Evaluation of sperm tail membrane integrity by light microscopy

Theriogenology

Volumn 52, Issue 7, 1999, Pages 1153-1159

  Nagy, Sz ^a   Hazas G ^a   Bali Papp, A ^a   Ivancsics J ^a   Szasz F ^b   Szasz Jr F ^c   Kovacs A ^a   Foote, R H ^d  

^a SZENT ISTVÁN UNIVERSITY   (Hungary)

^b National AI Corporation   (Hungary)

^c UNIVERSITY OF VETERINARY MEDICINE   (Hungary)

^d Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

Author keywords

Boar; Bull; Membrane integrity; Ram; Spermatozoa; Viability staining

Indexed keywords

TRYPAN BLUE;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL CELL; ARTICLE; CELL MEMBRANE; COW; CYTOLOGY; GIEMSA STAIN; MALE; MEMBRANE; METHODOLOGY; MICROSCOPY; NONHUMAN; SHEEP; SPERMATOZOON; SPERMATOZOON MOTILITY; SPERMATOZOON TAIL; SWINE; ULTRASTRUCTURE;

ANIMALS; AZURE STAINS; CELL MEMBRANE; MALE; MICROSCOPY; SHEEP; SPERM MOTILITY; SPERM TAIL; SPERMATOZOA; SWINE;

EID: 0033231635     PISSN: 0093691X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0093-691X(99)00207-1     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Amann RP, Graham JK. Spermatozoal function. In: McKinnon AO, Voss JL (eds), Equine Reproduction. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1993;715-745.
2. Barth AD. Bull Breeding Soundness Evaluation Manual. Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Canada, 1995.
3. Dott HM, Foster GC. A technique for studying the morphology of mammalian spermatozoa which are eosinophilic in a differential 'live/dead' stain. J Reprod Fertil 1972;29:443-445.
4. Dumont P. Terminology of semen assessment: An attempt to define "live", "motile" and "progressive" sperm cells. 10th European Al Vets, 1998;8 pp.
5. Garner DL. Ancillary tests of bull semen quality. Vet Clin N Am: Food Anim Prac 1997;13:313-330.
6. Hackett AJ, Macpherson JW. Some staining procedures for spermatozoa. A review. Can Vet J 1965;6:55-62.
7. Jeyendran RS, Van der Ven HH, Perez-Pelaez M, Crabo BG, Zaneveld LJD. Development of an assay to assess the functional integrity of the human sperm membrane and its relationship to other semen characteristics. J Reprod Fertil 1984;70:219-228.
8. Kovács A, Foote RH. Viability and acrosome staining of bull, boar and rabbit spermatozoa. Biot Histoc 1992;67:119-124.
9. Lasley JF, Easley GT, Mckenzie FF. A staining method for differentiation of live and dead spermatozoa. I. Applicability to the staining of ram spermatozoa. Anat Rec 1942;82:167-174.
10. Lindahl PE, Drevius L-O. Observations on bull spermatozoa in a hypotonic medium related to sperm mobility mechanisms. Exp Cell Res 1964;36:632-646.
11. Liu Z, Foote RH. Bull sperm motility and membrane integrity in media varying in osmolality. J Dairy Sci 1998;81:1868-1873.
12. Mayer DT, Squiers CD, Bogart R, Oloufa MM. The technique for characterizing mammalian spermatozoa as dead or living by differential staining. J Anim Sci 1951;10:226-235.
13. Smith JF, Murray GR. Evaluation of different staining techniques for determination of membrane status in spermatozoa. Proc NZ Soc Anim Prod 1997;57:246-250.
14. Way AL, Henault MA, Killian GJ. Comparison of four staining methods for evaluating acrosome status and viability of ejaculated and cauda epididymal bull spermatozoa. Theriogenology 1995;43:1301-1316.