ArticleBrazilian journal of veterinary medicine2026
Impact of three field-practical thawing methods on bovine semen motility, viability, and membrane and acrosome integrity at 0 and 2 hours post-thaw.
Article in Brazilian journal of veterinary medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The effectiveness of artificial insemination with frozen semen depends largely on semen quality, which can be influenced by the thawing method. This study evaluated the effect of three field-practical semen thawing methods on bovine sperm motility, viability, and plasma membrane and acrosome integrity at 0 and 2h post-thaw. The treatments were: T1 (water at 37 °C), T2 (axilla at 36.1°C), and T3 (room temperature at 23.4 °C). A total of 42 frozen semen straws was analyzed. Motility was assessed using a CASA system, viability was evaluated with Hoechst/propidium iodide staining, and plasma membrane and acrosome integrity were examined using the hypoosmotic swelling (HOS) test and Coomassie blue (CB) staining, respectively. Statistical analysis included ANOVA and t-tests. At 0h, thawing using a water bath (T1) or the axilla (T2) resulted in higher (P < 0.05) total motility, progressive motility, rapid motility, and number of rapidly motile sperm compared to thawing at room temperature (T3). Thawing using a water bath also resulted in higher (P<0.05) sperm viability and percentage of HOS+/CB+ cells at 0h than thawing with T2 or T3. At 2h, post-thaw, T1 resulted in superior (P<0.05) total motility, progressive motility, rapid motility, and viability compared with T2 and T3 thawing methods. Holding samples from 0 to 2h reduced sperm quality parameters in all three thawing methods. In conclusion, thawing semen in warm water at 37 °C yielded better sperm quality parameters at both 0 and 2h post-thaw than thawing in the axilla or at room temperature.
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.