The three-dimensional image analysis of the chromocenter in motile and immotile human sperm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chromosomes in human spermatozoa are arranged non-randomly with the centromeres of non-homologous chromosomes forming a chromocenter. We have compared motile and immotile sperm populations in normozoospermic patients to determine if there is any dissimilarity in the formation of the chromocenter and the nuclear position of chromosome 17. Based on the differences between motile and immotile populations, we propose for the 'optimal' nuclear organization to be defined as containing 1 to 3 chromocenter(s) with central radial and median longitudinal position for the centromere of chromosome 17. By this definition, 42% of motile spermatozoa had 'optima' nuclei, in comparison to 25% of immotile spermatozoa (P < 0.05). Immotile spermatozoa exhibited a greater disruption in the formation of the chromocenter, altered position of the centromere of chromosome 17, and were more prone to chemical decondensation, resulting in higher nuclear and chromocenter volumes. The altered topology of the chromosomes might lead to the disruption of the sequence of events involved in fertilization and early embryonic development.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".