Jp. Kastelic et al., INSULATING THE SCROTAL NECK AFFECTS SEMEN QUALITY AND SCROTAL TESTICULAR TEMPERATURES IN THE BULL/, Theriogenology, 45(5), 1996, pp. 935-942
Nine Simmental X Angus bulls (2-yr of age) were used in 2 experiments.
In Experiment 1, the scrotal neck was insulated (from Day 1 to Day 8)
in 5 bulls, and semen was collected from all 9 bulls by electroejacul
ation approximately every 3 d until Day 35. Bulls with insulated scrot
al necks had lower percentages of normal spermatozoa (P<0.08) and high
er percentages of spermatozoa with head defects (P<0.06) or droplets (
P<0.08) than the untreated bulls. There was a time-by-treatment intera
ction (P<0.04) for midpiece defects: the incidence was higher (P<0.05)
in the insulated than noninsulated bulls from Day 5 to Day 32. Sperma
tozoa within the epididymis or at the acrosome phase during insulation
appeared to be the most affected. Compared with the noninsulated bull
s, the insulated bulls had twice as many (P<0.02) spermatozoa with mid
piece defects and 4 times as many (not significant) with droplets on D
ay 5, fewer (P<0.04) normal spermatozoa and 3 times as many with midpi
ece defects (P<0.05) and with droplets (not significant) on Day 8, few
er (P<0.02) normal spermatozoa on Days 15 and 18, and more sperm cells
(P<0.05) with head defects on Days 18 and 21. In Experiment 2, scrota
l subcutaneous temperature (SQT; degrees C, mean+/-SE) prior to and af
ter the scrotal neck had been insulated for 48 h in all 9 bulls was 30
.4 +/- 0.7 and 32.4 +/- 0.6 (P<0.01) at the top, 30.3 +/- 0.7 and 31.8
+/- 0.6 (P<0.03) at the middle, and 30.2 +/- 0.8 and 30.7 +/- 0.6 (P<
0.05) at the bottom of the scrotum. Concurrently, there was an increas
e (0.9 degrees C) in intratesticular temperature (ITT) at the top (P<0
.07), middle (P<0.04), and bottom (P<0.04) of the testes. Scrotal surf
ace temperature (SST) prior to and after the scrotal neck had been ins
ulated for 24 h was 29.2 +/- 0.7 and 28.2 +/- 0.4 (P<0.05) at the top
of the scrotum and 24.7 +/- 0.6 and 25.3 +/- 0.7 (not significant) at
the bottom, resulting in SST gradients of 4.6 +/- 0.6 and 2.9 +/- 0.5,
respectively (P<0.05). However, after the scrotal neck had been insul
ated for 48 h, none of the SST end points were significantly different
from those prior to insulation. It appears that compensatory thermore
gulatory mechanisms restored SST but were not able to restore SQT and
ITT. Insulation of the scrotal neck affected SST, SQT, ITT and semen q
uality, emphasizing the importance of the scrotal neck in scrotal/test
icular thermoregulation.