Suppr超能文献

用于评估种马精液活力的便携式设备的评估

Evaluation of a portable device for assessment of motility in stallion semen.

作者信息

Buss Tammo, Aurich Jörg, Aurich Christine

机构信息

Artificial Insemination and Embryo Transfer, Department for Small Animals and Horses, Vetmeduni Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Section for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Andrology, Department for Small Animals and Horses, Vetmeduni Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

出版信息

Reprod Domest Anim. 2019 Mar;54(3):514-519. doi: 10.1111/rda.13390. Epub 2018 Dec 28.

Abstract

In horse breeding, quality assessment of semen before insemination is often requested. Non-laboratory-based techniques for objective analysis of sperm motility are thus of interest. The aim of this study was evaluating a portable device for semen analysis (Ongo sperm test) and its comparison with computer-assisted semen analysis (CASA). Semen was collected from 10 stallions, diluted to 100, 50 and 25 × 10  sperm/ml and analysed for total (TM) and progressive motility (PM). The final sperm concentration influenced total motility analysed by Ongo (p < 0.05) which was higher at 100 × 10  sperm/ml when compared to 25 × 10  sperm/ml (p < 0.05) but not when compared to 50 × 10  sperm/ml (n.s.). Sperm concentration did not influence total motility when assessed by SpermVision (n.s.). Agreement between methods was evaluated by correlation analysis and Bland-Altman plot. Intra-assay variation of Ongo was 5.2% ± 3.0 for TM and 6.9% ± 3.4 for PM. Correlation between Ongo and CASA was r = 0.79, 0.88 and 0.83 for 100, 50 and 25 × 10  sperm/ml for TM, and r = 0.87, 0.89 and 0.87 for PM, respectively (all p < 0.001). At the 100 and 25 mio/ml dilutions, the difference between the two systems deviated significantly from 0, while no such bias existed at the 50 mio/ml dilution (TM Ongo 85.0%, CASA 82.3%; PM Ongo 64.1%, CASA 66.1%). The 95% confidence interval was 19.9%, 18.9% and 19.2% ± mean for TM and 20.7%, 17.4% and 20.3% ± mean for 100, 50 and 25 × 10  sperm/ml, respectively. In conclusion, Ongo sperm test sperm motility data were strongly correlated with data obtained by CASA. In addition, at a concentration of 50 × 10  sperm/ml values measured with both systems were close to identical. At this concentration, which is recommended in equine AI, Ongo and CASA can be used interchangeably.

摘要

在马匹繁育中,通常需要在输精前对精液进行质量评估。因此,基于非实验室的精子活力客观分析技术备受关注。本研究的目的是评估一种便携式精液分析设备(Ongo精子检测)及其与计算机辅助精液分析(CASA)的比较。从10匹种马采集精液,稀释至100、50和25×10⁶精子/ml,并分析总活力(TM)和前向运动活力(PM)。最终精子浓度影响了Ongo分析的总活力(p<0.05),与25×10⁶精子/ml相比,100×10⁶精子/ml时总活力更高(p<0.05),但与50×10⁶精子/ml相比则无差异(无统计学意义)。用SpermVision评估时,精子浓度不影响总活力(无统计学意义)。通过相关性分析和Bland-Altman图评估两种方法之间的一致性。Ongo的批内变异对于TM为5.2%±3.0,对于PM为6.9%±3.4。对于TM,Ongo与CASA在100、50和25×10⁶精子/ml时的相关性分别为r=0.79、0.88和0.83,对于PM分别为r=0.87、0.89和0.87(均p<0.001)。在100和25×10⁶/ml稀释度下;两种系统之间的差异显著偏离0,而在50×10⁶/ml稀释度下不存在这种偏差(TM,Ongo为85.0%,CASA为82.3%;PM,Ongo为64.1%,CASA为66.1%)。95%置信区间对于TM在100、50和25×10⁶精子/ml时分别为19.9%、18.9%和19.2%±均值,对于PM分别为20.7%、17.4%和20.3%±均值。总之,Ongo精子检测的精子活力数据与CASA获得的数据高度相关。此外,在50×10⁶精子/ml浓度下,两种系统测得的值几乎相同。在马人工授精中推荐的这个浓度下,Ongo和CASA可以互换使用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b7d0/7379573/89335049021c/RDA-54-514-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验