A difference in dry mass between the heads of X- and Y-bearing human spermatozoa

Sumner, A. T.; Robinson, Jacqueline

doi:10.1530/jrf.0.0480009

Cited by 63 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1981). The fre quency of nondisjunction derived from Y-body analysis did not agree with data from nuclear mass measurements (Sumner and Robinson, 1976) or from human sperm karyotypes (Brandriffand Gordon, 1990: Martin andRademaker. 1990).…”

Section: Abstract Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (Fish) Withmentioning

confidence: 78%

Detection of aneuploidy in human interphase spermatozoa by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)

Martin

Chan

1993

Cytogenet Genome Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with repetitive-sequence DNA probes was performed on human interphase sperm to determine the utility of this technique for aneuploidy detection. DNA sequences specific for chromosomes 15 and 16 and the Y were biotinylated and hybridized with human sperm that had been treated with cetyltrimethyl-ammonium bromide and dithiothreitol to render them accessible to the probes. Fluoresceinated avidin and antiavidin were utilized to visualize bound probe. More than 10,000 sperm were analyzed for each chromosome probe. The hybridization efficiency was 98–99% for all three probes. The frequencies for disomy (i.e., for nuclei containing two fluorescent signals) for chromosomes 15 and 16 and the Y were 0.14%, 0.17%, and 0.11 %, respectively. These frequencies are all somewhat higher than those obtained by the human sperm karyotyping technique. Nevertheless, these preliminary results suggest that FISH is a simple and rapid technique that may provide an accurate screen for aneuploidy detection in human sperm.

show abstract

Section: Abstract Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (Fish) Withmentioning

confidence: 78%

Detection of aneuploidy in human interphase spermatozoa by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)

Martin

Chan

1993

Cytogenet Genome Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The MicroSort technique (Johnson et al 1993) uses high-speed flow cytometric sorting of individual spermatozoa based on the 2.8% greater total DNA content in normal human spermatozoa bearing an X compared with Y chromosome (Sumner and Robinson 1976). Spermatozoa are briefly exposed to a dilute solution of a nonintercalating fluorescent DNA dye (Hoechst 33342), which attaches to the minor groove of DNA (Latt and Stetten 1976).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

MicroSort® sperm sorting causes no increase in major malformation rate

Marazzo

Karabinus

Johnson

et al. 2016

Reprod. Fertil. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the safety of MicroSort (MicroSort Division, GIVF, Fairfax, VA, USA) sperm sorting by monitoring major malformations in infants and fetuses conceived using sorted spermatozoa. Data were collected in a prospective protocol with monitoring that began from conception through birth until 1 year of life. Comprehensive ascertainment identified fetuses and stillbirths with malformations after 16 weeks gestation, pregnancies terminated for malformations and babies with major malformations. Outcomes in MicroSort pregnancies were compared with outcomes in published studies that used active and comprehensive ascertainment of malformations in the general population and in pregnancies established after assisted reproduction. Using comprehensive outcomes from all pregnancies, the rate of major malformations in MicroSort pregnancies conceived after IVF with or without intracytoplasmic sperm injection was 7.8%; this did not differ significantly from the rates reported in the three assisted reproductive technology control studies not associated with MicroSort (8.6%, 9.2% and 8.3%). Similarly, the rate of major malformations in MicroSort pregnancies initiated with intrauterine insemination was 6.0%, not significantly different from that reported in non-assisted reproductive technology pregnancies not associated with MicroSort (6.9%, 4.6% and 5.7%). Prospective record review of pregnancy outcomes and paediatric evaluation to 1 year indicate no association between MicroSort sperm sorting and major malformations.

show abstract

“…Shettles' method suggested that intercourse at time of ovulation, preceded by alkaline douche, female orgasm simultaneously or before the husband's orgasm, abstinence to the time of ovulation and various vaginal penetration techniques would increase the likelihood for a male offspring [1]. For the last 30 years, attention has been focused on using various in vivo techniques based on differential morphology [2,3], size and swimming ability of X-and Y-bearing spermatozoa [4]. Discontinuous albumin density gradients presented by Ericsson et al [5], Sephadex columns [6], discontinuous Percoll gradients [7] and swim-up procedures have all been widely used and researched.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Controlled Study for Gender Selection Using Swim-Up Separation

Khatamee

Horn²,

Weseley³

et al. 1999

Gynecol Obstet Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the success for gender selection using a sample of semen separated by a modified swim-up technique. Design: We retrospectively compared the gender outcome of two treatments (A and B) for either a male or female offspring with those who conceived spontaneously. Setting: Private practice of one author (M.A.K.). Patients, Participants: The treatment groups consisted of 52 total pregnancies for couples who conceived by the separation technique. Of these 52 participants, 15 desired a female offspring and were placed into treatment A and 37 desired a male offspring and were placed into treatment B. The control groups consisted of 162 women who were presented with initial consultation for gender selection and conceived spontaneously. Control group A consisted of 80 women who initially chose a female offspring, and control group B consisted of 82 participants who initially chose a male. Interventions: In treatment group A, one timed intrauterine insemination (IUI) was carried out with the bottom 0.5 ml of the separated semen on cycle days 12–14, when the follicle was 18–22 mm. Patients in this group were also administered clomiphene citrate and human chorionic gonadotropin. In treatment group B, one timed IUI was done with the top 0.5 ml of the separated semen, when the follicle was 18–22 mm. Main Outcome Measure: The gender outcome of the pregnancies of two treatment and control groups was evaluated based on the known desired gender. Results: The success rate for conceiving a female child after intervention (treatment group A) was 86.7% effective (p = 0.002) as compared to the control group A. Couples seeking a male child (treatment group B) were 89.2% effective (p = 0.0002) as compared to the control group B. Conclusions: This study reveals that the modified swim-up method with additional monitoring results in statistically significant gender preselection.

show abstract

A difference in dry mass between the heads of X- and Y-bearing human spermatozoa

Cited by 63 publications

References 16 publications

Detection of aneuploidy in human interphase spermatozoa by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)

Detection of aneuploidy in human interphase spermatozoa by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)

MicroSort® sperm sorting causes no increase in major malformation rate

A Controlled Study for Gender Selection Using Swim-Up Separation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About