The usefulness of Real Time Morphology software in semen assessment of teratozoospermic boars

References

• Bielas, W., Dubiel, A. and Niżański, W. (2003) Effects of cryopreservation methods, packaging systems and the thermoresistance test on the post-thaw quality of boar semen. Med Wet 59:172–175.
   Google Scholar
• Björndahl, L., Söderlund, I., Johansson, S., Mohammadieh, M., Pourian, M.R. and Kvist U. (2004) Why the WHO Recommendations for Eosin-Nigrosin Staining Techniques for Human Sperm Vitality Assessment Must Change. J Androl 25:671–678.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bland, J.M. and Altman, D.G. (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 8(1):307–310.
   Google Scholar
• Blom, E. (1981) Ocena morfologiczna wad plemników buhaja. II. Propozycja nowej klasyfikacji wad plemników. Morphological evaluation of bull spermatozoa abnormalities. II. Proposal of a new classification of spermatozoa abnormalities. Med Wet 37:239–242.
   Google Scholar
• Brito, L.F., Greene, L.M., Kelleman, A., Knobbe, M. and Turner, R. (2011) Effect of method and clinician on stallion sperm morphology evaluation. Theriogenology 76:745–750.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Broekhuijse, M.L., Sostaric, E., Feitsma, H. and Gadella, B.M. (2012) Application of computer-assisted semen analysis to explain variations in pig fertility. J Anim Sci 90:779–789.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buendía, P., Soler, C., Paolicchi, F., Gago, G., Urquieta, B., Pérez-Sánchez, F., (2002) Morphometric characterization and classification of alpaca sperm heads using the sperm-class analyzer computer-assisted system. Theriogenology 57:1207–1218.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chong, A.P., Walters, C.A. and Weinneb, S. (1984) The neglected laboratory test. J Androl 4:280–282.
   Google Scholar
• Coetzee, K., Bermes, N., Krause, W. and Menkveld, R. (2001) Comparison of normal sperm morphology outcomes from two different computer-assisted semen analysis systems. Andrologia 33:159–163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dott, H.M. and Foster, G.C. (1972) A technique for studying the morphology of mammalian spermatozoa which are eosinophilic in a differential ‘live/dead’ stain. J Reprod Fertil 29:443–445.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gago, C., Pérez-Sánchez, F., Yeung, C.H., Tablado, L., Cooper, T.G. and Soler, C. (1998) Standardization of sampling and staining methods for the morphometric evaluation of sperm heads in the Cynomolgus monkey (Macaca fascicularis) using computer-assisted image analysis. Int J Androl 21:169–176.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Graves, J.E., Higdon, H.L., Boone, W.B. and Blackhurst, D.W. (2005) Developing techniques for determining sperm morphology in today's andrology laboratory. J Assisted Reprod and Genet 22:219–225.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Harasymowycz, J., Ball, L. and Seidel, G.E. (1976) Evaluation of bovine spermatozoal morphologic features after staining or fixation. Am J Vet Res 37:1053–1057.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hirai, M., Boersma, A., Hoeflich, A., Wolf, E., Foil, J., Aumuller, T.R., (2001) Objectively measured sperm motility and sperm head morphometry in boars (Sus scrofa): relation to fertility and seminal plasma growth factors. J Androl 22:104–111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt, C., Holt, W.V., Moore, H.D., Reed, H.C. and Curnock, R.M. (1997) Objectively measured boar sperm motility parameters correlate with the outcomes of on-farm inseminations: results of two fertility trials. J Androl 18:312–323.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Iguer-ouada, M. and Verstegen, J.P. (2001) Evaluation of the “Hamilton Thorn computer-based automated system” for dog semen analysis. Theriogenology 55:733–749.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kosiniak-Kamysz, K., Bittmar, A. and Podstawski, Z. (2007) Alkaline phosphatase activity as a marker of dog semen freezability. ucrari Stiintifice: Zootehnie si Biotehnologii 40:131–135.
   Google Scholar
• Kozdrowski, R. and Dubiel, A. (2004) Morphological changes in wild boar (Sus Scrofa L.). Semen in annual cycle. Electronic Journal of Polish Agricultural Universities (EJPAU). Website: http://www.ejpau.media.pl/volume7/issue2/veterinary/art-10.html 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Marnet, B., Vieitez, G., Milhet, P., Richoilley, G., Lesourd, F. and Parinaud, J. (2000) Computer assisted assessment of sperm morphology: comparison with conventional method. Inter J Androl 23:22–28.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Menkveld, R., Lacquet, F.A., Kruger, T.F., Lombard, C.J., Sanchez Sarmiento C.A. and Villiers, A. (1997) Effects of different staining and washing procedures on the results of human sperm morphology evaluation by manual and computerised method. Andrologia 29:1–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Niżański, W. (2006) Intravaginal insemination of bitches with fresh and frozen-thawed semen with addition of prostatic fluid: Use of an infusion pipette and the Osiris catheter. Theriogenology 66:470–483.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Niżański, W., Klimowicz, M., Partyka, A., Savic, M. and Dubiel, A. (2009) Effects of the inclusion of equex STM into tris-based extender on the motility of dog spermatozoa incubated at 5⁰C. Reprod Dom Anim 44( Suppl 2):363–365.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Oettle, E.E. (1993) Sperm morphology and fertility in the dog. J Reprod Fertil Suppl 47:257–260.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ombelet, W., Menkveld, R., Kruger, T.F. and Steeno, O. (1995) Sperm morphology assessment: historical review in relation to fertility. Hum Reprod Update 1:543–557.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ombelet, W., Pollet, H., Bosmans, E. and Vereecken, A. (1997) Results of a questionnaire on sperm morphology assessment. Human Repro 12:1015–1020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peña, F.J., Saravia, F., García-Herreros M, Núñez-Martínez, I., Tapia, J.A., Johannisson, A., (2005) Identification of sperm morphometric subpopulations in two different portions of the boar ejaculate and its relation to postthaw quality. J Androl 26:716–723.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Purdy, P.H., Tharp, N., Stewart, T., Spiller, S.F. and Blackburn, H.D. (2010) Implications of the pH and temperature of diluted, cooled boar semen on fresh and frozen-thawed sperm motility characteristics. Theriogenology 74:1304–1310.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rijsselaere, T., Van Soom, A., Maes, D. and de Kruif, A. (2002) Use of the sperm quality analyzer (SQAII-C) for the assessment of dog sperm quality. Reprod Dom Anim 37:158–163.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rijsselaere, T., Van Soom, A., Maes, D. and de Kruif, A. (2003) Effect of technical settings on canine semen motility parameters measured by the Hamilton-Thorne analyzer. Theriogenology 60:1553–1568.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ron-el, R., Nachum, H., Herman, A., Golan, A., Caspi, E. and Soffer, Y. (1991) Delayed fertilization and poor embryonic development associated with impaired semen quality. Fertil Steril 55:338–344
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sekoni, V.O., Gustafsson, B.K. and Mather, E.C. (1981) Influence of wet fixation, staining techniques, and storage time on bull sperm morphology. Nord Vet Med 33:161–166.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• van der Horst, G. and Maree, L. (2009) SpermBlue: a new universal stain for human and animal sperm which is also amenable to automated sperm morphology analysis. Biotech Histochem 84:299–308.
   Google Scholar
• Watson, P.F. (1975) Use of a Giemsa stain to detect changes in acrosomes of frozen ram spermatozoa. Vet Rec 97:12–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar