» Articles » PMID: 29952339

Reconsideration of the Evaluation Criteria for Bull Ejaculated Sperm Motility in the Context of Rotation

Overview
Journal J Reprod Dev
Date 2018 Jun 29
PMID 29952339
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Progressive movement of spermatozoa has conventionally been regarded as a good indicator of motility. However, bull spermatozoa exhibit two types of progressive movement: progressive/planar movement without rotation and progressive/helical movement with rotation. The aim of this study was to reconsider the evaluation criteria of bull ejaculated sperm motility in the context of rotation. Here, we compared the movement patterns of ejaculated spermatozoa with relatively high and low protein kinase A (PKA)-mediated signaling activities, because sperm motility is positively regulated by PKA-mediated signaling activities. We prepared sperm samples with high and low PKA-mediated signaling activities by suspending spermatozoa in media containing either the stimulator (NaHCO) or inhibitor (KH-7) of adenylyl cyclase 10, and we then investigated movement patterns and relative velocities using a microscopic high-speed camera and recording system. In the control medium without NaHCO and KH-7, most spermatozoa exhibited round/planar movement without rotation and asymmetrical bends in the principal pieces. NaHCO significantly promoted changes in movement patterns from round/planar movement to progressive/planar movement (without rotation) as well as symmetrization of flagellar bends and increased relative velocities. KH-7 significantly increased spermatozoa exhibiting progressive/helical movement (with rotation), decreased relative velocities, and symmetrized flagellar bends with a reduction in their size. These indicate that progressive/planar movement (without rotation) and fast movement characterize the movement patterns of bull ejaculated spermatozoa with high PKA-mediated signaling activities. A sign of reduced PKA-mediated signaling activity is not only slow movement but also helical movement (with rotation). Thus, it is beneficial to add a new parameter of "rotation" to the evaluation criteria of bull ejaculated sperm motility.

Citing Articles

Comparative characteristics between calyculin A-induced and thimerosal-induced hyperactivation of cryopreserved bovine spermatozoa.

Miyamoto N, Ohya A, Duritahala , Sakase M, Harayama H J Reprod Dev. 2023; 69(3):170-177.

PMID: 37081666 PMC: 10267582. DOI: 10.1262/jrd.2023-007.


Involvement of Ca-ATPase in suppressing the appearance of bovine helically motile spermatozoa with intense force prior to cryopreservation.

Duritahala , Sakase M, Harayama H J Reprod Dev. 2022; 68(3):181-189.

PMID: 35236801 PMC: 9184823. DOI: 10.1262/jrd.2021-143.


Flagellar hyperactivation of bull and boar spermatozoa.

Harayama H Reprod Med Biol. 2018; 17(4):442-448.

PMID: 30377397 PMC: 6194283. DOI: 10.1002/rmb2.12227.

References
1.
Somanath P, Jack S, Vijayaraghavan S . Changes in sperm glycogen synthase kinase-3 serine phosphorylation and activity accompany motility initiation and stimulation. J Androl. 2004; 25(4):605-17. DOI: 10.1002/j.1939-4640.2004.tb02831.x. View

2.
Huang Z, Vijayaraghavan S . Increased phosphorylation of a distinct subcellular pool of protein phosphatase, PP1gamma2, during epididymal sperm maturation. Biol Reprod. 2003; 70(2):439-47. DOI: 10.1095/biolreprod.103.020024. View

3.
Kojima A, Matsushita Y, Ogura Y, Ishikawa S, Noda T, Murase T . Roles of extracellular Ca(2+) in the occurrence of full-type hyperactivation in boar ejaculated spermatozoa pre-incubated to induce the cAMP-triggered events. Andrology. 2015; 3(2):321-31. DOI: 10.1111/andr.12005. View

4.
Woolley D . Studies on the eel sperm flagellum. 2. The kinematics of normal motility. Cell Motil Cytoskeleton. 1998; 39(3):233-45. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0169(1998)39:3<233::AID-CM6>3.0.CO;2-5. View

5.
Kathiravan P, Kalatharan J, Karthikeya G, Rengarajan K, Kadirvel G . Objective sperm motion analysis to assess dairy bull fertility using computer-aided system--a review. Reprod Domest Anim. 2010; 46(1):165-72. DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0531.2010.01603.x. View