Andrologic examination in small cat a mount (Leopardus tigrinus Schreber, 1775)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5380/avs.v10i2.4420Keywords:
Sême, felideos, felinos, exame andrológico, Leopardus tigrinus, Semen, felids, feline, andrologic examinationsAbstract
A better understanding of the reproductive physiology of Neotropical small felids is necessary to get a more consistent reproductive performance aiming to increase the number of individuals that reproduce in the captive population and to develop and use assisted reproduction techniques. Andrologic examinations (n=32) were performed in three series of captive small catamounts (Leopardus tigrinus, n=11), at Itaipu Binacional Wildlife Breeding Center, at Foz do Iguassu PR Brazil. Animals were kept in enriched enclosures and were fed with bovine meat, whole chicken, rats, supplemented with minerals and vitamins. The anesthetic protocol used was xilazine (0.9 mg/kg, IM) combined with tiletamine/zolazepan (6.7 mg/kg, IM). The electroejaculation protocol used was described by Howard (1986) and consisted in 8 series of 10 stimulus, with intensity varying from 2 to 5 volts. Urine contamination was detected in 10 semen samples (31.2%), being possible to discard these and make good use of the other ones. Values are depicted as mean ± SEM. The characteristics of the semen were: volume 0.13 ± 0.20 ml; motility 73.44 ± 3.71%; status 3.48 ± 0.11; pH 7.58 ± 0.07. Spermatic concentration was 436.41 ± 95.8 x 106 cells/ml, with 55.86 ± 3.34 % morphologically normal spermatozoids. Results demonstrated that the used protocol was efficient in all animals submitted to semen collection and that teratospermia is high in this species.
Downloads
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors that wish to publish in AVS agree with the following conditions:
- To keep copyright of the article and allow the AVS to publish the first time. The article will be licensed by Creative Commons - Atribuição 4.0 Internacional allowing the sharing of their work.
- Authors may distribute their work by other channel of distribution (ex.: local or public repository).
- Authors have the permission to publish their work online, using different channels (similar to above), even before the final editorial process.











