“…Different strategies were adopted to select the best spermatozoa within an ejaculate through targeted elimination of poor‐quality or damaged spermatozoa. Such techniques range from simple differential migration of spermatozoa, called the swim‐up assay (Chen et al, ; Mahadevan & Baker, ; Mortimer, ; Mortimer & Mortimer, ), to more complicated procedures based on density gradient centrifugation (e.g., albumin density (Ericsson, Langevin, & Nishino, ), or polyvinylpyrrolidone‐ and silane‐coated silica colloid solutions, such as Percoll™ and PureSperm®, respectively (Kaneko et al, ; Lessley & Garner, ; Morrell, )); filtration (glass wool (Paulson & Polakoski, ; Van der Ven et al, ), sephadex gel (Steeno, Adimoelja, & STEENO, ), or membrane (Agarwal, Manglona, & Loughlin, ); and microfluidic devices (Li et al, ; Shirota et al, ; Suarez & Wu, ). These purification procedures yield pure and high‐quality spermatozoa (motile and morphological normal) from both humans and animals, but the observed low and highly variable recovery efficiencies (10% to 63%), additional labor, and time‐consumption (>60 min) limit their utility to small‐scale applications (i.e., in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection).…”