Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 372

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Comparison of Chromatin Assays for DNA Fragmentation Evaluation in Human Sperm

Open access
Chohan, Kazim R., Griffin, Jeanine T., Lafromboise, Marie, De Jonge, Christopher J., Carrell, Douglas T.·2006·Journal of Andrology

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Sperm chromatin integrity is vital for successful pregnancy and transmission of genetic material to the offspring. We evaluated chromatin integrity in sperm from 60 infertile men and 7 fertile donors comparing the sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA), TdT‐mediated‐dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL), the sperm chromatin dispersion (SCD) test, and acridine orange staining technique (AOT). The TUNEL and SCD assays showed a strong relationship with the SCSA (r > .866; P < .001) for sperm DNA fragmentation, both in infertile men and donors of known fertility. AOT did not show any relationship with SCSA. The breakdown of the DNA fragmentation index (DFI) into 3 categories (≤15%, >15%‐<30%, and ≥30%) showed that the SCSA, TUNEL, and SCD test predict the same levels of DNA fragmentation. AOT consistently showed higher levels of DNA fragmentation for each DFI category. DNA fragmentation in sperm between infertile men and donor sperm was significantly different (P < .05) under SCSA (22.0 ± 1.6 vs 11.8 ± 1.4), TUNEL (19.5 ± 1.3 vs 11.1 ± 0.9) and SCD (20.4 ± 1.3 vs 10.8 ± 1.1), respectively. DNA fragmentation in sperm evaluated by AOT did not differ (P > .05) between infertile men (31.3 ± 2.4) and donors (32.7 ± 4.8). AOT showed extreme variations for sperm DNA fragmentation in semen from both infertile men and donors. The problems of indistinct colors, rapid fading, and the heterogeneous staining were also faced. In conclusion, SCSA, TUNEL, and SCD show similar predictive values for DNA fragmentation, and AOT shows variable and increased levels of DNA fragmentation, which makes it of questionable value in clinical practice.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2164/jandrol.05068

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 372

Metadata

Authors
Chohan, K. R., Griffin, J. T., Lafromboise, M., De Jonge, C. J., & Carrell, D. T.
Venue
Journal of Andrology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-01-02
Volume
27
Issue
1
Pages
53-59
ISSN
  • 0196-3635 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-4640
OpenAlex
W2151257983
Cited by
372
References
0
FWCI
19.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of Chromatin Assays for DNA Fragmentation Evaluation in Human Sperm. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2164/jandrol.05068
The paper
Chohan, K. R., Griffin, J. T., Lafromboise, M., De Jonge, C. J., & Carrell, D. T. (2006). Comparison of Chromatin Assays for DNA Fragmentation Evaluation in Human Sperm. Journal of Andrology. https://doi.org/10.2164/jandrol.05068

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.