Recent decline in sperm motility among donor candidates at a sperm bank in Denmark
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY QUESTION: Has there been variation in semen quality among men applying to be sperm donors (i.e. donor candidates) in Denmark in recent years (2017-2022)? SUMMARY ANSWER: The motile sperm concentration and total motile sperm count (TMSC) in ejaculates-both measures of sperm quality-declined by as much as 22% from 2019 to 2022. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Questions remain about whether human semen quality has declined in recent years. Whilst some studies provide evidence for a decline in human semen quality, these findings have been disputed owing to potential biases in the populations studied or in the methods used to measure semen quality. Resolution of this issue has important implications for human fertility, as well as for those involved in the recruitment of sperm donors for use in medically assisted reproduction. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We obtained data on the semen quality of ejaculates previously collected from 2017 to 2022 at sperm bank locations in four cities in Denmark: Aarhus, Aalborg, Copenhagen, and Odense. Our study focuses on the single semen samples provided by 6758 donor candidates aged between 18 and 45 years old to determine whether their sperm quality met a minimum criterion for them to be accepted as sperm donors. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: All ejaculates were analyzed within 1 hour of production. Semen volume (ml) was estimated by weight and both the concentration (106/ml) of sperm as well as the concentration of motile sperm (World Health Organization grades a and b) were measured using the same protocols and computer-assisted semen analysis system across all years at each site. Statistical analyses of the semen variables were controlled for age and donation site, as well as the average monthly high temperature when the ejaculate was produced. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: From 2017 to 2019, semen volume, sperm concentration, and total sperm count in the ejaculates of donor candidates increased by 2-12%. Then, from 2019 to 2022, sperm concentration and total sperm count changed by 0.1-5% from year to year, but none of those changes were statistically significant. In contrast, both motile sperm concentration and TMSC declined significantly, by 16% and 22%, respectively, between 2019 and 2022. Thus, the concentration of motile sperm in donor candidates declined from 18.4 [95% CL: 17.0, 20.0] million/ml in 2019 to 15.5 [14.4, 16.7] million/ml in 2022, and TMSC declined from 61.4 [55.8, 67.5] million per ejaculate in 2019 to 48.1 [44.1, 52.4] million in 2022. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We cannot determine from the available data the causes of the decline in semen quality of donor candidates from 2019 to 2022. However, as this period coincides with lockdowns and changes in work patterns during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, it is possible that changes in motile sperm concentration and TMSC were the result of changes in the lifestyles of the men whose semen was analyzed. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Men providing initial semen samples at sperm banks, when applying to be sperm donors, are a useful population in which to monitor changes in human semen quality over time. Our results have implications for human fertility and the recruitment of sperm donors for medically assisted reproduction, where motile sperm concentration is an essential selection criterion because it influences fertility. We suggest that gathering health and lifestyle data on donor candidates at sperm banks might help to identify causal factors for the decline of sperm quality that could be addressed and intervention, if desired, could be personalized for each accepted donor. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No external funding was obtained for this study. E.L. and A.-B.S. are employees of Cryos International. AP reports paid consultancy for Cryos International, Cytoswim Ltd, Exceed Health, and Merck Serono in the last 2 years of this study, but all monies were paid to the University of Sheffield (former employer). AP is also an unpaid trustee of the Progress Educational Trust (Charity Number 1139856). RM declares support from Cryos International to present results of this research at ESHRE 2023. None of the authors were directly involved in the collection or physical analysis of semen samples. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".