4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Dimensional assessment of X-bearing and Y-bearing haploid and disomic human sperm with the use of fluorescence in situ hybridization and objective morphometry

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 85, Issue 1, Pages 121-127

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.07.1295

Keywords

sperm; X-bearing spermatozoa; Y-bearing spermatozoa; dimensional attributes; haploid; dosomic

Funding

  1. EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH &HUMAN DEVELOPMENT [R01HD019505] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH [R01OH004061] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  3. NICHD NIH HHS [HD-19505] Funding Source: Medline
  4. NIOSH CDC HHS [OH-04061] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To explore the dimensional attributes of haploid and disomic X-bearing and Y-bearing spermatozoa. Design: Morphometric evaluation of more than 2,000 X-bearing and Y-bearing spermatozoa after identification of the genotype with fluorescence in situ hybridization. Setting: Academic clinical and research andrology laboratory. Main Outcome Measure(s): Sperm head area, perimeter, long axis, short axis, shape factor, elliptical form factor (long axis/short axis), and tail length. Result(s): We found no differences in dimensions or dimensional distributions between X-bearing and Y-bearing spermatozoa, whether in the native or the decondensed state, or in oligozoospermic or normozoospermic men. There were inconsistent differences and a 70% overlap in the dimensions of haploid and disomic spermatozoa. The other 30% of sperm with disomic nuclei were either smaller or larger compared to haploid spermatozoa. Conclusion(s) There are no differences, or distinguishing characteristics, in dimensions or dimensional distributions between X-bearing and Y-bearing spermatozoa. Dimensional attributes do not discriminate between dysomic and haploid spermatozoa.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available