Effects of Age and Mitochondrial Functionality on Canine Sperm Quality: Implications for Canine Fertility
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Not all sires have sperm suitable for chilled or frozen storage, and success in artificial insemination (AI) varies highly among individual dogs and breeds. Fertilizing potential is further complicated as sperm quality declines with the aging process. The overall objective of this work was to study the effects of age and mitochondrial function on sperm quality and bioenergetics using traditional methods assessed in the clinical setting, as well as emerging methods of investigating metabolic flexibility and the heterogenous nature of sperm. This dissertation explores the physiology and pathophysiology of canine sperm through the study of a breeding colony of highly fertile Labrador retrievers, and a rapidly aging purebred population of North American Great Danes. This was accomplished in three chapters. Chapter 1, Comparative Oxidative Metabolism in Mammalian Sperm, provides a review of the literature and current understanding of mitochondrial physiology and metabolic control of essential sperm functions in mammalian species of veterinary importance. We discuss the differences in fundamental oxygen and ATP substrate balance in stallions, bulls, and dogs, with an emphasis on the maintenance of sperm motility, electron transport chain (ETC) function, reactive oxygen species (ROS) production, and the balance of glycolytic and oxidative phosphorylation production of ATP in sperm.\nIn Chapter 2, Sperm Parameters in the Great Dane: Influence of Age on Semen Quality, I characterized the distribution of sperm quality parameters within a purebred population of actively showing North American Great Danes, a rapidly aging breed currently suffering declining fertility. I identified progressive declines in sperm quality that accompany aging, detailed the relationship between ROS production and sperm motility and morphology, and distinguished sources of variation in sperm quality within the breed. Age was negatively associated with several sperm motility parameters associated with sperm fertility such as total and progressive motility, and amplitude of lateral head displacement (p<.05), with a predicted -9.9%, -9.0%, and +8.3% change per year of age. Sperm of younger GD dogs aged 12 ≤ x <24 months had significantly higher total and progressive motility (TM, PM), amplitude of lateral head displacement (ALH), and nonlinear motility (p<.05) than older dogs (x ≥ 48 months). Results support anecdotal reports of decline of the fertility with the advance of age in this breed, and indicate that age and ROS have significant influences on sperm parameters in the GD. The influence of selection for breed specific phenotypes could help explain the functional significance of the diversity among GD males.\nIn Chapter 3, Effects of Substrate Availability and Mitochondrial Disruption on Oxidative Metabolism and Sperm Motility in Fertile Dogs, I investigated the adaptability of canine sperm bioenergetics under differing nutrient conditions and the effects of mitochondrial dysregulation on sperm motility. With simultaneous measurement of mitochondrial oxygen consumption (MITOX) and sperm kinematics, I observed a high adaptability and metabolic flexibility of high-quality canine sperm. While all energetic substrates tested successfully maintained sperm motility, significant differences were found in MITOX and mitochondrial spare respiratory capacity (SRC), the strength with which mitochondrial energy production may rise to meet energetic challenge. In addition, the ability to maintain sperm kinematics when supplemented with various energetic substrates differed significantly with mitochondrial disruption by mitochondrial effectors. A population of Labrador retrievers from a highly fertile breeding colony managed by Guide Dogs for the Blind was chosen for this study due to their high semen quality, good health, and known fertility. \n
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».