The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparison of Chromatin Assays for DNA Fragmentation Evaluation in Human Sperm
Open accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
An overview of apoptosis assays detecting DNA fragmentation
Majtnerová, P., & Roušar, T. (2018) · Molecular Biology Reports · doi:10.1007/s11033-018-4258-9 · Cited by 330
Parmegiani, L., Cognigni, G. E., Bernardi, S., Troilo, E., Ciampaglia, W., & Filicori, M. (2010) · Fertility and Sterility · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.03.033 · Cited by 264
Should we evaluate and treat sperm DNA fragmentation?
Agarwal, A., Cho, C.-L., & Esteves, S. C. (2016) · Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/gco.0000000000000271 · Cited by 148
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.