ReviewActa veterinaria Scandinavica2025
A review of sperm cryopreservation in the domestic dog and cat-part II, freezing epididymal spermatozoa, why is it different from ejaculated spermatozoa?
Review in Acta veterinaria Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Sperm Recovery and Evaluation in Domestic Species: Challenges and Current Practices.Reproduction in domestic animals = Zuchthygiene · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
If a male dies suddenly or requires castration, it may still be possible to produce offspring through artificial insemination (AI) by cryopreserving spermatozoa retrieved from the epididymis. Spermatozoa differ in maturation status along the epididymal duct, and only motile spermatozoa that have acquired fertilizing capacity are suitable for AI. Such spermatozoa can be collected from the terminal epididymal segment, located in the cauda epididymidis in the dog, and in both the corpus and cauda in the cat. Unlike ejaculated spermatozoa, epididymal spermatozoa have not been exposed to seminal plasma and therefore display distinct functional and structural characteristics. The method of sperm collection may also affect the sperm quality. While epididymal mincing results in the highest sperm numbers, it is associated with contamination of blood and epididymal tissue. Although numerous studies have reported successful cryopreservation of epididymal spermatozoa in dogs and cats, reports of live offspring following AI with frozen-thawed epididymal spermatozoa remain scarce. This review summarizes the physiological, anatomical, and functional distinctions between epididymal and ejaculated spermatozoa, emphasizing their implications for cryopreservation strategies and fertility outcomes.
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.