ARS | Publication request: 185 Cost effectiveness of maintaining research chicken populations in situ or with cryopreserved semen or ovaries

Submitted to: Meeting Abstract
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: April 25, 2012
Publication Date: July 9, 2012
Citation: Silversides, F.G., Purdy, P.H., Blackburn, H.D. 2012. 185 Cost effectiveness of maintaining research chicken populations in situ or with cryopreserved semen or ovaries. Meeting Abstract. Poultry Science Association, Athens, GA, July 9-12.

Technical Abstract: The cost of maintaining poultry populations has resulted in substantial losses of lines kept for research, and scientists’ calls for action have gone unheeded. To date the costs of alternatives to keeping live populations (LP) have not been considered. The costs of programs using LP, semencryo preservation and reconstitution (SC), and ovary and semen cryopreservation and reconstitution (OSC) were evaluated over 20 yr using biological parameters of cryopreservation and population reconstitution that were derived from the literature. Costs for LP, SC, and OSC were evaluated by summing the compounded cost of preservation [P(1 + i) n], the sum of the compounded yearly costs of storage [SS(1 + i)] and the sum of the compounded yearly cost of recovery SR(1+i) where n =years of storage and i = compounding rate. Over 20 yr, costs for SC and OSC were from 3 to 20% of those associated with LP depending on the number of populations recovered, and the ability to rapidly reconstitute populations using OSC made it the least expensive option. Keeping LP was most cost effective for periods of up to 3 yr. However, with longer periods, LP becomes increasingly difficult to justify and any research population that will not be used within 5 yr should be cryopreserved and in situ maintenance discontinued. The rapid reconstitution possible with OSC and SC (for single gene mutations) suggest that cryopreserved material could be included in short-term research projects and recoverycosts included in the budget. Using the methods evaluated would reduce research costs and allow institutions to focus resources on investigating lines currently kept and developing new lines.