[Influence of different filling method-related sperm counting chambers and structural factors of disposable chambers on sperm motility]
- PMID: 37422871
[Influence of different filling method-related sperm counting chambers and structural factors of disposable chambers on sperm motility]
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the effects of different filling method-related sperm counting chambers and the structural factors of Leja counting chambers on sperm motility using computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA).
Methods: Using drop-filled Makler, capillary-loaded Leja and structurally modified Leja sperm counting chambers, we measured sperm concentration, the percentages of progressively motile sperm (PMS) and non-progressively motile sperm (NPMS), total sperm motility, curvilinear velocity (VCL), average path velocity (VAP), straight line velocity (VSL), beat-cross frequency (BCF), linearity (LIN), wobble (WOB) and straightness (STR) in the semen samples of 76 males by CASA and compared them between different chambers.
Results: The drop-filled Makler sperm counting chamber achieved remarkably higher PMS, NPMS, total sperm motility, VCL and VAP than the Leja chambers (P < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in VSL, BCF, LIN, WOB and STR between the Makler and Leja chambers (P > 0.05), or in sperm concentration, PMS, NPMS and total sperm motility between the capillary-loaded and structurally modified Leja counting chambers (P > 0.05). The ground edge and thickness of the coverslip of the Leja counting chamber produced no significant inference on the kinetic sperm parameters (P > 0.05).
Conclusions: The drop-filled sperm counting chamber achieves significantly higher sperm motility and kinetic parameters than the capillary-loaded Leja chamber. The structural factors such as the ground edge and thickness of the coverslip of the Leja counting chamber do not influence the analysis of sperm parameters.
Keywords: edged coverslip; sperm parameters; thickness of coverslip; type of filling; sperm counting chamber.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of commercially available chamber slides for computer-aided analysis of human sperm.Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2021 Apr;67(2):168-175. doi: 10.1080/19396368.2020.1850907. Epub 2020 Dec 29. Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2021. PMID: 33375858
-
Influence of chamber type integrated with computer-assisted semen analysis (CASA) system on the results of boar semen evaluation.Pol J Vet Sci. 2015;18(4):817-24. doi: 10.1515/pjvs-2015-0106. Pol J Vet Sci. 2015. PMID: 26812825
-
Comparison of different counting chambers using a computer-assisted semen analyzer.Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2015;61(5):307-13. doi: 10.3109/19396368.2015.1063175. Epub 2015 Jul 27. Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2015. PMID: 26214093
-
Influence of counting chamber type on CASA outcomes of equine semen analysis.Equine Vet J. 2012 Sep;44(5):542-9. doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2011.00523.x. Epub 2011 Dec 12. Equine Vet J. 2012. PMID: 22150933
-
[Quality evaluation of 3 sperm counting chambers by computer-assisted sperm analysis system].Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue. 2009 Mar;15(3):241-3. Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue. 2009. PMID: 19452697 Chinese.
Cited by
-
Analysis of selected sperm samples by a computer-assisted system with high frame rate: A prospective study.Health Sci Rep. 2023 Apr 27;6(5):e1217. doi: 10.1002/hsr2.1217. eCollection 2023 May. Health Sci Rep. 2023. PMID: 37123552 Free PMC article.
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Miscellaneous