Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39272329›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024

Effect of Two Different Sperm Selection Methods on Boar Sperm Parameters and In Vitro Fertilisation Outcomes.

Maria Serrano-Albal, Marie Claire Aquilina, Lucas G Kiazim, Louisa J Zak, Darren K Griffin, Peter J Ellis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Maria Serrano-AlbalSchool of Biosciences, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NZ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6234-4058
Marie Claire AquilinaSchool of Biosciences, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NZ, UK.
Lucas G KiazimSchool of Biosciences, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NZ, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6498-0421
Louisa J ZakTopigs Norsvin Research Center, Meerendonkweg 25, 5216 TZ 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4486-6255
Darren K GriffinSchool of Biosciences, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NZ, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7595-3226
Peter J EllisSchool of Biosciences, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NZ, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9709-7934

Funding

Topigs Norsvin and the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) LINK awards scheme BB/R00708X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Porcine in vitro embryo production (IVP) protocols have conventionally used density gradient selection (DGS) by centrifugation to prepare sperm samples and achieve successful fertilisation. However, the possible toxicity of the solutions used and the potential damage caused by the centrifugation step may have a negative effect on the quality of the sample. Microfluidic chip-based sperm (MCS) sorting has been proposed as an alternative technique for the selection of high-quality sperm with the purpose of improving reproductive outcomes in IVF. This device does not require centrifugation or any toxic solution to prepare the sample for fertilisation. The sample is not subjected to unnecessary stress, and the process is less operator-dependent. In this study, we compared the sperm parameters of unselected extender-diluted boar semen samples with selected samples using DGS and MCS methods. The results show an expected reduction in sperm concentration after both methods. All the groups were significantly different from one another, with MCS being the group with the lowest concentration. Though the three groups had a similar overall motility, significant differences were found in progressive motility when comparing the unselected group (control, 19.5 ± 1.4%) with DGS and MCS. Progressive motility in DGS was also significantly higher than in MCS (65.2 ± 4.9% and 45.7% ± 5.3, respectively). However, MCS selection resulted in enriched sperm samples with a significantly lower proportion of morphologically abnormal sperm compared to DGS. After fertilisation, no statistical differences were found between the two methods for embryological parameters such as cleavage rates, blastulation rates, and embryo quality. The number of cells in blastocysts derived from MCS was significantly greater than those derived from DGS sperm. Thus, we demonstrate that MCS is at least as good as the standard DGS for most measures. As a more gentle and reproducible approach for sperm selection, however, it could improve consistency and improve IVP outcomes as mediated by a greater proportion of morphologically normal sperm and manifested by a higher cell count in blastocysts.

Indexed as

density gradient centrifugationembryo productionmicrofluidicssperm morphologysperm motility

Identifiers

PMID39272329
PMCPMC11394568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.