Cited by 129Sperm and Testicular FunctionReproductive Biology and FertilityReproductive Health and Technologies

Sperm selection capacity of the human zona pellucida

Menkveld, Roelof, Franken, Daniel R., Kruger, Thinus F., Oehninger, Sergio, Hodgen, Gary D.·1991·Molecular Reproduction and Development

Abstract

Previous hemizona assay (HZA) results have illustrated a positive and significant correlation between the percentage of morphologically normal spermatozoa in the semen and the number of spermatozoa tightly bound to the zona pellucida. The present study was designed to evaluate the morphologic features using strict criteria of spermatozoa tightly bound to the zona pellucida. Semen samples of 4 normozoospermic and 11 teratozoospermic men were used to compare the percentage of normal spermatozoa in the semen with that found 1) after swim-up separation and 2) bound to the zona under HZA conditions. The mean (+/- SEM) % normal forms for normozoospermic men in semen, after swim-up and zona-bound spermatozoa were 21.5 +/- 1.6, 27.5 +/- 2.9, and 44.8 +/- 3.4, respectively. A significantly higher % of normal forms were found among zona-bound sperm compared to swim-up forms (p = 0.02) and seminal sperm (p = 0.02). The mean % of normal sperm forms present in semen, after swim-up and zona pellucida-binding for teratozoospermic men, were 3.7 +/- 0.9, 5.8 +/- 1.6 and 15.6 +/- 3.1, respectively. Significant differences existed between the % of normal sperm forms found in the swim-up and zona-bound spermatozoa (P = less than 0.01 and P = less than 0.0003, respectively) compared to the original ejaculates. Results indicate that a selective process against abnormal spermatozoa occurs at the site of the zona pellucida.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mrd.1080300409

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Tygerberg strict criteria were based on the observation that the morphology of spermatozoa in the cervical mucus was better than those from the semen sample and similar to the morphology required for binding to zona pellucida.

    “This approach was based on the observation that the morphology of spermatozoa in the cervical mucus was better than those from the semen sample and similar to the morphology required for binding to zona pellucida (28,29).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Menkveld, R., Franken, D. R., Kruger, T. F., Oehninger, S., & Hodgen, G. D.
Affiliations
  • Tygerberg Hospital (ZA)
  • Eastern Virginia Medical School (US)
Corresponding author
Oehninger, Sergio
Venue
Molecular Reproduction and Development
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1991-12
Volume
30
Issue
4
Pages
346-352
ISSN
  • 1040-452X (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-2795
OpenAlex
W1970974034
Cited by
129
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
FWCI
5.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Molecular Reproduction and Development (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Sperm and Testicular Function
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Biology and Fertility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
Keywords
zona pellucida, sperm selection, teratozoospermia, sperm morphology, hemizona assay
MeSH terms
Cell Separation, Female, Humans, Male, Semen, Sperm-Ovum Interactions, Spermatozoa, Zona Pellucida

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review