Is flow cytometry really adapted to the determination of sperm concentration?

References

• Yamamoto T., Mori S., Yoneyama M., Imanishi M., Takeuchi M. Evaluation of rat sperm by flow cytometry: simultaneous analysis of sperm count and sperm viability. J Toxicol Sci 1998; 23: 373–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• World Health Organization. Laboratory manual for the examination of human semen and semen–cervical mucus interaction, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York 1992; 10–45
   Google Scholar
• Evenson D. P., Parks J. E., Kaproth M. T., Jost L. K. Rapid determination on sperm cell concentration in bovine semen by flow cytometry. J Dairy Sci 1993; 76: 86–94
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen P., Stenvang J. P., Godfrey W. L. A flow cytometric method for rapid determination of sperm concentration and viability in mammalian and avian semen. J Androl 2004; 25: 255–64
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Auger J., Eustache F., Ducot B., Blandin T., Daudin M., Diaz I., et al. Intra‐ and inter‐individual variability in human sperm concentration, motility and vitality assessment during a workshop involving ten laboratories. Hum Reprod 2000; 15: 2360–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu J. C., Lu N. Q., Huang Y. F., Li P. S., Fisch H. Quality evaluation of three different sperm counting chambers. Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue 2004; 10: 755–60
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eustache F., Jouannet P., Auger J. Evaluation of flow cytometric methods to measure human sperm concentration. J Androl 2001; 22: 558–67
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Neuwinger J., Behre H. M., Nieschlag E. External quality control in the andrology laboratory: an experimental multicenter trial. Fertil Steril 1990; 54: 308–14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. WHO laboratory manual for the examination of human semen and sperm–cervical mucus interaction, 4th edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1999; 14–50
   Google Scholar
• Tsuji T., Okada H., Fujisawa M., Hamaguchi Y., Kamidono S. Automated sperm concentration analysis with a new flow cytometry‐based device, S–FCM. Am J Clin Pathol 2002; 117: 401–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham J. K. Assessment of sperm quality: a flow cytometric approach. Anim Reprod Sci 2001; 68: 239–47
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garner D. L., Johnson L. A., Yue S. T., Roth B. L., Haugland R. P. Dual DNA staining assessment of bovine sperm viability using SYBR‐14 and propidium iodide. J Androl 1994; 15: 620–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kavak A., Johannisson A., Lundeheim N., Rodriguez‐Martinez H., Aidnik M., Einarsson S. Evaluation of cryopreserved stallion semen from Tori and Estonian breeds using CASA and flow cytometry. Anim Reprod Sci 2003; 76: 205–16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vetter C. M., Miller J. E., Crawford L. M., Armstrong M. J., Clair J. H., Conner M. W., et al. Comparison of motility and membrane integrity to assess rat sperm viability. Reprod Toxicol 1998; 12: 105–14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrunkina A. M., Gröpper B., Töpfer‐Petersen E., Günzel‐Apel A. R. Volume regulatory function and sperm membrane dynamics as parameters for evaluating cryoprotective efficiency of a freezing extender. Theriogenology 2005; 63: 1390–406
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waterhouse K. E., De Angelis P. M., Haugan T., Paulenz H., Hofmo P. O., Farstad W. Effects of in vitro storage time and semen‐extender on membrane quality of boar sperm assessed by flow cytometry. Theriogenology 2004; 62: 1638–51
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garner D. L., Thomas C. A., Joerg H. W., DeJarnette J. M., Marshall C. E. Fluorometric assessments of mitochondrial function and viability in cryopreserved bovine spermatozoa. Biol Reprod 1997; 57: 1401–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas C. A., Garner D. L., DeJarnette J. M., Marshall C. E. Fluorometric assessments of acrosomal integrity and viability in cryopreserved bovine spermatozoa. Biol Reprod 1997; 56: 991–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters E. M., Men H., Agca Y., Mullen S. F., Critser E. S., Critser J. K. Osmotic tolerance of mouse spermatozoa from various genetic backgrounds: acrosome integrity, membrane integrity, and maintenance of motility. Cryobiology 2005; 50: 193–205
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boilard M., Bailey J., Collin S., Dufour M., Sirard M. A. Effect of bovine oviduct epithelial cell apical plasma membranes on sperm function assessed by a novel flow cytometric approach. Biol Reprod 2002; 67: 1125–32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apedaile A. E., Garrett C., Liu D. Y., Clarke G. N., Johnston S. A., Baker H. W. G. Flow cytometry and microscopic acridine orange test: relationship with standard semen analysis. Reprod BioMed Online 2004; 8: 398–407
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ricci G., Perticarari S., Fragonas E., Giolo E., Canova S., Pozzobon C., et al. Apoptosis in human sperm: its correlation with semen quality and the presence of leukocytes. Hum Reprod 2002; 17: 2665–72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wald M., Lewin L. M., Soffer Y., Oschri Y., Shochat L., Vigodner M., et al. Evaluation of sperm samples from infertile men by flow cytometry. Harefuah 2004; 143: 22–5, 86
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kirk E. S., Squires E. L., Graham J. K. Comparison of in vitro laboratory analyses with the fertility of cryopreserved stallion spermatozoa. Theriogenology 2005; 64: 1422–39
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thongtip N., Saikhun J., Damyang M., Mahasawangkul S., Suthunmapinata P., Yindee M., et al. Evaluation of post‐thaw Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) spermatozoa using flow cytometry: the effects of extender and cryoprotectant. Theriogenology 2004; 62: 748–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen P., Hansen C., Liboriussen T., Lehn‐Jensen H. Implementation of flow cytometry for quality control in four Danish bull studs. Anim Reprod Sci 2005; 85: 201–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Love C. C., Thompson J. A., Brinsko S. P., Rigby S. L., Blanchard T. L., Lowry V. K., et al. Relationship between stallion sperm motility and viability as detected by two fluorescence staining techniques using flow cytometry. Theriogenology 2003; 60: 1127–38
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen P., Knudsen D. B., Wachmann H., Madsen M. T. Quality control in boar semen production by use of the FACSCount AF system. Theriogenology 2004; 62: 1218–28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen C., Christensen P., Stryhn H., Hedeboe A. M., Rode1 M., Boe‐Hansen G. Validation of the FACSCount AF System for determination of sperm concentration in boar semen. Reprod Dom Anim 2002; 37: 330–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garner D. L., Johnson L. A. Viability assessment of mammalian sperm using SYBR‐14 and propidium iodide. Biol Reprod 1995; 53: 276–84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spanò M., Evenson D. P. Flow cytometric analysis for reproductive biology. Biol Cell 1993; 78: 53–62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar