| Literature DB >> 25984501 |
Vasiliki G Sapanidou1, Ioannis Margaritis1, Nektarios Siahos1, Konstantinos Arsenopoulos1, Eleni Dragatidou1, Ioannis A Taitzoglou1, Ioannis A Zervos1, Alexandros Theodoridis2, Maria P Tsantarliotou1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Grape extracts of the Greek species Vitis vinifera possess potent antioxidant properties in vitro. The freeze/thaw process and the preparation of semen during assisted reproductive techniques can adversely affect the functional integrity of spermatozoa. The objective was to assess the effect of three different concentrations (1 μg ml(-1), 2 μg ml(-1) and 5 μg ml(-1)) of a polyphenol-rich grape pomace extract on motility, viability, acrosomal and lipid peroxidation status of thawed bovine spermatozoa after 2 and 4 hrs of incubation.Entities:
Keywords: Grape; Lipid peroxidation; Motility; Polyphenols; Spermatozoa; Viability
Year: 2014 PMID: 25984501 PMCID: PMC4389799 DOI: 10.1186/2241-5793-21-19
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Biol Res (Thessalon) ISSN: 1790-045X Impact factor: 1.889
The effect of different doses of the grape extract on CASA parameters (mean ± SD)
| Time | Conc. of grape extract | Total motile | Rapid | Progressive motile | VSL | VCL | VAP | ALH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (hrs) | (μg ml −1) | (%) | (%) | (%) | (μm sec −1) | (μm sec −1) | (μm sec −1) | (μm) |
| 0 | 0 | 69.17 ± 5.16 | 50.50 ± 5.15 | 17.85 ± 4.53 | 21.25 ± 4.89 | 57.93 ± 2.97 | 31.28 ± 5.62 | 2.35 ± 0.30 |
| 1 | 77.97 ± 5.38 | 51.70 ± 6.27 | 20.10 ± 5.74 | 20.53 ± 4.32 | 63.0 ± 8.28 | 36.13 ± 3.97 | 2.88 ± 0.39 | |
| 2 | 79.6 ± 5.36 | 56.20 ± 1.50 | 21.15 ± 4.84 | 23.73 ± 7.79 | 63.8 ± 3.84 | 37.53 ± 2.87 | 3.28 ± 0.57 | |
| 5 | 81.07 ± 3.7 | 56.25 ± 2.21 | 23.52 ± 1.64 | 25.15 ± 11.27 | 64.65 ± 2.3 | 43.88 ± 6.8 | 2.78 ± 0.15 | |
| 2 | 0 | 45.65 ± 17.61 | 19.02 ± 6.22a | 14.70 ± 3.98 | 29.8 ± 16.37 | 54.48 ± 14.06 | 38.25 ± 13.84 | 3.08 ± 0.31 |
| 1 | 64.47 ± 16.03 | 31.57 ± 10.16ab | 22.57 ± 8.14 | 24.0 ± 8.89 | 57.85 ± 3.88 | 39.0 ± 5.10 | 2.78 ± 0.15 | |
| 2 | 63.82 ± 9.53 | 38.57 ± 5.57ab | 22.32 ± 7.48 | 33.15 ± 12.03 | 63.10 ± 14.66 | 42.25 ± 14.42 | 3.2 ± 0.16 | |
| 5 | 71.85 ± 3.61 | 44.15 ± 11.60b | 26.07 ± 3.06 | 28.48 ± 16.06 | 63.83 ± 8.23 | 39.88 ± 5.67 | 3.12 ± 0.46 | |
| 4 | 0 | 36.23 ± 6.97 | 13.00 ± 3.94 | 12.57 ± 2.00 | 19.48 ± 6.91 | 47.68 ± 8.14 | 28.38 ± 4.07 | 2.52 ± 0.58 |
| 1 | 40.05 ± 13.04 | 16.47 ± 7.78 | 10.22 ± 4.77 | 24.45 ± 9.82 | 45.53 ± 9.73 | 25.88 ± 4.51 | 2.50 ± 0.58 | |
| 2 | 38.7 ± 4.86 | 15.78 ± 5.57 | 12.30 ± 3.56 | 19.48 ± 8.38 | 44.93 ± 9.35 | 25.18 ± 6.19 | 2.10 ± 0.84 | |
| 5 | 51.40 ± 6.22 | 25.52 ± 7.59 | 15.97 ± 3.25 | 19.78 ± 10.45 | 51.93 ± 10.54 | 28.70 ± 4.25 | 2.85 ± 0.70 |
a,b Different letters in each treatment indicate statistically significant differences within each given time point (p <0.05, n = 4).
The effect of different doses of the grape extract on sperm viability (mean ± SD)
| Time (hours) | Extract (μg ml −1) | Alive spermatozoa-intact acrosome (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | 81.0 ± 2.4 |
| 1 | 77.0 ± 3.0 | |
| 2 | 82.0 ± 1.8 | |
| 5 | 79.0 ± 3.2 | |
| 2 | 0 | 49.0 ± 2.5a |
| 1 | 48.0 ± 1.8a | |
| 2 | 54.5 ± 1.5b | |
| 5 | 55.6 ± 1.5b | |
| 4 | 0 | 39.5 ± 2.9 |
| 1 | 39.0 ± 5.4 | |
| 2 | 37.3 ± 2.6 | |
| 5 | 47.4 ± 13.5 |
Different letters in each column indicate statistically significant difference between the treatments within each given time point (p <0.05, n = 4).
Figure 1The effect of the grape extract on LPO production of sperm (mean ± SD). Different letters indicate statistically significant differences between different concentrations within each time point (p <0.05).