Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T09:08:23.724Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Artificial Insemination in Poultry and the Storage of Semen—A Re-appraisal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2007

P. E. Lake
P. E. Lake
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council, Poultry Research Centre, King's Buildings, Edinburgh 9Scotland
Get access

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Research Article
Information
World's Poultry Science Journal , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , April 1967 , pp. 111 - 132
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1967

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

Abe, T., Miyauchi, S., Ito, I., Uchino, K. and Hosoda, T. 1965. Serological studies on the artificial insemination of domestic fowl, II. Effect of sperm agglutinating antibodies on the fertility of hens. Jap. Poult. Sci. 2: 132–138.Google Scholar
Abe, T., Otsuka, S., and Hosoda, T. 1966. Serological studies on the artificial insemination of domestic fowl, IV. Effects of immunisation of semen on the fertility of hens. Jap. Poult. Sci. 3: 88–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arscott, G. H. and Parker, J. E. 1966. Effectiveness of Vit E in reserving sterility of male chickens fed a diet high in linoleic acid. Poult. Sci. 45: 1066 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Arscott, G. H., Parker, J. E. and Dickinson, E. M. 1965. Effect of dietary linoleic acid vitamin E and ethoxyquin on fertility of male chickens. Poult. Sci. 44: 1349 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Bajpai, P. K. and Brown, K. I. 1963a. The effect of some diluents on semen characteristics of turkeys. Poult. Sci. 42: 882–888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bajpai, P. K. and Brown, K. I. 1963b. The effect of egg yolk on semen characteristics of turkeys. Poult. Sci. 42: 888–893.Google Scholar
Bajpai, P. K. and Brown, K. I. 1964. The effect of different temperatures on the metabolic activity, morphology and fertilizing capacity of turkey semen. Poult. Sci. 43: 1501–1508.Google Scholar
Bobr, L. W., Lake, P. E., Lorenz, F. W., Ogasawara, F. X. and Krzanowska, H. 1965. Inhibition of ovulation in the domestic hen by intrauterine insemination. Poult. Sci. 44: 659–661.Google Scholar
Bobr, L. W., Lorenz, F. W. and Ogasawara, F. X. 1962. The role of the uterovaginal junction in storage of cock spermatozoa. Poult. Sci. 41: 1628 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Bobr, L. W., Ogasawara, F. X. and Lorenz, F. W. 1964a. Distribution of spermatozoa in the oviduct and fertility in domestic birds, I. Residence sites of spermatozoa in fowl oviducts. J. Reprod. Fertil. 8: 39–47.Google Scholar
Bobr, L. W., Ogasawara, F. X. and Lorenz, F. W. 1964b. Distribution of spermatozoa in the oviduct and fertility in domestic birds, II. Transport of spermatozoa in the fowl oviduct. J. Reprod. Fertil. 8: 49–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bornstein, S., Schindler, H., Moses, E. and Gabriel, I. 1965. Fertility of chickens during a regime of continuous artificial insemination on a commercial breeding farm. Israel. J. Agric. Res. 15: 33–40.Google Scholar
Brown, K. I. 1966. Storage of turkey semen. Poult. Sci. 45: 1073 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Brown, J. E., Harris, G. C. and Hobbs, T. D. 1963. Effect of intraperitoneal insemination on egg production and fertilizing capacity of fresh and frozen chicken sperm. Poult. Sci. 42: 810–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, D. M. 1955. A comparison of artificial insemination with natural mating in the domestic fowl. Vet. Rec. 67: 461–467.Google Scholar
Cooper, D. M. 1963. Modern trends in animal health and husbandry. Artificial insemination of poultry. Brit. Vet. J. 119: 194–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Silva, P. L. G. 1962. Artificial insemination in poultry, 1. Collection of semen from the cock. Ceylon Vet. J. 10: 124–127.Google Scholar
El Jack, M. H., and Lake, P. E. 1966. The effect of resting roosters from ejaculation on the quality of spermatozoa in semen. J. Reprod. Fertil. 11: 489–491.Google Scholar
Ferebee, D. C., Ogasawara, F. X. and Rooney, W. F. 1966. Plastic tube method of artificial insemination of turkeys. Bull. Univ. Calif. Agric. Ext. Service. AXT-219.Google Scholar
Fujii, S. 1963. Histological and histochemical studies on the oviduct of the domestic fowl with special reference to the region of uterovaginal juncture. Arch. histol. japon. 23: 447–459.Google Scholar
Fujii, S., and Tamura, T. 1963. Location of sperms in the oviduct of the domestic fowl with special reference to storage of sperms in the vaginal gland. J. Fac. Fish. Anim. Husb. Hiroshima Univ. 5: 145–163.Google Scholar
Gertner, M. 1966. Radiological examination of the utero-vaginal oviduct section of layer geese, with particular respect to artificial insemination aspects. Proc. XIIIth World's Poult. Congr. Kiev. pp. 268–274.Google Scholar
Gilbert, A. B., Reynolds, M. E. and Lorenz, F. W. 1966. The vascular system of the tubular sperm host glands of the domestic hen. Poult. Sci. 45: 1086 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Gowe, R. S., Johnson, A. S. and Merritt, E. S. 1957. Poultry Division, Central Experimental Farm, Ottawa. Progress Report, 1949-54. Canada Dept. Agric. pp. 6–28.Google Scholar
Hancock, J. L. and Hovell, G. J. R. 1961. The effect of semen volume and number of spermatozoa on the fertility of intra-uterine inseminations of pigs. Anim. Prod. 3: 153–161.Google Scholar
Harper, J. A. 1965. Fertility of turkey eggs as related to method of collecting and aeration of semen. Poult. Sci. 44: 726–731.Google Scholar
Harris, G. C. 1965. Preservation of chicken semen in liquid nitrogen at -196°C. Poult. Sci. 44: 1376 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Harris, G. C. 1966. Effects of various factors on fertility of chicken semen frozen at -196°C. Poult. Sci. 45: 1090–1091 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Harris, G. C., Hobbs, T. D. and Petersen, H. P. 1961. Effects of stirring on the fertility of chicken spermatozoa. Poult. Sci. 40: 1413 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Harrison, D. G., Offor, M., Soo, D. and Heald, P. J. 1966. Isolation of poly a-glutamic acid from the oviduct of the domestic fowl and a possible role in maintenance of fertlity. Nature. Lond. 212: 706.Google Scholar
Howes, J. R. and Gowe, R. S. 1960. Genetically determined fertility differences between two breeds of fowl. Poult. Sci. 39: 1259 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Itagaki, K., Tsibokura, M., Inomata, R. and Nakano, S. 1966. Serological studies on the artificial insemination in domestic fowl, I. On the decline of fertility and agglutinin against spermatozoa. Jap. Poult. Sci. 3: 1–4.Google Scholar
Jones, J. E., Wilson, H. R., Harms, R. H., Simpson, C. F. and Waldroup, P. W. 1966. Reproduction in male chickens following protein deficiencies during the growing period. Poult. Sci. 45: 1095–1096 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Kamar, G. A. R. 1958. The collection of cock's semen without milking the copulatory organ. Poult.. Sci. 37: 1382–1385.Google Scholar
Krueger, W. F., Abdul Wahid, M. and Quisenberry, J. H. 1966. The effect of sulfaquinoxaline and chlortetracycline in combination on fertility and hatchability of chicken eggs. Poult. Sci. 45: 1098 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Kushner, H. F., Novik, I., Kopylovskaya, G. and Gintovt, V. 1966. Development and application of artificial insemination for poultry breeding (chickens and turkeys). Proc. XIIIth World's Poult. Congr. Kiev pp. 110–114.Google Scholar
Lake, P. E. 1962. Artificial Insemination in Poultry. In The Semen of Animals and Artificial Insemination. Ed. Maule, J. R.. Chap. 19. 331–356. Commonwealth Agric. Bureaux, England.Google Scholar
Lake, P. E. 1966a. Physiology and Biochemistry of Poultry Semen. Adv. Repr. Physiol. Vol. I. pp. 93–123. Ed. McLaren, A.. Logos Press Ltd. London.Google Scholar
Lake, P. E. 1966b. A cytochemical examination of the spermatozoa of the domestic fowl. Res. vet. Sci. 7: 121–127.Google Scholar
Lake, P. E. 1967. The maintenance of spermatozoa in the oviduct of the domestic fowl. In Reproduction in the Female Mammal. 13th Nottingham Easter School, 1966. (In press).Google Scholar
Lake, P. E. and Wood-Gush, G. D. M. 1956. Diurnal rhythms in semen yields and mating behaviour in the domestic cock. Nature. Lond. 178: 853.Google Scholar
Lamoreux, W. F. 1943. The influence of different amounts of illumination upon the production of semen in the fowl. J. Exptl. Zool. 94: 73–95.Google Scholar
Lillie, R. J., Calvert, C. C. and Menge, H. 1965. The fertilizing capacity of the domestic cock as affected by linoleic acid. Poult. Sci. 44: 1393 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Lorenz, F. W. 1959. Reproduction in the Domestic Fowl: Physiology of the male. In Reproduction in Domestic Animals. Ed. Cole, H. H. and Cupps, P. T.. Vol. 2. 343–398. Academic Press, Inc. New York.Google Scholar
Lorenz, F. W. 1964. Recent Research on fertility and artificial insemination of domestic birds. Proc. Vth Internat. Congr. Anim. Reprod. and A. I. Trento. Sec. III 7–32.Google Scholar
Melrose, D. R. 1962. Artificial insemination in cattle. In The Semen of Animals and Artificial Insemination. Ed. Maule, J. P.. Commonwealth Agric. Bureaux, England.Google Scholar
Millar, P. G. 1966. Studies on the use of diluted semen in turkey breeding. Proc. XIIIth World's Poult. Congr. Kiev. pp. 115–120.Google Scholar
Millar, P. G. and Garwood, F. E. 1964. Field trials of diluents in the artificial insemination of turkeys. Vet. Rec. 76: 624–-8.Google Scholar
Millar, P. G., Garwood, F. E. and Herbert, C. N. 1965. Further trials with diluted semen in the artificial insemination of turkeys. Vet. Rec. 77: 130–132.Google Scholar
Moyer, D. D., Leighton, A. T. and Van Krey, H. P. 1966. Force moulting of infertile turkeys to improve fertility. Poult. Sci. 45: 1108 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Nestor, K. E. and Brown, K. I. 1966. Method and frequency of insemination affect turkey fertility. Poult. Sci. 45: 1110 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Nestor, K. A. and Hyre, H. M. 1961. A comparison of various treatments of fowl semen. Poult. Sci. 40: 772–777.Google Scholar
Nevo, A. C. 1965. Dependence of sperm motility and respiration on oxygen concentration. J. Reprod. Fertil. 9: 103–107.Google Scholar
Ogasawara, F. X. and Lorenz, F. W. 1966. Early mortality in chicken embryos following intravaginal insemination. Poult. Sci. 45: 1112 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Ogasawara, F. X., and Lorenz, F. W. and Bobr, L. W. 1966. Distribution of spermatozoa in the oviduct and fertility in domestic birds, III. Intra-uterine insemination of semen from low fecundity cocks. J. Reprod. Fertil. 11: 33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogasawara, F. X. and Rooney, W. F. 1966. Artificial insemination and fertility in turkeys. British Poult. Sci. 7: 77–82.Google Scholar
Parker, J. E. and Arscott, G. H. 1965. The effect of time of insemination on fertility of hen's eggs. Poult. Sci. 44: 1405–1406 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Parker, J. E. and McCluskey, W. H. 1964. The effect of the length of daily light periods on the volume and fertilizing capacity of semen from male chickens. Poult. Sci. 43: 1401–05.Google Scholar
Parker, J. E. and McCluskey, W. H. 1965. The effect of length of daily light periods on sexual development and subsequent fertilizing capacity of male chickens. Poult. Sci. 44: 23–27.Google Scholar
Parkes, A. S. and Deanesley, R. 1966. The Ovarian Hormones. In Marshall's Physiology of Reproduction. Vol. III. Ed. Parkes, A. S., pp. 615–616. Longmans, Green & Co. Ltd. London.Google Scholar
Perek, M. 1966. Fertility in the male in relation to natural and artificial insemination. In Physiology of the Domestic Fowl. British Egg Marketing Board Symposium. No. 1. pp. 52–60. Ed- Horton-Smith, C. & Amoroso, E. C.. Oliver and Boyd Ltd. Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Perek, M. and Snapir, N. 1963. Seasonal variations in semen production of different breeds of cocks and the effect of vitamin C feed supplementation upon the semen of White Rocks. Brit. Poult. Sci. 4: 19–26.Google Scholar
Polge, C. 1956. Artificial insemination in pigs. Vet. Rec. 68: 62–76.Google Scholar
Proudfoot, F. G. 1966. The influence of oxygen and other gases on the fertilizing ability of fowl semen held for several hours at 10°C in Cryovac enclosures. Poult. Sci. 45: 443–446.Google Scholar
Proudfoot, F. G. and Stewart, D. K. R. 1967. The effect of oxygen and type of container on the retention of the fertilizing capacity of fowl spermatozoa in vitro. J. Reprod. Fertil. 13: (In press).Google Scholar
Quinn, P. J. and White, I. G. 1966. The effect of cold-shock and deep-freezing on the concentration of major cations in spermatozoa. J. Reprod. Fertil. 12: 263–270.Google Scholar
Saeki, Y. 1963a. Effect of freezing point depression of diluent on the fertilizing ability of cock sperm. Bull. Nat. Inst. Anim. Indust. Chiba City. 1: 1–7.Google Scholar
Saeki, Y. 1963b. Fertilizing ability of cock spermatozoa first ejaculated and changes in semen quality with age of the cock. Jap. J. Zootech. Sci. 34: 121–125.Google Scholar
Saeki, Y. and Nogami, Y. 1964. Seasonal differences in fertility and hatchability of eggs produced by the natural mating and artificial insemination methods of chickens. Jap. J. Anim. Reprod. 10: 37–43.Google Scholar
Saeki, Y., Miyauchi, S., Abe, T., Hosoda, T., and Akita, T. 1965. Relationship between fertility of eggs from hens continuously inseminated for a long period and their agglutinin titres against cock spermatozoa. Jap. Poult. Sci. 2: 109–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schindler, H. & Hurwitz, S. 1966. The preservation of sperm motility in different regions of the hen oviduct in vivo. Poult. Sci. 45: 369–374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schindler, H., Nahari, U. and Bornstein, S. 1963. The effect of sperm number and sperm concentration on fertility in artificial insemination of chickens. Israel J. Agric. Res. 13: 155–162.Google Scholar
Singh, V. B., Ball, R. S. and Pomeroy, B. S. 1964. Studies on the etiology of a transmissible disease causing infertility in female turkeys. Poult. Sci. 43: 1362 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Soller, M., Snapir, N. & Schindler, H. 1965. Herilability of semen quantity, concentration and motility in White Rock roosters, and their genetic correlation with rate of gain. Poult. Sci. 44: 1527–1529.Google Scholar
Stower, J. P & Bud-Husaim, 1957. Conception rates with bull semen diluted in a glycerolized glycine—egg yolk—fructose buffer. J. Agric. Sci. 49: 220–222.Google Scholar
Szumowski, P. 1960. Insemination artificelle chez les Palmipedes. Rec. Med. Vet. 136: 1156–1205.Google Scholar
Szumowski, P. 1964. Une etude sur le sperme de jars. Proc. Vth Internat. Congr. Anim. Reprod. and A.I., Trento. 4: 572–581.Google Scholar
Szumowski, P. and Theret, M. 1965. Causes possibles de la faible fertilite des oies et des difficultes de son amelioration. Rec. Med. Vet. 141: 583–597.Google Scholar
Takeda, A. 1964. Behaviour of spermatozoa in the genital tract of the hen. I. Presence of spermatozoa in the oviduct. Jap. Poult. Sci. 1: 19–31.Google Scholar
Takeda, A. 1965. Behaviour of spermatozoa in the genital tract of the hen, II. Survival of spermatozoa in the ligitated oviduct. Jap. Poult. Sci. 2: 115–122.Google Scholar
Takeda, A. 1966. Behaviour of spermatozoa in the genital tract of the hen, III. Fertility and spermatozoal behaviour following infundibulal insemination. Jap. Poult. Sci. 3: 15–22.Google Scholar
Tanaka, K., Hong Chan, K. & Okamoto, S. 1965. The effect of adding fractionated egg yolk on motility, per cent motile sperm and fertility of chicken spermatozoa. Jap. Poult. Sci. 2: 27–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanaka, K. and Okamoto, S. 1966. The effect of freezing point depression on chicken spermatozoa. Jap. Poult. Sci. 3: 5–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanaka, K., Tomita, T. and Okamoto, S. 1966. Studies on deep-freezing of fowl semen. Jap. J. Zootech. Sci. 37: 134–138.Google Scholar
Taneja, G. C., & Gowe, R. S. 1961. Effect of varying doses of undiluted semen on fertility in the domestic fowl. Nature. Lond. 191: 828–829.Google Scholar
Tulloch, B. R. 1962. A modified technique for the collection of poultry semen. S. Afr. J. Agric. Sci. 5: 153–155.Google Scholar
Tyler, A. 1961. Approaches to the control of fertility based on immunological phenomena. J. Reprod. Fertil. 2: 473–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Duijn, C. 1964. Relationship between spermatozoan numbers and fertility. Internat. J. Fert. 9: 609–612.Google Scholar
Van Krey, H. P., Ogasawara, F. X. and Pangborn, J. 1966. Light and electron microscopic studies of possible sperm gland emptying mechanisms. Poult. Sci. 45: 1134 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Van Krey, H. P., Ogasawara, F. X. and Lorenz, F. W. 1966. Distribution of spermatozoa in the oviduct and fertility in domestic birds. IV. Fertility of spermatozoa from infundibular and uterovaginal glands. J. Reprod. Fertil. 11: 257–262.Google Scholar
Van Wambeke, F. 1964. The use of milk and skim-milk as cock semen diluents. Proc. Vth Internat. Congr. Anim. Reprod. and A.I. Trento. 4: 682–686.Google Scholar
Van Wambeke, F. 1967. The storage of fowl spermatozoa. 1. Preliminary results with new diluents. J. Reprod. Fertil. (In press).Google Scholar
Verma, O. P. and Cherms, F. L. 1965. The appearance of sperm and their persistency in storage tubules of turkey hens after a single insemination. Poult. Sci. 44: 609–613.Google Scholar
Verma, O. P. and Cherms, F. L. 1966. Recovery of spermatozoa from the reproductive tract of turkey hens. Poult. Sci. 45: 604–607.Google Scholar
Watanabe, M. 1961. Experimental studies on the artificial insemination of domestic ducks with special reference to the production of Mule-Ducks. J. Fac. Fish. Anim. Husb. Hiroshima Univ. 3: 439–478.Google Scholar
Watanabe, M. 1961. Effects of dilutors and storage on fertility of duck semen. Jap. J. Anim. Reprod. 7: 38–40.Google Scholar
Watanabe, M. 1965. Artificial insemination of poultry. Jap. J. Zootech. Sci. 36: 29–39.Google Scholar
Wentworth, B. C. and Mellen, W. M. 1964. Effects of spermatozoal antibodies and methods of insemination on the fecundity of domestic hens. Brit. Poult. Sci. 5: 59–65.Google Scholar
Wentworth, B. C. and Mellen, W. J. 1965. Anti-testis antibodies and fecundity in female Japanese Quail. Physiol. Zool. 38: 361–369.Google Scholar
Wilcox, F. H. 1960. Effect on fertility of temperature, handling methods, Lake's solution and the addition of egg white, egg yolk and sugars to the diluent used in storing chicken semen. Poult. Sci. 39: 459–467.Google Scholar
Wilcox, F. H., Shaffner, C. S. and Wilson, H. R. 1961. Breed differences in storing chicken semen. J. Hered. 52: 119–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, F. H. and Shorb, M. 1958. The effect of antibiotics on bacteria in semen and on motility and fertilizing ability of chicken spermatozoa. Amer. J. Vet. Res. 19: 945–949.Google Scholar
Wilson, H. R., Waldroup, P. W., Jones, J. E., Duerre, D. J. and Harms, R. H. 1965. Protein levels in growing diets and reproductive performance of cockerels. J. Nutr. 85: 29–37.Google Scholar
Woodard, A. E. and Abplanalp, H. 1966. Semen production of Broad-Breasted Bronze males maintaines in cages and on the floor. Poult. Sci. 45: 1138–1139 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Yamane, J., Tsukunaga, S. and Takahashi, T. 1962. A new model of bird holder and semen receptacle for collecting semen from the cock. Bull. Horoshima Agric. Coll. 2: 17–24.Google Scholar
Yamane, J., Tsukunaga, S. and Takahashi, T. 1963. Effects of uterine and vaginal inseminations upon fertility of domestic hens. Bull. Hiroshima Agric. Coll. 2: 65–73.Google Scholar
Yoshida, S. and Masuda, H. 1961. Biochemical studies on the fowl semen. I. Respiration and glycolysis of fowl spermatozoa. Proc. Silver Jubilee, Lab. Amin. Husb., Coll. Agric. Kyoto Univ. pp. 105–114.Google Scholar
Yoshida, S. and Masuda, H. 1965a. Biochemical studies on fowl semen. II. Effects of some respiratory inhibitors on metabolism of fowl spermatozoa. Jap. J. Zootech. Sci. 36: 278–285.Google Scholar
Yoshida, S. and Masuda, H. 1965b. Biochemical studies on fowl semen. III. On the Meyerhof Quotient of fowl spermatozoa and effects of some glycolytic and oxidative phosphorylation inhibitors on metabolism and motility of fowl spermatozoa. Jap. J. Zootech. Sci. 36: 286–29.Google Scholar