| Literature DB >> 35405819 |
Vasiliki Stravogianni1, Theodoros Samaras2, Constantin M Boscos1, John Markakis2, Evdokia Krystallidou3, Athina Basioura4, Ioannis A Tsakmakidis1.
Abstract
Biomedical measurements by specialized technological equipment have been used in farm animals to collect information about nutrition, behavior and welfare. This study investigates the relation of semen quality (CASA analysis, viability, morphology, membrane biochemical activity and DNA fragmentation) with boar behavior during ejaculation. Sensors were placed on the boar's body. Movement features were collected using an inertial measurement unit (IMU), comprising an accelerometer, a gyroscope and a magnetometer. Boar, scrotal and dummy temperatures were measured by an infrared (IR) camera and an IR thermometer, while the face salivation of the boar was recorded by a moisture meter (also based on IR technology). All signals and images were logged on a mobile device (smartphone or tablet) using a Bluetooth connection and then transferred wirelessly to the cloud. The data files were then processed using scripts in MATLAB 2021a (MathWorks, Natick, Massachusetts) to derive the necessary indices. Ninety-four ejaculates from five boars were analyzed in this study. The statistical analysis was performed in the Statistics and Machine Learning Toolbox of MATLAB 2021a using a linear mixed effects model. Significant and strong negative correlations (R2 > 0.5, p ≤ 0.05) were observed between boar, dummy and scrotal temperature with the progressive, rapid and slow movement of spermatozoa, VCL (curvilinear velocity), VSL (straight line velocity) and ALH (amplitude of lateral head displacement) kinematics. The volume of the ejaculate was correlated with the scrotal and dummy temperature. Dummy's temperature was negatively correlated with BCF (beat/cross-frequency), viability and total time of ejaculation, while it was positively correlated with abnormal morphology. Body temperature was negatively correlated with BCF. Positive correlations were noticed between VAP (average path velocity) and total time of ejaculation with body acceleration features, as well as between the overall dynamic body acceleration (ODBA) and total time of ejaculation. In conclusion, the use of biomedical sensors can support the evaluation of boar sperm production capacity, providing valuable information about semen quality.Entities:
Keywords: biomedicine; boar semen; fertility; pig; sensor signals; thermal camera
Year: 2022 PMID: 35405819 PMCID: PMC8996908 DOI: 10.3390/ani12070829
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 2.752
Figure 1Thermal image of three boar scrotum’s surface areas (square, cross and circle area) during ejaculation.
Figure 2Boar salivation and face moisture imaging during ejaculation.
Correlations that were significant at p < 0.05 between sperm variables and thermal data.
| Variables | Regression Coefficient | 95% Confidence Interval | R-Squared | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower Coefficient | Upper Coefficient | |||||
| Progressive | Dummy Temperature | −1.298 | −1.667 | −0.929 | <0.001 | 0.637 |
| Progressive | Scrotal Temperature | −2.064 | −2.700 | −1.428 | <0.001 | 0.543 |
| Progressive | Body Temperature | −3.697 | −4.813 | −2.581 | <0.001 | 0.546 |
| Rapid | Dummy Temperature | −1.521 | −1.892 | −1.151 | <0.001 | 0.662 |
| Rapid | Scrotal Temperature | −2.420 | −3.192 | −1.647 | <0.001 | 0.576 |
| Rapid | Body Temperature | −4.252 | −5.686 | −2.818 | <0.001 | 0.577 |
| Slow | Dummy Temperature | 1.085 | 0.736 | 1.435 | <0.001 | 0.616 |
| Slow | Scrotal Temperature | 1.733 | 1.173 | 2.294 | <0.001 | 0.516 |
| Slow | Body Temperature | 3.262 | 2.293 | 4.230 | <0.001 | 0.548 |
| VCL | Dummy Temperature | −0.796 | −1.078 | −0.514 | <0.001 | 0.625 |
| VCL | Scrotal Temperature | −1.289 | −1.862 | −0.718 | <0.001 | 0.555 |
| VCL | Body Temperature | −2.378 | −3.394 | −1.363 | <0.001 | 0.596 |
| VSL | Scrotal Temperature | −0.569 | −0.928 | −0.209 | 0.002 | 0.510 |
| VSL | Body Temperature | −0.911 | −1.571 | −0.251 | 0.007 | 0.515 |
| VSL | Dummy Temperature | −0.369 | −0.552 | −0.187 | <0.001 | 0.554 |
| ALH | Scrotal Temperature | −0.073 | −0.101 | −0.044 | <0.001 | 0.518 |
| ALH | Body Temperature | −0.140 | −0.190 | −0.090 | <0.001 | 0.575 |
| ALH | Dummy Temperature | −0.046 | −0.061 | −0.030 | <0.001 | 0.602 |
| BCF | Body Temperature | −0.067 | −0.121 | −0.013 | 0.016 | 0.506 |
| BCF | Dummy Temperature | −0.022 | −0.037 | −0.007 | 0.005 | 0.504 |
| Abn. Morph. | Dummy Temperature | 0.005 | 0.004 | 0.006 | <0.001 | 0.586 |
| Viability | Dummy Temperature | −0.006 | −0.007 | −0.005 | <0.001 | 0.685 |
| Volume | Scrotal Temperature | −4.630 | −8.407 | −0.853 | 0.017 | 0.756 |
| Volume | Dummy Temperature | −2.560 | −4.579 | −0.542 | 0.014 | 0.760 |
| Tot. Ejac. Time | Dummy Temperature | −0.114 | −0.215 | −0.014 | 0.026 | 0.651 |
Progressive, Rapid, Slow: spermatozoa with progressive, rapid and slow movement, respectively, %; VCL: curvilinear velocity (μm/s); VSL: straight line velocity (μm/s); ALH: amplitude of lateral head displacement (μm); BCF: beat/cross-frequency (Hz); Abn. Morph.: abnormal morphology %; Volume: ejaculate’s volume (ml); Tot. Ejac. Time: total time of ejaculation process (min). All temperatures were measured in °C.
Correlations that were significant at p < 0.05 between sperm variables, processing of ejaculation and accelerometer sensor data.
| Variables | Regression Coefficient | 95% Confidence Interval | R-Squared | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower Coefficient | Upper Coefficient | |||||
| VAP | Acceleration (g) | 15.980 | 1.918 | 30.042 | 0.026 | 0.533 |
| Tot. Ejac. Time | ODBA (g) | 26.967 | 14.009 | 39.925 | <0.001 | 0.608 |
| Tot. Ejac. Time | Acceleration (g) | 40.403 | 26.606 | 54.200 | <0.001 | 0.686 |
VAP: average path velocity (μm/s); Tot. Ejac. Time: total time of ejaculation process (min); ODBA: overall dynamic body acceleration (g); g: acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s2).
Correlations that were significant at p < 0.05, between salivation, accelerometer sensor and thermal measurements.
| Variables | Regression Coefficient | 95% Confidence Interval | R-Squared | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower Coefficient | Upper Coefficient | |||||
| Scrotal Temperature | Body Temperature | 1.430 | 1.211 | 1.650 | <0.001 | 0.672 |
| Scrotal Temperature | Dummy Temperature | 0.445 | 0.392 | 0.498 | <0.001 | 0.776 |
| Body Temperature | Dummy Temperature | 0.243 | 0.209 | 0.277 | <0.001 | 0.767 |
| ODBA (g) | Acceleration (g) | 0.969 | 0.759 | 1.179 | <0.001 | 0.807 |
| ODBA (g) | Salivation (pixels) | 0.008 | 0.028 | 0.015 | 0.005 | 0.678 |
ODBA: overall dynamic body acceleration (g); g: acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s2). All temperatures were measured in °C.