Background/Objectives: Understanding the causes of bull subfertility and developing reliable diagnostic tools are critical to reducing economic losses caused by reproductive failure in beef cattle. Metabolomic analysis of sperm from bulls with diverging field fertility may provide insights on sperm metabolism that are associated with fertility. The objective was to determine metabolomic differences in sperm from bulls with differing field fertility. Methods: Angus bulls (n = 15) were classified based on a composite field fertility index (CFI). Frozen–thawed semen straws (n = 10 per bull) underwent a Percoll gradient sperm purification process. Metabolomic analysis was performed through ultra-high performance liquid chromatography coupled high resolution mass spectrometry at the University of Tennessee Biological and Small Molecule Mass Spectrometry Core. The general linear model (GLM) procedure of Statistical Analysis System (SAS) was used to evaluate linear and quadratic relationships between metabolites and CFI. Furthermore, the MIXED procedure was used to determine differences in metabolite abundance between the four highest and lowest fertility bulls. Significance was determined when p ≤ 0.05 and tendency was declared when p ≤ 0.10. Results: A total of 75 metabolites were detected. Quadratic relationships with fertility were observed for kynurenine, xanthine, and ophthalmate. Tricarballylic acid and creatinine showed a negative linear relationship with fertility. When differences in metabolite abundance were assessed between the four highest and lowest fertility bulls, N-acetylglutamate and N-acetylglutamine had greater abundance in low fertility bulls. Conclusions: Metabolites kynurenine, xanthine, ophthalmate, tricarballylic acid, and creatinine are potential fertility markers to identify subfertile bulls from a breeding population. These metabolites have promising future implications in the diagnosis and treatment of beef bull subfertility.
Roberts et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: