Journal Home
Search for

Volume 85, Issue 1, Pages 121-127 (January 2006)


View previous. 24 of 72 View next.

Dimensional assessment of X-bearing and Y-bearing haploid and disomic human sperm with the use of fluorescence in situ hybridization and objective morphometry

Part of this research was presented at the 28th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Andrology, Phoenix, Arizona, March 29–April 2, 2003.

Zoltan Zavaczki, M.D., Ph.D.a, Ciler Celik-Ozenci, DDS, Ph.D.b, Laszlo Ovaric, Attila Jakab, M.D., Ph.D.c, G. Leyla Sati, M.S.b, David C. Ward, M.D.d, Gabor Huszar, M.D.eCorresponding Author Informationemail address

Received 7 April 2005; received in revised form 5 July 2005; accepted 5 July 2005.

Objective

To explore the dimensional attributes of haploid and disomic X-bearing and Y-bearing spermatozoa.

Design

Morphometric evaluation of more than 2,000 X-bearing and Y-bearing spermatozoa after identification of the genotype with fluorescence in situ hybridization.

Setting

Academic clinical and research andrology laboratory.

Main Outcome Measure(s)

Sperm head area, perimeter, long axis, short axis, shape factor, elliptical form factor (long axis/short axis), and tail length.

Result(s)

We found no differences in dimensions or dimensional distributions between X-bearing and Y-bearing spermatozoa, whether in the native or the decondensed state, or in oligozoospermic or normozoospermic men. There were inconsistent differences and a 70% overlap in the dimensions of haploid and disomic spermatozoa. The other 30% of sperm with disomic nuclei were either smaller or larger compared to haploid spermatozoa.

Conclusion(s)

There are no differences, or distinguishing characteristics, in dimensions or dimensional distributions between X-bearing and Y-bearing spermatozoa. Dimensional attributes do not discriminate between dysomic and haploid spermatozoa.

a Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Szent-Györgi University School of Medicine, Szeged, Hungary

b Department of Histology and Embryology, Akdeniz University, Antalya, Turkey

c Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary

d Hospital for Cancer Care and Research, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada

e Sperm Physiology Laboratory, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut

Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Gabor Huszar, M.D., Sperm Physiology Laboratory, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar St, New Haven, Connecticut 06520 (FAX: 203-737-1200)

 This work was supported by the National Institute of Health (HD-19505, OH-04061).

PII: S0015-0282(05)03597-1

doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.07.1295


View previous. 24 of 72 View next.