Comparison of sperm quality and DNA integrity in mouse sperm exposed to various cooling velocities and osmotic stress

The first objective was to compare sperm quality following conventional manual sperm freezing (cryovials held 1, 2, 3, and 4 cm, respectively, above liquid nitrogen (LN 2) for 10 min, resulting in cooling velocities of approximately −14.9, −10.1, −6.6, and −5.1 °C/min, respectively), and cooling velocities of −5, −20, −40, and −100 °C/min in a programmed automated freezer, for sperm recovered from CD-1, B6129SF1, and C57BL/6NCrlBR mice. Furthermore, using these strains, as well as 129S/SvPaslco, and DBA/2NCrlBR mice, the second objective was to determine the effects on DNA integrity of sperm exposed to hyposmotic (1 mOsm/L) and hyperosmotic (2400 mOsm/L) solutions, compared to an isosmotic control (300 mOsm/L). For freezing above LN 2 or in an automated freezer, 2 cm above LN 2 and −100 °C/min, respectively, were optimal (P < 0.05–0.01), with no significant differences between these two approaches for post-thaw progressive motility, DNA integrity, and in vitro rates of fertilization and blastocyst formation. Both manual and automated freezing techniques increased post-thaw sperm DNA fragmentation (P < 0.01); the DNA integrity of post-thaw sperm was significantly affected by cooling velocity and strain background. Relative to isosmotic controls, a hyposmotic solution was more deleterious (P < 0.05–0.01) to sperm DNA integrity than a hyperosmotic solution for CD-1, B6129SF1, C57BL/6, and DBA mice (there were strain-dependent differences). In conclusion, optimization of freezing distance and cooling velocity (manual and automated freezing, respectively) were significant factors for efficient cryopreservation and re-derivation of mice from frozen-thawed sperm. Additionally, osmotically-driven volume changes in mouse sperm increased DNA fragmentation, with susceptibility affected by background strain.