A non-activating semen diluent does not cause motility or acrosomal reaction or capacitate the sperm cell. The effects of such a diluent on the viability of honey bee spermatozoa stored in ambient conditions were assessed 60 days pre-cryopreservation and 24 h post-cryopreservation. Seven variations of a Tris-based non-activating diluents (FEM1 - FEM7) were compared to samples treated with conventional activating diluent and untreated semen. Semen viability (membrane integrity) was assessed after short- and long-term storage at 14.0 ± 0.2 °C. The non-activating medium FEM7 contained more viable spermatozoa than the activating medium, 24 h after cryopreservation (67.6 ± 10.9% and ~4%, respectively). After 60 days, 22.0 ± 7.8% of spermatozoa was viable in non-activating medium versus 0.0 and 60.8 ± 12.3%, in conventional media and untreated controls, respectively. Hence FEM7 was used to cryopreserve bee semen and subsequently inseminate honey bee queens. The quality of brood produced by the queens was assessed 30-60 days after insemination. The percentage of worker-bee offspring (produced from successfully fertilized eggs) was ~75% for both the non-activating medium and the conventional extender medium. Our results indicate that a non-activating medium possesses significant advantage over the conventional activating medium if the semen requires storage after treatments such as cryopreservation. The percentage of female offspring (from fertilized eggs) produced by queens inseminated with semen diluted in either the activating or non-activating medium did not differ from one another.
Keywords: Activation; Apis; Capacitance; Cryopreservation; Diluent; Drone; Extender; Honey bee; Long-term storage; Semen; Spermatozoa.
Published by Elsevier Inc.