Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorVíquez, Luis
dc.contributor.authorBarquero, Vinicio
dc.contributor.authorSole, Carles
dc.contributor.authorRoldan, Eduardo R.S.
dc.contributor.authorValverde, Anthony
dc.date.accessioned2022-09-01T22:16:07Z
dc.date.available2022-09-01T22:16:07Z
dc.date.issued2020-06-26
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2238/13875
dc.descriptionArtículo científicoes
dc.description.abstractThe ejaculate is heterogenous and sperm sub-populations with different kinematic patterns can be identified in various species. Nevertheless, although these sub-populations are statistically well defined, the statistical differences are not always relevant. The aim of the present study was to characterize kinematic sub-populations in sperm from two bovine species, and diluted with different commercial extenders, and to determine the statistical relevance of sub-populations through Bayesian analysis. Semen from 10 bulls was evaluated after thawing. An ISAS®v1 computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA)-Mot system was employed with an image acquisition rate of 50 Hz and ISAS®D4C20 counting chambers. Sub-populations of motile spermatozoa were characterized using multivariate procedures such as principal components (PCs) analysis and clustering methods (k-means model). Four different sperm sub-populations were identified from three PCs that involved progressiveness, velocity, and cell undulatory movement. The proportions of the different sperm sub-populations varied with the extender used and in the two species. Despite a statistical difference (p < 0.05) between extenders, the Bayesian analysis confirmed that only one of them (Triladyl®) presented relevant differences in kinematic patterns when compared with Tris-EY and OptiXcell®. Extenders differed in the proportion of sperm cells in each of the kinematic sub-populations. Similar patterns were identified in Bos taurus and Bos indicus. Bayesian results indicate that sub-populations SP1, SP2, and SP3 were different for PC criteria and these differences were relevant. For velocity, linearity, and progressiveness, the SP4 did not show a relevant difference regarding the other sperm sub-populations. The classical approach of clustering or sperm subpopulation thus may not have a direct biological meaning. Therefore, the biological relevance of sperm sub-populations needs to be reevaluated.es
dc.language.isoenges
dc.publisherBiology 2020es
dc.rightsacceso abiertoes
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subjectCinemáticaes
dc.subjectMotilidades
dc.subjectFertilidad -- Ganadoes
dc.subjectEspecies bovinases
dc.subjectToro -- Fertilidades
dc.subjectCalidad del semenes
dc.subjectKinematicses
dc.subjectMotilityes
dc.subjectFertility--Cattlees
dc.subjectBovine specieses
dc.subjectBull -- Fertilityes
dc.subjectSemen qualityes
dc.subjectResearch Subject Categories::FORESTRY, AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES and LANDSCAPE PLANNING::Animal productiones
dc.titleKinematic sub-populations in bull spermatozoa: a comparison of classical and bayesian approacheses
dc.typeartículo científicoes
dc.identifier.doidoi.org/10.3390/biology9060138


Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

acceso abierto
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como acceso abierto