ReviewVeterinary world2025
Two decades of sperm sex-sorting in animals: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of techniques, effectiveness, and global research trends (2005-2025).
Review in Veterinary world, 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.
- Immunomagnetic Sex-Sorting of Landrace Boar Semen Using a Porcine Y-Specific scFv Antibody: Efficiency and Post-Sorting Sperm Quality.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: Sperm sex-sorting technologies are crucial tools for enhancing reproductive management, production efficiency, sustainability, and animal welfare. Although widely used across various species, the effectiveness of these technologies, particularly between flow cytometry and emerging alternative methods, remains inconsistently reported. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined research published worldwide over the past 20 years to compare the performance of different sperm sex-sorting techniques, evaluate pregnancy outcomes and offspring sex ratios, and identify research trends, limitations, and knowledge gaps. Materials and Methods: A thorough search of PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar identified studies published from 2005 to 2025. Ninety-one studies met the criteria for systematic review, and 22 were included in the quantitative synthesis. Data extraction included species, sex-sorting method, experimental design, sperm quality parameters, pregnancy outcomes, and female-offspring proportions. Random-effects proportional meta-analyses were conducted for pregnancy rate and sex-ratio outcomes. Heterogeneity was assessed using I², Tau², and H², while publication bias was evaluated with funnel plots and Egger's/Begg's tests. Results: Flow cytometry was the most widely used method (64 studies), especially in North America, while research in Asia focused more on alternative techniques such as antibody-based sorting, centrifugation, modified buffers, magnetic beads, and microfluidics. Meta-analysis of Conclusion: Flow cytometry remains the global gold standard for sperm sex-sorting, offering high accuracy, but it is limited by cost, technical requirements, and reduced accessibility in developing regions. Growing research activity in Asia highlights increasing interest in alternative, low-cost methods; however,
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.