Albumin-V: Role in Bovine Spermatozoa Viability, Motility and Membrane Elasticity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Semen preservation is an important process to ensure semen quality is sufficient for assisted reproductive technology. Studies have showed that suppression of free radicals, crystal formation and regulation of extracellular osmotic pressure is essential to ensure survivability. Past studies have indicated that utilizing protein already existent in the body could be used as a free radical scavenger and osmotic regulator - a potential preservation agent. Thus, the objective of this study was to determine the effect of different albumin-V concentrations on pooled bovine spermatozoa. Pooled cryopreserved semen straws were thawed and incubated in different concentrations of albumin-V (0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0 mg albumin-V/ml Bio-excel® extender) at 4°C. Sperm motility and viability were analyzed at 0, 2, 24 and 48 hours using Makler Chamber. Results indicated that motility and viability were noticeably reduced against time except for sperm incubated in 0.4 mg/ml. Membrane elasticity study using atomic force microscope (AFM) was then conducted on 0, 0.4, and 1.0 mg/ml 48 hours spermatozoa. We had observed that sperm membrane in the 0.4 mg/ml had a lower elasticity value (1.7 ± 0.6 kPA) compared to fresh semen (5.5 ± 1.0 kPA), 0 mg/ml (5.5 ± 0.1 kPA) and 1.0 mg/ml (5.3 ± 0.9 mg/ml). It is very likely that the motility and viability reduction was partly due to the changes in spermatozoa membrane elasticity. We conclude that albumin-V is a potential molecule for 4°C semen preservation; varying albumin concentration will have an influence on the spermatozoa membrane and affect the overall outcome of semen quality. Further study is required to elucidate the function and mechanism of albumin-V in preservation and its direct effect on ART outcome.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".