Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-jwnkl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T07:26:52.645Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of rate of cooling to 5°C, storage at 5°C, glycerol concentration, sodium chloride, fructose and glycine on the revival of deep-frozen bull spermatozoa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

I.C.A. Martin
I.C.A. Martin
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Physiology, University of Sydney, Sydney, N.S.W., Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Bull spermatozoa were deep-frozen to −79° C. in diluents prepared with 1% lecithin and containing mixtures of sodium citrate, sodium chloride, fructose, glycine and gelatin, and revival rates measured after thawing, using scores of motility rate of progression of spermatozoa), the visual estimation of percentage of motile spermatozoa and the percentage of spermatozoa unstained by Congo-red-nigrosin. The experimental design was a one-ninth replicate of a 37 factorial. A decrease in the time taken to cool samples

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 64 , Issue 3 , June 1965 , pp. 425 - 432
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1965

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

REFERENCES

Albright, J.L., Ehlers, M.H. & Erb, R.E. (1958) J. Dairy Sci. 41, 524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, A. W. (1953). J. Gen. Physiol. 36, 449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, A. W. (1954). Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 7, 573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, A. W. (1955). Aust. Vet. J. 31, 124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, A. W. (1960). Aust. Vet. J. 36, 376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, A. W., Emmens, C. W., Martin, I. & Heyting, J. (1957). A.I. Digest, 5, 6.Google Scholar
Blackshaw, A. W. & Salisbury, G. W. (1957 J. Dairy Sci. 40, 1099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claringbold, P. J. (1955). Biometrics, 11, 174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cochran, W. G. & Cox, G. M. (1957). Experimental Design, 2nd ed.New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Emmens, C. W. & Blackshaw, A. W. (1950). Aust. Vet. J. 26, 226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmens, C. W. & Swyer, G. I. M. (1948). J. Gen. Physiol. 32, 121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erickson, W. E. & Graham, E. F. (1959). J. Dairy Sci. 42, 520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flipse, R. J. & Almquist, J. O. (1956). J. Dairy Sci. 39, 1690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempthorne, O. (1952). The Design and Analysis of Experiments. New York: John Wiley and Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, I. C. A. (1963a). J. Agric. Sci. 61, 55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, I. C. A. (1963b). J. Reprod. Fertil. 6, 433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, I. C. A. (1963c). J. Reprod. Fertil. 6, 441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polge, C. & Lovelock, J.E. (1952). Vet. Rec. 64, 396.Google Scholar
Rakes, J. M. & Stallcup, O.T. (1956). Science, 123, 224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy, A. & Bishop, M. W. H. (1954). Nature, Lond., 174, 746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A.U. & Polge, C. (1950). Nature, Lond., 166, 668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tischer, R. G. & Kempthorne, O. (1951). Food Tech. 5, 200.Google Scholar