Motility and acrosomal integrity comparisons between electro-ejaculated and epididymal ram sperm after exposure to a range of anisosmotic solutions, cryoprotective agents and low temperatures

Effective ram sperm cryopreservation protocols, which would yield acceptable lambing rates following artificial insemination (AI), are currently lacking. The objectives of the current studies were to compare the effects of various anisosmotic conditions, cryoprotective agents (CPAs) and chilling on the motility and acrosomal integrity of electro-ejaculated and epididymal ram sperm. Three experiments were conducted. In experiment 1, ejaculated and epididymal ram sperm were exposed to 75, 150, 225, 600, 900 and 1200 milliosmolal (mOsm)/kg sucrose solutions, held for 5 min and then returned to isosmotic condition. Motility characteristics of sperm during exposure to each anisosmotic solutions and after returning to isosmotic conditions were determined. In experiment 2, ejaculated and epididymal ram sperm were exposed to 1 M glycerol (Gly), dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), ethylene glycol (EG) and propylene glycol (PG) for 5 min and then returned to isosmotic conditions. Motility characteristics of sperm samples during exposure to each CPA solution and after returning to isosmotic conditions were determined. In experiment 3, effects of various temperatures on motility characteristics of ejaculated and epididymal ram sperm were determined after exposing them to three different sub-physiologic temperatures (4, 10 and 22 °C) for 30 min and subsequently returning them to 37 °C. The motility of ejaculated ram sperm was significantly more affected from anisosmotic stress than was epididymal ram sperm (P < 0.05). While anisosmotic stress had no effects on acrosomal integrity of epididymal ram sperm, there was a significant reduction in acrosomal integrity for ejaculated ram sperm after the addition and removal of a 75 mOsm sucrose solution. The abrupt addition and removal of 1 M Gly, DMSO, EG or PG had no effect on the motility and acrosomal integrity of epididymal ram sperm (P > 0.05). However, there was a slight decrease in acrosomal integrity for ejaculated ram sperm after exposure to 1 M Gly, DMSO or EG (P > 0.05). Both epididymal and ejaculated ram sperm exhibited temperature-dependent loss of motility and acrosomal integrity (P < 0.05). However, ejaculated ram sperm was more sensitive to chilling stress than epididymal sperm (P < 0.05). In conclusion, the current data suggest that while epididymal ram sperm is extremely resilient to various cryobiologically relevant stress conditions, ejaculated ram sperm demonstrate greater sensitivity to such stressors. These findings should be taken into account when developing cryopreservation protocols for ejaculated and epididymal ram sperm.