The Effect of Turnera diffusa Leaf Supplementation in Diet on the Qualitative and Quantitative Characteristics of Boar Semen
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Animals, Experimental Design, and Feeding
2.2. Semen Collection and Quantitative and Qualitative Analyses
- -
- Ejaculate volume (mL);
- -
- Sperm concentration (million/mL);
- -
- Sperm motility (%);
- -
- Sperm agglutination (%);
- -
- Number of insemination doses obtained from one ejaculate;
- -
- Sperm viability at 24, 48, and 72 h.
- -
- N—number of doses;
- -
- D—number of sperm cells required per dose;
- -
- d—sperm concentration (million/mL);
- -
- v—ejaculate volume (mL);
- -
- m—motility coefficient expressed as a fraction (e.g., 70% motility = 0.7);
- -
- c—coefficient representing the percentage of morphologically normal sperm, expressed analogously to the motility coefficient.
2.3. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Limitations
6. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Lin, C.L.; Ponsuksili, S.; Tholen, E.; Jennen, D.G.; Schellander, K.; Wimmers, K. Candidate gene markers for sperm quality and fertility of boar. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2006, 92, 349–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Robinson, J.A.; Buhr, M.M. Impact of genetic selection on management of boar replacement. Theriogenology 2005, 63, 668–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Waberski, D.; Riesenbeck, A.; Schulze, M.; Weitze, K.F.; Johnson, L. Application of preserved boar semen for artificial insemination: Past, present and future challenges. Theriogenology 2019, 137, 2–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Bortolozzo, F.; Menegat, M.; Mellagi, A.; Bernardi, M.; Wentz, I. New artificial insemination technologies for swine. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 2015, 50, 80–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Knox, R.V. Artificial insemination in pigs today. Theriogenology 2016, 85, 83–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Galić, I.; Dragin, S.; Stanĉić, I.; Maletić, M.; Apić, J.; Kladar, N.; Spasojević, J.; Grba, J.; Kovaĉević, Z. Effect of an antioxidant supplement combination on boar sperm. Animals 2022, 12, 1301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Horky, P.; Urbankova, L.; Bano, I.; Kopec, T.; Nevrkla, P.; Pribilova, M.; Baholet, D.; Chilala, P.; Slama, P.; Skalickova, S. Selenium nanoparticles as potential antioxidants to improve semen quality in boars. Animals 2023, 13, 2460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Blagojević, J.; Stanimirović, Z.; Glavinić, U.; Vakanjac, S.; Radukić, Ž.; Mirilović, M.; Maletić, M. Impact of supplemented nutrition on semen quality, epigenetic-related gene expression, and oxidative status in boars. Animals 2024, 14, 3297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Carson, C.C., 3rd. Erectile dysfunction: Diagnosis and management with newer oral agents. Proc. Baylor. Univ. Med. Cent. 2000, 13, 356–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Mundey, M.K.; Blaylock, N.A.; Mason, R.; Glick, S.D.; Maisonneuve, I.M.; Wilson, V.G. Pharmacological comparison of the effect of ibogaine and 18-methoxycoronaridine on isolated smooth muscle from the rat and guinea-pig. Br. J. Pharmacol. 2000, 129, 1561–1568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- El-Demerdash, F.M.; Jebur, A.B.; Nasr, H.M.; Hamid, H.M. Modulatory effect of Turnera diffusa against testicular toxicity induced by fenitrothion and/or hexavalent chromium in rats. Environ. Toxicol. 2019, 34, 330–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Tousson, E.; Hafez, E.; Zaki, S.; Gad, A.; Elgharabawy, R.M. Evaluation of the testicular protection conferred by Damiana (Turnera diffusa Willd) against amitriptyline-induced testicular toxicity, DNA damage and apoptosis in rats. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2020, 132, 110819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Parra-Naranjo, A.; Delgado-Montemayor, C.; Salazar-Aranda, R.; Waksman-Minsky, N. Bioactivity of the genus Turnera: A review of the last 10 years. Pharmaceuticals 2023, 16, 1573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Estrada-Reyes, R.; Carro-Juárez, M.; Martínez-Mota, L. Pro-sexual effects of Turnera diffusa Wild (Turneraceae) in male rats involves the nitric oxide pathway. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2013, 146, 164–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Estrada-Reyes, R.; Ortiz-López, P.; Gutiérrez-Ortíz, J.; Martínez-Mota, L. Turnera diffusa Wild (Turneraceae) recovers sexual behavior in sexually exhausted males. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2009, 123, 423–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Chevallier, A. The Encyclopedia of Medicinal Plants; Dorling Kindersley: New York, NY, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Hafez, E.S.E.; Hafez, B. Reproducción e Inseminación Artificial en Animales, 7th ed.; MH Interamericana: Columbus, OH, USA, 2002; Available online: https://www.scribd.com/document/394898878/Reproduccion-e-Inseminiacion-Artificial-Hafez (accessed on 22 December 2025).
- Martínez, M. Las Plantas Medicinales de México, 7th ed.; Ediciones Botas: Mexico, Mexico, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Kumar, G.G.; Kilari, E.K.; Nelli, G.; Bin Salleh, N. Oral administration of Turnera diffusa Willd. exSchult. extract ameliorates steroidogenesis and spermatogenesis impairment in the testes of rats with type-2 diabetes mellitus. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2023, 314, 116638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Palacios, N.N.M.; Domínguez, J.A.G.; Flores, F.V.; Cardoso, G.R.P.; Palacios, N.M.; Mendoza, M.M. Characteristics of the ejaculate when using different doses of freeze-dried Damiana de California (Turnera diffusa Willd) in stallions. BJHR 2025, 8, e79360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- AOAC International. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International, 18th ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2007; Available online: https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=1753366 (accessed on 22 December 2025).
- Domínguez, J.A. Métodos de Investigación Fitoquímica. In Plantas Investigación Quimica, 1st ed.; Centro Regional de Ayuda Técnica, LIMUSA: Mexico City, Mexico, 1973; p. 281. [Google Scholar]
- Amdal, H.; Hogset, H. Artificial insemination in swine. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1956, 131, 59–64. [Google Scholar]
- Evans, T. Number of Insemination Doses Formula for Boar Semen; Pig International, Watt Publishing Co.: Rockford, IL, USA, 1994; Volume 22, p. 4. 568p. [Google Scholar]
- Cerolini, S.; Maldjian, A.; Pizzi, F.; Gliozzi, T.M. Changes in sperm quality and lipid composition during cryopreservation of boar semen. Reproduction 2001, 121, 395–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Brezezinska-Slevbodzinska, E.; Slebodzinski, A.B.; Prietas, B.; Wieezorek, G. Antioxidant effect of vitamin E and glutathione on lipid peroxidation in boar seminal plasma. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 1995, 47, 69–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Stashenko, E.; Cordoba, Y.; Martinez, J. Oxygen radical absorption capacity of Lippia origanoides (thymol and phellandrene chemotypes) and Turnera diffusa essential oils and extracts. Planta Med. 2015, 81, PW_199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Savić, R.; Radojković, D.; Gogić, M.; Popovac, M.; Petrović, A.; Radović, Č. Do Motility and Sperm Dose Count Affect In Vivo Fertility in Boar? Chem. Proc. 2022, 10, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Hackerova, L.; Pilsova, A.; Pilsova, Z.; Zelenkova, N.; Tymich Hegrova, P.; Klusackova, B.; Chmelikova, E.; Sedmikova, M.; Simonik, O.; Postlerova, P. Boar Sperm Motility Assessment Using Computer-Assisted Sperm Analysis: Current Practices, Limitations, and Methodological Challenges. Animals 2025, 15, 305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Rosselli, M.; Cometti, B.P.S.; Leeners, B.; Szutkowska, M.E.; Jackson, E.K.; Dubey, R.K. Modulation of Cyclic AMP Levels in Fallopian Tube Cells by Natural and Environmental Estrogens. Cells 2021, 10, 1250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Flowers, W.L. Factors affecting the production of quality ejaculates from boars. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2022, 246, 106840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Lopez Rodriguez, A.; Van Soom, A.; Arsenakis, I.; Maes, D. Boar management and semen handling factors affect the quality of boar extended semen. Porc. Health Manag. 2017, 3, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]

| Item | Diet |
|---|---|
| Ingredient, % of diet | |
| Corn | 21.0 |
| Wheat | 31.0 |
| Barley | 30.0 |
| Sunflower meal, 34% | 12.0 |
| Wheat bran | 4.0 |
| Mineral–vitamin premix 1 | 2.0 |
| Composition, % of DM unless otherwise noted | |
| DM, % | 88.3 |
| MEs, Mcal/kg 2 | 3.07 |
| NEs, Mcal/kg 2 | 2.37 |
| CP | 17.0 |
| CF | 3.63 |
| Crude fiber | 5.11 |
| Lysine | 0.78 |
| Methionine + Cystine | 0.73 |
| Threonine | 0.71 |
| Tryptophan | 0.22 |
| Calcium | 0.84 |
| Phosphorus, total | 0.76 |
| Digestible phosphorus | 0.53 |
| Vit A, IU/kg | 12,000 |
| Vit D3, kg | 2000 |
| Vit E, mg/kg | 100 |
| Indicator | Period | W Value | p Value | Normality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ejaculation volume | Control | 0.9275 | 0.138 | Yes |
| Experimental | 0.9460 | 0.311 | Yes | |
| Sperm concentration | Control | 0.8866 | 0.023 * | No |
| Experimental | 0.8898 | 0.027 * | No | |
| Motility, % | Control | 0.7176 | <0.001 *** | No |
| Experimental | 0.7964 | <0.001 *** | No | |
| Agglutination, % | Control | 0.8159 | 0.002 ** | No |
| Experimental | 0.7795 | <0.001 *** | No | |
| Number of doses | Control | 0.9735 | 0.826 | Yes |
| Experimental | 0.9600 | 0.543 | Yes | |
| 24 h S.R., % | Control | 0.7546 | <0.001 *** | No |
| Experimental | 0.8363 | 0.003 ** | No | |
| 48 h S.R., % | Control | 0.8004 | <0.001 *** | No |
| Experimental | 0.6238 | <0.001 *** | No | |
| 72 h S.R. % | Control | 0.8151 | 0.001 ** | No |
| Experimental | 0.7052 | <0.001 *** | No |
| Indicators | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ejaculation Volume | |||||
| Source | SS (Sum of Squares) | df (Degrees of Freedom) | MS (Mean Square) | F | p-Value |
| Boar | 111,761 | 3 | 37,254 | 58.87 | p < 0.001 |
| Treatment | 874.2 | 1 | 874.2 | 0.5564 | p = 0.497 |
| Boar × Treatment | 17,265 | 3 | 5755 | 6.487 | p = 0.007 |
| Subject × Boar | 7594 | 12 | 632.8 | ||
| Subject × Treatment | 6285 | 4 | 1571 | ||
| Subject | 6806 | 4 | 1701 | ||
| Residual | 10,647 | 12 | 887.2 | ||
| Sperm concentration | |||||
| Boar | 512,640 | 3 | 170,880 | 30.08 | p < 0.001 |
| Treatment | 31,360 | 1 | 31,360 | 3.087 | p = 0.154 |
| Boar × Treatment | 5760 | 3 | 1920 | 0.3038 | p = 0.822 |
| Subject × Boar | 68,160 | 12 | 5680 | ||
| Subject × Treatment | 40,640 | 4 | 10,160 | ||
| Subject | 56,000 | 4 | 14,000 | ||
| Residual | 75,840 | 12 | 6320 | ||
| Motility, % | |||||
| Boar | 95.00 | 3 | 31.67 | 7.795 | p = 0.004 |
| Treatment | 2.500 | 1 | 2.500 | 0.06015 | p = 0.818 |
| Boar × Treatment | 72.50 | 3 | 24.17 | 2.667 | p = 0.095 |
| Subject × Boar | 48.75 | 12 | 4.063 | ||
| Subject × Treatment | 166.3 | 4 | 41.56 | ||
| Subject | 166.3 | 4 | 41.56 | ||
| Residual | 108.8 | 12 | 9.062 | ||
| Agglutination, % | |||||
| Boar | 20.00 | 3 | 6.667 | 0.1758 | p = 0.911 |
| Treatment | 90.00 | 1 | 90.00 | 0.6729 | p = 0.458 |
| Boar × Treatment | 90.00 | 3 | 30.00 | 0.6154 | p = 0.618 |
| Subject × Boar | 455.0 | 12 | 37.92 | ||
| Subject × Treatment | 535.0 | 4 | 133.8 | ||
| Subject | 185.0 | 4 | 46.25 | ||
| Residual | 585.0 | 12 | 48.75 | ||
| Number of doses | |||||
| Boar | 3447 | 3 | 1149 | 48.63 | p < 0.001 |
| Treatment | 211.6 | 1 | 211.6 | 1.773 | p = 0.254 |
| Boar × Treatment | 230.6 | 3 | 76.87 | 1.434 | p = 0.282 |
| Subject × Boar | 283.5 | 12 | 23.63 | ||
| Subject × Treatment | 477.4 | 4 | 119.4 | ||
| Subject | 458.1 | 4 | 114.5 | ||
| Residual | 643.4 | 12 | 53,62 | ||
| 24 h S.R., % | |||||
| Boar | 456.9 | 3 | 152.3 | 18,99 | p = 0.001 |
| Treatment | 390.6 | 1 | 390.6 | 27,78 | p = 0.006 |
| Boar × Treatment | 61.88 | 3 | 20.63 | 0.9754 | p = 0.411 |
| Subject × Boar | 96.25 | 12 | 8.021 | ||
| Subject × Treatment | 56.25 | 4 | 14.06 | ||
| Subject | 133.8 | 4 | 33.44 | ||
| Residual | 253.8 | 12 | 21.15 | ||
| 48 h S.R., % | |||||
| Boar | 396.9 | 3 | 132.3 | 13.37 | p = 0.003 |
| Treatment | 225.6 | 1 | 225.6 | 103.1 | p < 0.001 |
| Boar × Treatment | 241.9 | 3 | 80.63 | 7.101 | p = 0.021 |
| Subject × Boar | 118.8 | 12 | 9.896 | ||
| Subject × Treatment | 8.750 | 4 | 2.188 | ||
| Subject | 66.25 | 4 | 16.56 | ||
| Residual | 136.3 | 12 | 11.35 | ||
| 72 h S.R., % | |||||
| Boar | 547.5 | 3 | 182.5 | 21.37 | p < 0.001 |
| Treatment | 302.5 | 1 | 302.5 | 9.878 | p = 0.035 |
| Boar × Treatment | 187.5 | 3 | 62.50 | 2.609 | p = 0.137 |
| Subject × Boar | 102.5 | 12 | 8.542 | ||
| Subject × Treatment | 122.5 | 4 | 30.63 | ||
| Subject | 147.5 | 4 | 36.88 | ||
| Residual | 287.5 | 12 | 23.96 | ||
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Share and Cite
Petrova, M.; Yordanova, G.; Eneva, K.; Nedeva, R.; Nedelkov, K.; Penev, T. The Effect of Turnera diffusa Leaf Supplementation in Diet on the Qualitative and Quantitative Characteristics of Boar Semen. Life 2026, 16, 83. https://doi.org/10.3390/life16010083
Petrova M, Yordanova G, Eneva K, Nedeva R, Nedelkov K, Penev T. The Effect of Turnera diffusa Leaf Supplementation in Diet on the Qualitative and Quantitative Characteristics of Boar Semen. Life. 2026; 16(1):83. https://doi.org/10.3390/life16010083
Chicago/Turabian StylePetrova, Mariyana, Gergana Yordanova, Katya Eneva, Radka Nedeva, Krum Nedelkov, and Toncho Penev. 2026. "The Effect of Turnera diffusa Leaf Supplementation in Diet on the Qualitative and Quantitative Characteristics of Boar Semen" Life 16, no. 1: 83. https://doi.org/10.3390/life16010083
APA StylePetrova, M., Yordanova, G., Eneva, K., Nedeva, R., Nedelkov, K., & Penev, T. (2026). The Effect of Turnera diffusa Leaf Supplementation in Diet on the Qualitative and Quantitative Characteristics of Boar Semen. Life, 16(1), 83. https://doi.org/10.3390/life16010083

