You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Effect of storage method and extender osmolality in the quality of cryopreserved epididymal ram spermatozoa
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Animal Reproduction Science, November 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2011.11.003 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. Tamayo-Canul, M. Álvarez, M. Mata-Campuzano, M. Álvarez-Rodríguez, P. de Paz, L. Anel, F. Martínez-Pastor |
| Abstract |
Post-mortem sperm recovery and cryopreservation could be a complement to germplasm banking in sheep, especially for endangered breeds. This study is an attempt to identify factors for improving the success of cryopreserving ram epididymal spermatozoa, considering the decrease of sperm quality with post-mortem time. Epididymal spermatozoa from 9 rams were kept at 5°C using three storage methods: within the epididymes, undiluted sperm mass, and diluted in extenders of different osmolality (TES-Tris-fructose at 320, 370 or 420 mOsm/kg, 20% egg yolk, 8% glycerol). At 0, 24, 48 and 72h, spermatozoa were cryopreserved using each extender. Samples were analyzed before and after cryopreservation by CASA (motility) and flow cytometry (viability and acrosomal status). Post-mortem time decreased pre-freezing and post-thawing sperm quality. Some storage x extender combinations improved the effect of post-mortem time on sperm quality. Both epididymis storage combined with the 420 extender, and storing the spermatozoa diluted in the 320 extender improved post-thawing quality, especially at long post-mortem times. Storing the spermatozoa diluted in the 370 extender was detrimental for the acrosomal status. These findings have practical applications. The simplest storage method (within the epididymes) seems to be adequate if hyperosmotic extenders were used for freezing. An alternative method could be storing the spermatozoa diluted in a hypoosmotic extender. These recommendations are limited to the osmolalities tested in this study (420 mOsm/kg and 320 mOsm/kg); other osmolalities should be tested. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 65 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 17% |
| Professor | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Other | 10 | 15% |
| Unknown | 12 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 28 | 42% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 13 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 16 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 February 2006.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Animal Reproduction Science
#171
of 1,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,830
of 245,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Reproduction Science
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,131 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 245,487 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.