Comparative analysis of semen quality and fertility in diverse rooster breeds: a systematic review
Bernabas Ayeneshet, Mengistie Taye, Wondmeneh Esatu, Assemu Tsefa
Abstract
SUMMARYGood semen quality is a vital tool for the rapid improvement of fertility by allowing maximum use of genetically improved roosters. Evaluation of the best quality semen for different chicken breeds increases artificial insemination efficiency and helps to improve chicken production through the wider usage of genetically superior roosters. The main aim of this systematic review is to summarise the fertility responses and semen quality parameters of different poultry strains to provide a summarised clue for breeders working on indigenous poultry breeds. There was a difference in semen volume per ejaculation between breeds’ fertility; however, there was similar semen volume for both Bar Plymouth Rock and Sasso breeds (0.8 mL). The semen volume of Bar Plymouth Rock ranged from 0.3 to 0.8 mL. There was a maximum (86%) of sperm motility in indigenous chickens from Chung University and a lower motility for indigenous chickens at the University of Urmia (29.6%). Viable sperm for Venda chicken was higher (96.8%) than the other breeds, and its performance ranged from 46.7% to 96.8%; however, there was the lowest (13%) sperm viability for Hubbard rooster. The sperm viability for White Leghorn also ranged from 49.7% to 82.5%. The abnormality of sperm was higher (72.6%) for the Rhode Island Red breed but lowest (3.2%) for indigenous chicken from Taiwan and 7% for Dahlem Red. Turkey’s breed was superior for spermatozoa concentration (10.6 × 109/mL) than other rooster breeds. The lowest (1.2 × 109/mL) sperm concentration was reported for Beijing chickens. In terms of the fertility rate, there was a higher (93%) fertility rate for White Leghorn (ranging from 81.7% to 93%) and the lowest (50.6%) fertility rate for South African Naked Neck (ranging from 50.6% to 55.7%. The observed difference in fertility and semen characteristics across the breeds was mainly attributed to the genetic, age, nutrition type, management difference, production type, agroecology difference, collection frequency and collection interval.