ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2016
Optimization of microelectrophoresis to select highly negatively charged sperm.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spermatozoal sialidases NEU1 and NEU3 are potential predictors for fertilization rate in IVF: a prospective cohort study.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Emerging trends in sperm selection: enhancing success rates in assisted reproduction.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2024Review
- Simulating nature in sperm selection for assisted reproduction.Nature reviews. Urology · 2022Review
- Sperm Selection for ICSI: Do We Have a Winner?Cells · 2021Review
- An Update on Semen Physiology, Technologies, and Selection Techniques for the Advancement of In Vitro Equine Embryo Production: Section II.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Review
- Sialic Acids and Tetraspanins: An Insight into their Potential as Indicators of Human Sperm Quality.American journal of men's healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe sperm membrane undergoes extensive surface remodeling as it matures in the epididymis. During this process, the sperm is encapsulated in an extensive glycocalyx layer, which provides the membrane with its characteristic negative electrostatic charge. In this study, we develop a method of microelectrophoresis and standardize the protocol to isolate sperm with high negative membrane charge.
methodsUnder an electric field, the percentage of positively charged sperm (PCS), negatively charged sperm (NCS), and neutrally charged sperm was determined for each ejaculate prior to and following density gradient centrifugation (DGC), and evaluated for sperm DNA damage, and histone retention. Subsequently, PCS, NCS, and neutrally charged sperm were selected using an ICSI needle and directly analyzed for DNA damage.
resultsWhen raw semen was analyzed using microelectrophoresis, 94 % were NCS. In contrast, DGC completely or partially stripped the negative membrane charge from sperm resulting PCS and neutrally charged sperm, while the charged sperm populations are increased with an increase in electrophoretic current. Following DGC, high sperm DNA damage and abnormal histone retention were inversely correlated with percentage NCS and directly correlated with percentage PCS. NCS exhibited significantly lower DNA damage when compared with control (P < 0.05) and PCS (P < 0.05). When the charged sperm population was corrected for neutrally charged sperm, sperm DNA damage was strongly associated with NCS at a lower electrophoretic current.
conclusionThe results suggest that selection of NCS at lower current may be an important biomarker to select healthy sperm for assisted reproductive treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.