Literature DB >> 20400771

Morphometric dimensions of the human sperm head depend on the staining method used.

L Maree1, S S du Plessis, R Menkveld, G van der Horst.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Assessment of sperm morphology (including morphometry) is extensively used to determine one of the qualities of a semen sample and depends on the differential staining of spermatozoa. A staining technique should cause as little change to sperm dimensions and form as possible in order to reliably evaluate the morphometric features of the sperm. Various staining techniques have been employed, but only a few have been recommended by the World Health Organization and are amenable to automated sperm morphometry analysis. Our study was aimed at comparing the effect of three staining techniques [Papanicolaou (PAP), Rapidiff (RD) and SpermBlue (SB)] on human sperm head dimensions and to compare these with the head dimensions in fresh semen.
METHODS: Smears made from human semen samples (n = 24) were stained according to the three staining techniques and sperm head morphometry was assessed with the Sperm Class Analyzer. Head dimensions of fresh spermatozoa were measured with a digital calliper on a computer screen. The minimum number of spermatozoa to be analyzed to represent the sperm population and the degree of inter-laboratory variation were determined. Electron micrographs from the same semen samples were used to determine the actual acrosome coverage of the spermatozoa in the semen (n = 7) in order to verify the results of the automatic analyses.
RESULTS: The osmolality of human semen differs from that of the RD and PAP fixatives and stains, but is more similar to the SB fixative and stain. At least 100 spermatozoa should be analyzed to include a representative sample of the sperm population. RD caused sperm heads to swell, PAP caused them to shrink and SB had no significant effect on sperm head dimensions when compared with spermatozoa in fresh semen. Very little inter-laboratory variations were found. The percentage acrosome coverage was significantly different between the three staining techniques, as well as between the RD and PAP stains and the manual measurements obtained using the electron micrographs.
CONCLUSIONS: Different staining techniques change the morphometric dimensions of the human sperm head, probably due to the fact that either the fixatives or stains are not iso-osmotic in relation to human semen. Since these changes in sperm head dimensions are not uniform, care should be taken when selecting a staining technique. Ideally, stained spermatozoa should have dimensions as close to spermatozoa in fresh semen as possible, as was found with the SB staining method, resulting in accurate evaluations of sperm head morphometry.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20400771     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deq075

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  29 in total

1.  Compact and light-weight automated semen analysis platform using lensfree on-chip microscopy.

Authors:  Ting-Wei Su; Anthony Erlinger; Derek Tseng; Aydogan Ozcan
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2010-10-01       Impact factor: 6.986

2.  Leukocytes and oxidative stress: dilemma for sperm function and male fertility.

Authors:  Ralf R Henkel
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2010-11-15       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 3.  Measurement and significance of sperm morphology.

Authors:  Roelof Menkveld; Cas A G Holleboom; Johann P T Rhemrev
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2010-11-15       Impact factor: 3.285

4.  Separation of sperm cells from samples containing high concentrations of white blood cells using a spiral channel.

Authors:  Jiyoung Son; Raheel Samuel; Bruce K Gale; Douglas T Carrell; James M Hotaling
Journal:  Biomicrofluidics       Date:  2017-09-27       Impact factor: 2.800

5.  Dimensions of human ejaculated spermatozoa in Papanicolaou-stained seminal and swim-up smears obtained from the Integrated Semen Analysis System (ISAS(®)).

Authors:  Giuseppe Bellastella; Trevor G Cooper; Marina Battaglia; Anda Ströse; Inma Torres; Barbara Hellenkemper; Carles Soler; Antonio A Sinisi
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2010-09-20       Impact factor: 3.285

Review 6.  Methodological considerations for examining the relationship between sperm morphology and motility.

Authors:  Kristin A Hook; Heidi S Fisher
Journal:  Mol Reprod Dev       Date:  2020-05-16       Impact factor: 2.609

7.  High-throughput sperm assay using label-free microscopy: morphometric comparison between different sperm structures of boar and stallion spermatozoa.

Authors:  Marcello Rubessa; Jean M Feugang; Mikhail E Kandel; Sierra Schreiber; Jade Hessee; Francesca Salerno; Sascha Meyers; Iwei Chu; Gabriel Popescu; Matthew B Wheeler
Journal:  Anim Reprod Sci       Date:  2020-05-23       Impact factor: 2.145

Review 8.  Machine learning for sperm selection.

Authors:  Jae Bem You; Christopher McCallum; Yihe Wang; Jason Riordon; Reza Nosrati; David Sinton
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2021-05-17       Impact factor: 14.432

9.  Sperm structure and motility in the eusocial naked mole-rat, Heterocephalus glaber: a case of degenerative orthogenesis in the absence of sperm competition?

Authors:  Gerhard van der Horst; Liana Maree; Sanet H Kotzé; M Justin O'Riain
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2011-12-05       Impact factor: 3.260

Review 10.  Advances in sperm analysis: techniques, discoveries and applications.

Authors:  Changsheng Dai; Zhuoran Zhang; Guanqiao Shan; Lap-Tak Chu; Zongjie Huang; Sergey Moskovtsev; Clifford Librach; Keith Jarvi; Yu Sun
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 14.432

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.