GEDIS® Data

Comparison of different insemination techniques in swine

Insemination systems were tested:

  • Traditional AI Catheter
  • GEDIS AI Catheter
  • Intrauterine Catheter
  • Deep Intrauterine Catheter

Methods and Protocol:

  • For the first two insemination systems (Foam Tip and GEDIS), a concentration of 3.5 billion spermatozoa in 100ml dose volume was utilized.
  • In the Intrauterine a concentration of 1.17 billion spermatozoa in 33ml dose volume was used.
  • In the Deep Intrauterine system a concentration of 350 million in a 10ml dose volume was used.
  • Females were inseminated on 11 different farms, between March, 2003 and June, 2003.
  • At each farm 5 sows were bred using each system for insemination.
  • In most farms females were inseminated 3 times, some farms only conducted 2 inseminations.
  • The Deep Intrauterine Catheter was discontinued after 3 farms due to problems with the application, injury to females and the refusal of producers to continue with this system.

GEDIS® Data collected:

As each female was inseminated, the following data was collected.

  • Individual ID
  • Group ID
  • Method of Insemination
  • Number of Inseminations
  • Time for each Insemination
  • Wean-Breed interval was recorded
  • Insemination Result
  • Farrowing
  • Result Total Born
Table 1 - Reproductive Trial Results
Insemination method Wean to Estrous Interval Total Females Bred Total Females Farrowed Farrowing Rate Total Born Fertility Index
Traditional AI 4.75 170 137 80.6 11.6 9.349
GEDIS® 4.73 175 149 85.1 11.5 9.786 4.6% better reproductive performance than traditional AI
Interuterine 4.7 177 110 62.1 11.2 6.955

Reproductive results & observations

Reproductive data from the trial has been summarized in Table 1 and is as follows:

  • Traditional AI Catheter - In these trials the traditional AI catheter showed an overall farrowing rate of 80.6% with an average of 11.6 total born. This resulted in an overall fertility index of 9.349.
  • GEDIS AI Catheter - The GEDIS AI catheter showed an overall farrowing rate of 85.1% with an average of 11.5 total born. This resulted in an overall fertility index of 9.786.
  • The GEDIS demonstrated a 4.6 % better reproductive performance than traditional AI.
  • The entire assembly is wrapped in plastic, which improved hygiene and avoids air/dust contamination of the catheter prior to use. Inseminations with the GEDIS catheter had almost no backflow due to the design of the catheter tip and how it securely “locks” into the cervix.
  • Intrauterine AI Catheter – The Intrauterine AI catheter showed an overall farrowing rate of 62.1 % with an average of 11.2 total born. This resulted in an overall fertility index of 6.955.
  • It was necessary to preheat the semen to facilitate the insertion and improve the progression of spermatozoa. The risk of injury is increased and it takes a longer amount of time to carry out the insemination process.
  • Deep Intrauterine AI Catheter – The catheter must be inserted slowly to avoid injury. The difficulty of application, injuries to the females and negative reactions from the technicians and owners during the trial resulted in this method being discontinued before trial end.

Labor & Insemination time results

The Gedis AI catheter displayed an appreciable advantage in time with respect to the other types of AI catheters used in the trial. With the GEDIS an average technician time of 45 seconds was required to identify the female in heat, insert the catheter and apply stimulation. This compares to the Traditional AI catheter average time of 158 seconds and with the Intrauterine AI catheter, which averaged 161 seconds per insemination. (See Table 2)

Table 2 - Labor & insemination Trial Results
Insemination method Average technician time per insemination
Traditional AI Catheter 158 seconds
GEDIS AI catheter 45 seconds 72% faster than traditional AI or intrauterine AI catheters
Intrauterine AI catheter 161 seconds
Significant difference * * = statistically significant difference
Swine products and technology