ArticleAnimal reproduction science2020
High-throughput sperm assay using label-free microscopy: morphometric comparison between different sperm structures of boar and stallion spermatozoa.
Article in Animal reproduction science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of Boar Semen Morphology and Morphometry.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025Review
- Label-free, high-throughput holographic imaging to evaluate mammalian gametes and embryos†.Biology of reproduction · 2024Review
- An Exploration of Current and Perspective Semen Analysis and Sperm Selection for Livestock Artificial Insemination.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Review
- Multiscale Assay of Unlabeled Neurite Dynamics Using Phase Imaging with Computational Specificity.ACS sensors · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The capacity for microscopic evaluation of sperm is useful for assisted reproductive technologies (ART), because this can allow for specific selection of sperm cells for in vitro fertilization (IVF). The objective of this study was to analyze the same sperm samples using two high-resolution methods: spatial light interference microscopy (SLIM) and atomic force microscopy (AFM) to determine if with one method there was more timely and different information obtained than the other. To address this objective, there was evaluation of sperm populations from boars and stallions. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported comparison when using AFM and high-sensitivity interferometric microscopy (such as SLIM) to evaluate spermatozoa. Results indicate that with the use of SLIM microscopy there is similar nanoscale sensitivity as with use of AFM while there is approximately 1,000 times greater throughput with use of SLIM. With SLIM, there is also allowace for the measurement of the dry mass (non-aqueous content) of spermatozoa, which may be a new label-free marker for sperm viability. In the second part of this study, there was analysis of two sperm populations. There were interesting correlations between the different compartments of the sperm and the dry mass in both boars and stallions. Furthermore, there was a correlation between the dry mass of the sperm head and the length and width of the acrosome in both boars and stallions. This correlation is positive in boars while it is negative in stallions.
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.