Sperm nuclear histone H2B: correlation with sperm DNA denaturation and DNA stainability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To examine the relationship between sperm DNA damage and sperm nuclear histone (H2B) staining. METHODS: We evaluated sperm samples from 14 consecutive asthenoteratozoospermic infertile men and six consecutive fertile controls. Sperm nuclear histone (H2B) staining and sperm chromatin integrity (assessed by sperm chromatin structure assay and expressed using the percentage of (i) DNA fragmentation index [% DFI] and (ii) high DNA stainability [% HDS)]) were evaluated. RESULTS: Histone H2B immunocytochemistry demonstrated two nuclear staining patterns: (i) focal punctate staining; and (ii) diffuse staining. Infertile men had a higher mean percentage of spermatozoa exhibiting diffuse H2B staining than did fertile men (7.7% +/- 4.6% vs. 1.6% +/- 1.2%, respectively, P < 0.01). We observed significant relationships between the proportion of spermatozoa with diffuse nuclear histone staining and both sperm % DFI (r = 0.63, P < 0.01) and sperm %HDS (r = 0.63, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The data demonstrate that infertile men have a higher proportion of spermatozoa with diffuse histone H2B than do fertile men and suggest that sperm DNA damage might, at least in part, be due to abnormally high histone H2B levels.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".