Geographic differences in semen quality of fertile U.S. males.
Open accessAbstract
Although geographic variation in semen quality has been reported, this is the first study in the United States to compare semen quality among study centers using standardized methods and strict quality control. We evaluated semen specimens from partners of 512 pregnant women recruited through prenatal clinics in four U.S. cities during 1999-2001; 91% of men provided two specimens. Sperm concentration, semen volume, and motility were determined at the centers, and morphology was assessed at a central laboratory. Study protocols were identical across centers, and quality control was rigorously maintained. Sperm concentration was significantly lower in Columbia, Missouri, than in New York, New York; Minneapolis, Minnesota; and Los Angeles, California. Mean counts were 58.7, 102.9, 98.6, and 80.8 X 10(6)/mL (medians 53.5, 88.5, 81.8, and 64.8 X 10(6)/mL) in Missouri, New York, Minnesota, and California, respectively. The total number of motile sperm was also lower in Missouri than in other centers: 113, 196, 201, and 162 X 10(6) in Missouri, New York, Minnesota, and California, respectively. Semen volume and the percent morphologically normal sperm did not differ appreciably among centers. These between-center differences remained significant in multivariate models that controlled for abstinence time, semen analysis time, age, race, smoking, history of sexually transmitted disease, and recent fever (all p-values < 0.01). Confounding factors and differences in study methods are unlikely to account for the lower semen quality seen in this mid-Missouri population. These data suggest that sperm concentration and motility may be reduced in semirural and agricultural areas relative to more urban and less agriculturally exposed areas.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Swan et al. found no difference in PNS among 4 US cities despite a difference in concentration and motility.
“This finding echoes the results of Swan et al. (15) who found no difference in the PNS among 4 US cities despite a difference in concentration and motility.”
From Poor reproducibility of percentage of normally shaped sperm using the World Health Organization Fifth Edition strict grading criteria (2022) · cites this paper as Swan et al. [15]
Outcomes are inconsistent for studies correlating lifestyle and environmental exposures with sperm morphology.
“Likewise, outcomes are inconsistent for studies correlating lifestyle and environmental exposures with sperm morphology (11, 12, 13, 14, 15).”
From Poor reproducibility of percentage of normally shaped sperm using the World Health Organization Fifth Edition strict grading criteria (2022) · cites this paper as [15]
The Discussion (p. 418) reports small, nonsignificant geographic differences in sperm morphology. The paper mentions smoking as a covariate and says pesticide-exposure analyses are planned, but our copy does not assess whether studies linking lifestyle or environmental exposures to sperm morphology have inconsistent outcomes (searched: inconsistent findings, smoking, pesticides, morphology). (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
World Health Organization reference values for human semen characteristics*‡
Cooper, T. G., Noonan, E., von Eckardstein, S., Auger, J., Baker, H. W. G., Behre, H. M., Haugen, T. B., Kruger, T., Wang, C., Mbizvo, M. T., et al. (2010) · Human Reproduction Update · doi:10.1093/humupd/dmp048 · Cited by 2,827 · see citing works
Self-citationExamination of US puberty-timing data from 1940 to 1994 for secular trends: panel findings
Euling, S. Y., Herman-Giddens, M. E., Lee, P. A., Selevan, S. G., Juul, A., SØrensen, T. I. A., Dunkel, L., Himes, J. H., Teilmann, G., & Swan, S. H. (2008) · PEDIATRICS · doi:10.1542/peds.2007-1813d · Cited by 662 · see citing works
Self-citationLiu, P. Y., Swerdloff, R. S., Christenson, P. D., Handelsman, D. J., & Wang, C. (2006) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(06)68614-5 · Cited by 272 · see citing works
Self-citationGonad evaluation in male systemic lupus erythematosus
Soares, P. M. F., Borba, E. F., Bonfa, E., Hallak, J., Corrêa, A. L., & Silva, C. A. A. (2007) · Arthritis & Rheumatism · doi:10.1002/art.22660 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Campbell, M. J., Lotti, F., Baldi, E., Schlatt, S., Festin, M. P. R., Björndahl, L., Toskin, I., & Barratt, C. L. R. (2021) · Andrology · doi:10.1111/andr.12983 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Le Moal, J., Sharpe, R. M., Jϕrgensen, N., Levine, H., Jurewicz, J., Mendiola, J., Swan, S. H., Virtanen, H., Christin-Maître, S., Cordier, S., et al. (2016) · The European Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckv153 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Self-citationBaker, K. C., Steiner, A. Z., Hansen, K. R., Barnhart, K. T., Cedars, M. I., Legro, R. S., Diamond, M. P., Krawetz, S. A., Usadi, R., Baker, V. L., et al. (2022) · F&S Reports · doi:10.1016/j.xfre.2022.03.003 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“(15) who found no difference in the PNS among 4 US cities despite a difference in concentration and motility.”
Background
- Authors
- Swan, S. H., Brazil, C., Drobnis, E. Z., Liu, F., Kruse, R. L., Hatch, M., Redmon, J. B., Wang, C., Overstreet, J. W., & Study For Future Families Research Group
- Affiliations
- University of Missouri (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Environmental Health Perspectives
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2003-04-01
- Volume
- 111
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 414-420
- ISSN
- 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-9924
- PMC
- PMC1241421
- OpenAlex
- W1988200713
- Cited by
- 297
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 9.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- public-domain
- creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor, 5386 d)
- Locations
- Environmental Health Perspectives (publishedVersion, public-domain)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- MOspace Institutional Repository (University of Missouri) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Missouri (R01-ES09916)
- University of Minnesota (MO1-RR00400)
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
- National Institutes of Health (MO1‐RR00400, RR00400)
- U.S. Public Health Service (M01-440425)
- National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (R01 ES09916, R01ES009916)
- National Center for Research Resources (M01RR000400, MO 1 RR00400, M01-RR00400)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Sperm and Testicular Function
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Male Reproductive Health Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
- Keywords
- semen quality, sperm concentration, sperm motility, regional variation, agricultural exposure, urban-rural differences, male fertility
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Agriculture, Environmental Exposure, Geography, Humans, Infertility, Male, Male, Rural Population, Semen, Sperm Count, Sperm Motility, United States, Urban Population, Epidemiologic Studies
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