SPAM1/HYAL5 double deficiency in male mice leads to severe male subfertility caused by a cumulus‐oocyte complex penetration defect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The glycosylphosphatidylinositol‐anchored sperm hyaluronidases (Hyals), sperm adhesion molecule 1 (SPAM1) and HYAL5, have long been believed to assist in sperm penetration through the cumulus‐oocyte complex (COC), but their role in mammalian fertilization remains unclear. Previously, we have shown that mouse sperm devoid of either Spam1 or Hyal5 are still capable of penetrating the COC and that the loss of either Spam1 or Hyal5 alone does not cause male infertility in mice. In the present study, we found that Spam1/Hyal5 double knockout (dKO) mice produced significantly fewer offspring compared with wild‐type (WT) mice, and this was due to defective COC dispersal. A comparative analysis between WT and Spam1/Hyal5 dKO epididymal sperm revealed that the absence of these 2 sperm Hyals resulted in a marked accumulation of sperm on the outside of the COC. This impaired sperm activity is likely due to the deficiency in the sperm Hyals, even though other somatic Hyals are expressed normally in the dKO mice. The fertilization ability of the Spam1/Hyal5 dKO sperm was restored by adding purified human sperm Hyal to the in vitro fertilization medium. Our results suggest that Hyal deficiency in sperm may be a significant risk factor for male sterility.—Park, S., Kim, Y.‐H., Jeong, P.‐S., Park, C., Lee, J.‐W., Kim, J.‐S., Wee, G., Song, B.‐S., Park, B.‐J., Kim, S.‐H., Sim, B.‐W., Kim, S.‐U., Triggs‐Raine, B., Baba, T., Lee, S.‐R., Kim, E. SPAM1/HYAL5 double deficiency in male mice leads to severe male subfertility caused by a cumulus‐oocyte complex penetration defect. FASEB J. 33, 14440‐14449 (2019). www.fasebj.org
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".