4.4 Article

DNA Status on Thawed Semen from Fighting Bull: A Comparison Between the SCD and the SCSA Tests

期刊

REPRODUCTION IN DOMESTIC ANIMALS
卷 44, 期 3, 页码 424-431

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0531.2008.01098.x

关键词

-

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Education and Science [AGL2004-05904GAN]
  2. Council for Education and Science of Junta de Castilla-La Mancha [PAC-06-047]
  3. Juan de la Cierva program (Spanish Ministry of Education and Science)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The assessment of sperm chromatin status is compulsory in a complete spermiogram. Here we applied the sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA) and the sperm chromatin dispersion (SCD) test to assess the chromatin status of three fighting bulls. Cryopreserved semen (two straws/bull) were analysed by duplicate after thawing and after 6 h at 37 degrees C with and without oxidative stress (1 mm FE2+). Results (SCD: percentage of spermatozoa with halo; SCSA: SD-DFI, %DFI and HDS) were analysed for differences between bulls and treatments, sensitivity and specificity (receiver operating characteristic curves) and repeatability (repeatability coefficients as 2SD of duplicate differences).%DFI for the three bulls was below 2% at 0 h, indicating no risk for fertility according to previous reports. It increased slightly for two of the bulls after FE2+ treatment (%DFI < 5%) and more pronouncedly for the other bull (C, %DFI similar to 10%), which merits further investigation. SCD rendered higher percentage of halos for bull C, but could not discriminate between samples with and without oxidizing treatment (AUC: 0.52). SCSA (%DFI) showed a high discriminating ability between treatments (AUC: 0.96). The repeatability coefficient was also higher for SCD (5.9) than for %DFI (1.8), indicating lower repeatability for SCD. Overall, %DFI might be the most useful parameter for assessing sperm chromatin on fighting bull. SCD might yield different information than SCSA, hence further research is warranted.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据