Identification of bacterial contaminants in porcine semen and its removal

돼지 정액내의 오염 세균의 동정 및 오염된 세균의 제거

  • Park, Choon-Keun (College of Animal Life Science, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Hong, Ki-Hun (School of Veterinary Medicine, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Lee, Yong-Seung (College of Animal Life Science, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Hahn, Tae-Wook (School of Veterinary Medicine, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Son, Su-Jung (School of Veterinary Medicine, Kangwon National University)
  • 박춘근 (강원대학교 동물생명과학대학) ;
  • 홍기훈 (강원대학교 수의학부대학) ;
  • 이용승 (강원대학교 동물생명과학대학) ;
  • 한태욱 (강원대학교 수의학부대학) ;
  • Published : 2008.11.30

Abstract

Bacteriospermia is a frequent finding in fresh boar semen and can result in detrimental effects on semen quality and longevity. The objectives of this study was to evaluate types of bacterial contaminants in porcine fresh semen and the reducing effect of antibiotic and density gradient with percoll on the bacterial contaminants. Fresh semen was collected by gloved-hand method into a pre-warmed($37^{\circ}C$) thermostable bottle, and was inoculated onto blood agar and MacConkey agar, respectively. After incubated for 48 hour, 7.5% $CO_2$ at $37^{\circ}C$, bacterial colonies were selected and identified by Gram staining, oxidase test, catalase test and finally identified using API kits and Vitek system. Aerobic culture yielded a variety of bacteria from different genera. The most prevalent contaminant of fresh semen were Leclecia adecarboxylata, Acineobacter banmanni, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Staphylococcus cohni spp urealyticus, Proteus mirabilis. Most of identified bacteria were Gram(-) and non-pathogenic bacteria. It seems that bacterial contaminants in fresh semen were seem originated from multiple sources at the stud/farm, and were from animal and non-animal origins. Gentamicin treatment did not eliminate the bacterial contaminants completely but 3 step-density gradient with percoll completely removed the bacterial contaminants in fresh semen. Therefore, future study is necessary to prove that density gradient method with percoll can eliminate bacteria in fresh semen without significantly affecting sperm viability or function.

Keywords

References

  1. Althouse GC, KusterCE, Clark SG. 1998. Contaminant growth of spermicidal bacteria in extended porcine semen. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Pig Veterinary Society Congress 2 : 37
  2. Dagnall GJR. 1986. An investigation of the bacterialora of the preputial diverticulum and of the semen of boars. M.Ph. thesis, Royal Veterinary College, Hertfordshire
  3. Danowski KM. 1989. Qualitative and quantitive investigation of the germ content in boar semen and the antibiotic sensisensitivity of the prevailing germ spectrum. Dr Med Vet Inaugural Dissertation, Tierarztliche Hochschule, Hannover
  4. Kuster CE, Althouse GC. 1997. Sperm agglutination of extended semen caused by gentamicin-resistant bacteria. In: Proceedings of the 28th AASP Meeting : 293-295
  5. Sone M, Kawarasaki T, Osaga A, et al. 1989. Effects of bacteria-contaminated boar semen on the reproductive performance. Jpn J Anim Reprod 35 : 159-164 https://doi.org/10.1262/jrd1977.35.159
  6. Sone M. 1990. Investigations on the control of bacteria in boar semen. Jpn J Anim Reprod 36 : 23-29 https://doi.org/10.1262/jrd1977.36.23P
  7. Tamuli MK, Sharma DK, Rajkonwar CK. 1984. Studies on the microbial-flora of boar semen. Indian Vet J 61 : 858-861
  8. Althouse GC, Kuster CE, Clark SG, et al. 2000. Field investigations of bacterial contaminations and their effects on extended porcine semen. Theriogenology 53 : 1167-1176 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(00)00261-2
  9. Althouse GC, Lu KG. 2005. Bacteriospermia in extended porcine semen. Theriogenology 63 : 573-584 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.09.031
  10. Sone M. 1982. Effects of various antibiotics on the control of bacteria in boar semen. Vet Rec 111 : 11-14 https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.111.1.11
  11. Althouse GC. 1997. Comparison of currently used semen extenders in the swine industry. Comp Cont Ed Prac Vet 19 : 777-782
  12. Mortimer D. 2000. Sperm preparation methods. J Androl 21 : 357-366