Sperm chromatin in beef bulls in tropical environments

Aniline blue test for sperm protamination-a valuable add-on to the bull breeding soundness evaluation

Bull breeding soundness evaluation (BBSE) is the most common procedure used to predict bull potential fertility. However, the use of traditional methods for semen evaluation can affect its reliability. The inclusion of additional advanced test in BBSE may increase its accuracy. This study aimed to investigate the correlation between the degree of sperm protamination and BBSE main parameters of scrotal circumference (SC), progressive motility (PM), morphologically normal sperm (NS), and different categories of morphological defects. In addition, to determine the correlation between the three methods used for protamine assessment, five Brangus bulls were subjected to the BBSE. Semen samples were collected via electro-ejaculation and evaluated using traditional methods. Three different methods were used to determine the degree of sperm protamination: aniline blue (AB) staining, chromomycin A3 staining with fluorescent microscope (CMA3-FLM), and CMA3 with flow cytometry (CMA3-FCM). Sperm protamine deficiency assessed using the three methods exhibited significant differences among bulls according to their classification by BBSE, and showed significant negative correlation with semen quality parameters of NS and PM. A significant positive correlation was found between AB positivity and morphological abnormalities. The three methods used for protamine assessment also revealed significant positive correlations. Among the three tests, AB staining was the cheapest and easiest test that offers an objective assessment method for sperm protamination. Hence, it can be concluded that the assessment of protamination using AB staining test might serve as an additional valuable parameter or a replacement whenever detail sperm motility and morphology analyses in conducting BBSE to predict bull fertility are not possible.

Adverse effects of in vitro manipulation of spermatozoa

Development of in vitro reproduction techniques has not only offered some infertile couples the possibility to have a child, it also revolutionized animal reproduction. Although in vitro reproduction techniques for humans or domestic and non-domestic animals have been designed to mimic in vivo conditions, modifications due to environmental effects or in vitro manipulation of gametes and embryos are unavoidable. For male gametes, in vitro manipulations include techniques to select spermatozoa, cryopreservation and other incubation procedures, during which spermatozoa may be exposed to oxidative stress and other insults that may damage their functions and DNA. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of key studies reporting sperm damage during in vitro manipulation, with particular focus on effects on DNA integrity, a fundamental factor for fertilization and transmission of paternal genetic information to offspring.

Detection of protamine 2 in bovine spermatozoa and testicles

BACKGROUND

Sperm DNA integrity is crucial for transmission of genetic information to future generations and DNA damage can occur during chromatin packaging. Chromatin packaging involves the replacement of somatic nucleosomal histones by nuclear proteins called protamines. Protamine 1 (PRM1) is transcribed and translated in spermatids of all mammals; however, protamine 2 (PRM2) is transcribed in low levels in spermatids and it is not yet described in bull mature spermatozoa.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess gene and protein expression of PRM2 and corroborate gene and protein expression of PRM1 in bull spermatozoa and testis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For this purpose, absolute q-RT-PCR was performed to calculate the number of copies of PRM1 and PRM2 mRNAs in bovine epididymal spermatozoa and testicular tissue. Western blot and mass spectrometry were performed to identify PRM1 and PRM2 in samples of bovine epididymal spermatozoa. Samples of bovine testicular tissue were collected to identify PRM1 and PRM2 by immunohistochemistry.

RESULTS

We evaluated that the number of PRM1 mRNA copies was about hundred times higher than PRM2 mRNA copies in sperm and testicular samples (p < 0.0001). In addition, we estimated the PRM1: PRM2 ratio based on mRNA number of copies. In spermatozoa, the ratio was 1: 0.014, and in testicle, the ratio was 1: 0.009. We also evaluated the immunolocalization for PRM1 and PRM2 in bovine testis, and both proteins were detected in spermatids. Western blot and mass spectrometry in bovine epididymal spermatozoa confirmed these results.

CONCLUSION

Our work identifies, for the first time, PRM2 in bovine epididymal spermatozoa and in testis. Further studies are still needed to understand the role of PRM2 on the chromatin of the spermatozoa and to verify how possible changes in PRM2 levels may influence the bull fertility.

Morphological defects, sperm DNA integrity, and protamination of bovine spermatozoa

The association between sperm morphology characteristics and DNA conformation and integrity is still controversial. In bulls, major morphological sperm abnormalities have been associated with reduced fertility, and morphological assessment is used to provide an indication of potential fertility of the individual. Sperm DNA fragmentation and damage has a negative effect on embryo development and subsequently fertility, with bull spermatozoa generally displaying low levels of DNA damage and tight chromatin. However, sensitive methods for detecting chromatin damage may reveal associations with morphological defects. The objective was to determine whether morphological sperm abnormalities and variables expressing sperm DNA integrity and protamination are correlated in bulls, using the sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA) and the sperm protamine deficiency assay (SPDA). Electroejaculated samples (n = 1009) from two-year-old tropically adapted bulls were split and fixed and submitted to microscopic sperm morphology assessment, and snap-frozen for sperm nuclear integrity assessments by SPDA and SCSA. For SPDA, the variables were defective (MCB) and deprotaminated (HCB), and for SCSA, the variables were DNA fragmentation index (DFI) and high DNA stainability (HDS). HCB correlated with DFI; τKen²  = 0.317 and HDS; 0.098, and MCB correlated with DFI; 0.183 (p < 0.001). The percentage of morphological normal spermatozoa was correlated negatively to DFI; τKen²  = -0.168, MCB; -0.116 and HCB; -0.137 (p < 0.001). HCB and DFI were both positively correlated to head defects, proximal droplets, and spermatogenic immaturity, but not to distal droplets, vacuoles, or diadems. Sperm DNA integrity and protamination, using the SCSA and SPDA, respectively, in bulls show associations with morphological parameters, particularly with head shape abnormalities and indicators of spermatogenic immaturity, including proximal droplets. The vacuoles and diadem defects were not correlated with sperm nuclear integrity, and hence, these are likely physiological features that may not directly affect sperm chromatin configuration.

Effect of bovine sperm chromatin integrity evaluated using three different methods on in vitro fertility

In vitro fertility potential of individual bulls is still relatively uncharacterized. Classical sperm analysis does not include the evaluation of all sperm characteristics and thus, some cell compartments could be neglected. In humans, sperm DNA integrity has already proven to have major influence in embryo development and assisted reproduction techniques successfully. In bovine, some studies already correlated chromatin integrity with field fertility. However, none of those have attempted to relate DNA assessment approaches such as chromatin deficiency (CMA3), chromatin stability (SCSA; AO+) and DNA fragmentation (COMET assay) to predict in vitro bull fertility. To this purpose, we selected bulls with high and low in vitro fertility (n = 6/group), based on embryo development rate (blastocyst/cleavage rate). We then performed CMA3, SCSA test and COMET assay to verify if the difference of in vitro fertility may be related to DNA alterations evaluated by these assays. For the three tests performed, our results showed only differences in the percentage of cells with chromatin deficiency (CMA3+; high: 0.19 ± 0.03 vs low: 0.04 ± 0.04; p = 0.03). No difference for chromatin stability and any of COMET assay categories (grade I to grade IV) was observed between high and low in vitro fertility bulls. A positive correlation between AO + cells and grade IV cells was found. Despite the difference between groups in CMA3 analysis, our results suggest that protamine deficiency in bovine spermatozoa may not have a strong biological impact to explain the difference of in vitro fertility between the bulls used in this study.

Sperm protamine deficiency correlates with sperm DNA damage in Bos indicus bulls

The primary purpose of spermatozoa is to deliver the paternal DNA to the oocyte at fertilization. During the complex events of fertilization, if the spermatozoon penetrating the oocyte contains compromised or damaged sperm chromatin, the subsequent progression of embryogenesis and foetal development may be affected. Variation in sperm DNA damage and protamine content in ejaculated spermatozoa was reported in the cattle, with potential consequences to bull fertility. Protamines are sperm-specific nuclear proteins that are essential to packaging of the condensed paternal genome in spermatozoa. Sperm DNA damage is thought to be repaired during the process of protamination. This study investigates the potential correlation between sperm protamine content, sperm DNA damage and the subsequent relationships between sperm chromatin and commonly measured reproductive phenotypes. Bos indicus sperm samples (n = 133) were assessed by two flow cytometric methods: the sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA) and an optimized sperm protamine deficiency assay (SPDA). To verify the SPDA assay for bovine sperm protamine content, samples collected from testis, caput and cauda epididymidis were analyzed. As expected, mature spermatozoa in the cauda epididymidis had higher protamine content when compared with sperm samples from testis and caput epididymidis (p < 0.01). The DNA fragmentation index (DFI), determined by SCSA, was positively correlated (r = 0.33 ± 0.08, p < 0.05) with the percentage of spermatozoa that showed low protamine content using SPDA. Also, DFI was negatively correlated (r = -0.21 ± 0.09, p < 0.05) with the percentage of spermatozoa with high protamine content. Larger scrotal circumference contributes to higher sperm protamine content and lower content of sperm DNA damage (p < 0.05). In conclusion, sperm protamine content and sperm DNA damage are closely associated. Protamine deficiency is likely to be one of the contributing factors to DNA instability and damage, which can affect bull fertility.