sperm per insemination dose are about 80% of those with conventional semen at normal sperm doses. This lowered fertility, in part due to damage to sperm during sorting, plus the extra cost of sexed semen limits the applications that are economically feasible. Even so, on the order of 2 million doses of bovine semen are sexed annually in the United States. The main application is for dairy heifers to have heifer calves, either for herd expansion or for sale as replacements, often for eventual export. Breeders of purebred cattle often use sexed semen for specific matings; thawing and then sexing frozen semen and immediately using the few resulting sexed sperm for in vitro fertilization is done with increasing frequency. Beef cattle producers are starting to use sexed semen to produce crossbred female replacements. Proprietary improvements in sperm sexing procedures, implemented in 2013, are claimed to improve fertility between 4 and 6 percentage points, or about 10%.

Keywords

sexed semencattlefertilityeconomics
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 8 , Supplement s1: New Science ‐ New Practices International Cow Fertility Conference 18‐21 May 2014, Westport, Ireland , May 2014 , pp. 160 - 164
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

De Vries, A, Overton, M, Fetrow, J, Leslie, K, Eicker, S and Rogers, G 2008. Exploring the impact of sexed semen on the structure of the dairy industry. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 847–856.Google Scholar
DeJarnette, JM, Nebel, RL and Marshall, CE 2009. Evaluating the success of sex sorted semen in US dairy herds from on farm records. Theriogenology 71, 49–58.Google Scholar
DeJarnette, JM, Nebel, RL, Marshall, CE, Moreno, JF, McCleary, CR and Lenz, RW 2008. Effect of sex-sorted sperm dosage on conception rates in Holstein heifers and lactating cows. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 1778–1785.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeJarnette, JM, McCleary, CR, Leach, MA, Moreno, JF, Nebel, RL and Marshall, CE 2010. Effects of 2.1 and 3.5×106 sex-sorted sperm dosages on conception rates of Holstein cows and heifers. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 4079–4085.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeJarnette, JM, Leach, MA, Nebel, RL, Marshall, CE, McCleary, CR and Moreno, JF 2011. Effects of sex sorting and sperm dosage on conception rates in Holstein heifers. Is comparable fertility of sex-sorted and conventional semen plausible? Journal of Dairy Science 94, 3477–3483.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Den Daas, JHG, de Jong, G, Lansbergen, LMTE and van Wagtendonk-de Leeuw, AM 1998. The relationship between the number of spermatozoa inseminated and the reproductive efficiency of individual dairy bulls. Journal of Dairy Science 81, 1714–1723.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frijters, AC, Mullaart, E, Roelofs, RM, van Hoorne, RP, Moreno, JF, Moreno, O and Merton, JS 2009. What affects fertility of sexed bull sperm more, low sperm dosage or the sorting process? Theriogenology 71, 64–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garner, DL and Seidel, GE Jr 2008. History of commercializing sexed semen for cattle. Theriogenology 69, 886–895.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garner, DL, Evans, KM and Seidel, GE 2012. Sex-sorting sperm using flow cytometry/cell sorting. Methods in Molecular Biology 927, 279–295.Google Scholar
Garner, DL, Gledhill, BL, Pinkel, D, Lake, S, Stephenson, D, Van Dilla, MA and Johnson, LA 1983. Quantification of the X- and Y- chromosome-bearing spermatozoa of domestic animals by flow cytometry. Biology of Reproduction 28, 312–321.Google Scholar
Herrmann, BG, Koschorz, B, Wertz, K, McLaughlin, KJ and Kispert, A 1999. A protein kinase encoded by the t complex responder gene causes non-mendelian inheritance. Nature 402, 141–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, LA and Welch, GR 1999. Sex preselection: high-speed flow cytometric sorting of X and Y sperm for maximum efficiency. Theriogenology 52, 1323–1341.Google Scholar
Johnson, LA, Flook, JP and Hawk, HW 1989. Sex preselection in rabbits: live births from X and Y sperm separated by DNA and cell sorting. Biology of Reproduction 41, 199–203.Google Scholar
Kaimio, I, Mikkola, M, Lindeberg, H, Heikkinen, J, Hasler, JF and Taponen, J 2013. Embryo production with sex-sorted semen in superovulated dairy heifers and cows. Theriogenology 80, 950–954.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klinc, P, Frese, D, Osmers, H and Rath, D 2007. Insemination with sex sorted fresh bovine spermatozoa processed in the presence of antioxidative substances. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 42, 58–62.Google Scholar
Koundouros, S and Verma, P 2012. Significant enrichment of Y-bearing chromosome human spermatozoa using a modified centrifugation technique. International Journal of Andrology 35, 880–886.Google Scholar
Norman, HD, Hutchison, JL and Miller, RH 2010. Use of sexed semen and its effect on conception rate, calf sex, dystocia, and stillbirth of Holsteins in the United States. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 3880–3890.Google Scholar
Rath, D, Barcikowski, S, de Graaf, S, Garrels, W and Grossfeld, R et al. 2013. Sex selection of sperm in farm animals: status report and developmental prospects. Reproduction 145, R15–R30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sang, L, Yang, WC, Han, L, Liang, AX, Hua, GH, Xiong, JJ, Huo, LJ and Yang, LG 2011. An immunological method to screen sex-specific proteins of bovine sperm. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 2060–2070.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schenk, JL, Suh, TK and Seidel, GE Jr 2006. Embryo production from superovulated cattle following insemination of sexed sperm. Theriogenology 65, 299–307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schenk, JL, Cran, DG, Everett, RW and Seidel, GE Jr 2009. Pregnancy rates in heifers and cows with cryopreserved sexed sperm: effects of sperm numbers per inseminate, sorting pressure and sperm storage before sorting. Theriogenology 71, 717–728.Google Scholar
Seidel, GE Jr 1999. Sexing mammalian spermatozoa and embryos – state of the art. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility (Suppl. 54), 475–485.Google ScholarPubMed
Seidel, GE Jr 2003. Economics of selecting for sex: the most important genetic trait. Theriogenology 59, 585–598.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seidel, GE Jr 2012. Sexing mammalian sperm – where do we go from here? Journal of Reproduction and Development 58, 505–509.Google Scholar
Seidel, GE Jr and Garner, DL 2002. Current status of sexing mammalian spermatozoa. Reproduction 124, 733–743.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suh, TK, Schenk, JL and Seidel, GE Jr 2005. High pressure flow cytometric sorting damages sperm. Theriogenology 64, 1035–1048.Google Scholar
Thomas, JM, Lock, SL, Poock, SE, Ellersieck, MR, Smith, MF and Patterson, DJ 2013. Delayed insemination of non-estrous cows improves pregnancy rates when using sex-sorted semen in timed artificial insemination of suckled beef cows. Proceedings of the National Association of Animal Breeders Symposium at the Beef Improvement Federation Meeting, 12 June, 2013, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
Tubman, LM, Brink, Z, Suh, TK and Seidel, GE Jr 2004. Characteristics of calves produced with sperm sexed by flow cytometry/cell sorting. Journal of Animal Science 82, 1029–1036.Google Scholar