Skip to main content Accessibility help
  • Print publication year: 2013
  • Online publication date: April 2013

Chapter 17 - Variability of human semen quality: caution in interpreting semen analysis data


1. World Health Organization. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen. 5th edn. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
2. DongF, SunY, SuYet al. Relationship between processed total motile sperm count of husband or donor semen and pregnancy outcome following intrauterine insemination. Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2011;57(5):251–5.
3. DemirB, DilbazB, CinarOet al. Factors affecting pregnancy outcome of intrauterine insemination cycles in couples with favourable female characteristics. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;31(5):420–3.
4. LarsenL, ScheikeT, JensenTKet al. Computer-assisted semen analysis parameters as predictors for fertility of men from the general population. The Danish first pregnancy planner study team. Hum Reprod. 2000;15(7):1562–7.
5. ZinamanMJ, BrownCC, SelevanSGet al. Semen quality and human fertility: a prospective study with healthy couples. J Androl. 2000;21(1):145–53.
6. MervielP, HeraudMH, GrenierNet al. Predictive factors for pregnancy after intrauterine insemination (IUI): an analysis of 1038 cycles and a review of the literature. Fertil Steril. 2010;93(1):79–88.
7. SlamaR, EustacheF, DucotBet al. Time to pregnancy and semen parameters: a cross-sectional study among fertile couples from four European cities. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(2):503–15.
8. BjorndahlL, SoderlundI, KvistU. Evaluation of the one-step eosin-nigrosin staining technique for human sperm vitality assessment. Hum Reprod. 2003;18(4):813–16.
9. JeyendranRS, Van der VenHH, Perez-PelaezMet al. Development of an assay to assess the functional integrity of the human sperm membrane and its relationship to other semen characteristics. J Reprod Fertil. 1984;70(1):219–28.
10. ChanSY, WangC, ChanSTet al. Predictive value of sperm morphology and movement characteristics in the outcome of in vitro fertilization of human oocytes. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf. 1989;6(3):142–8.
11. CoetzeeK, KrugeTF, LombardCJ. Predictive value of normal sperm morphology: a structured literature review. Hum Reprod Update. 1998;4(1):73–82.
12. OmbeletW, MenkveldR, KrugerTFet al. Sperm morphology assessment: historical review in relation to fertility. Hum Reprod Update. 1995;1(6):543–57.
13. MenkveldR, WongWY, LombardCJet al. Semen parameters, including WHO and strict criteria morphology, in a fertile and subfertile population: an effort towards standardization of in-vivo thresholds. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(6):1165–71.
14. FredricssonB, BjorkG. Morphology of postcoital spermatozoa in the cervical secretion and its clinical significance. Fertil Steril. 1977;28(8):841–5.
15. MenkveldR, FrankenDR, KrugerTFet al. Sperm selection capacity of the human zona pellucida. Mol Reprod Dev. 1991;30(4):346–52.
16. BjorndahlL. What is normal semen quality? On the use and abuse of reference limits for the interpretation of semen analysis results. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2011;14(3):179–86.
17. NeuwingerJ, BehreHM, NieschlagE. External quality control in the andrology laboratory: an experimental multicenter trial. Fertil Steril. 1990;54(2):308–14.
18. GandiniL, MendittoA, ChiodoFet al. From the European Academy of Andrology. Italian pilot study for an external quality control scheme in semen analysis and antisperm antibiotics detection. Int J Androl. 2000;23(1):1–3.
19. BrazilC, SwanSH, TollnerCRet al. Quality control of laboratory methods for semen evaluation in a multicenter research study. J Androl. 2004;25(4):645–56.
20. DunphyBC, KayR, BarrattCLet al. Quality control during the conventional analysis of semen, an essential exercise. J Androl. 1989;10(5):378–85.
21. PalaciosER, ClaveroA, GonzalvoMCet al. Acceptable variability in external quality assessment programmes for basic semen analysis. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(2):314–22.
22. MortimerD, ShuMA, TanR. Standardization and quality control of sperm concentration and sperm motility counts in semen analysis. Hum Reprod. 1986;1(5):299–303.
23. LevitasE, LunenfeldE, WeissNet al. Relationship between the duration of sexual abstinence and semen quality: analysis of 9,489 semen samples. Fertil Steril. 2005;83(6):1680–6.
24. De JongeC, LaFromboiseM, BosmansEet al. Influence of the abstinence period on human sperm quality. Fertil Steril. 2004;82(1):57–65.
25. BlackwellJM, ZaneveldLJ. Effect of abstinence on sperm acrosin, hypoosmotic swelling, and other semen variables. Fertil Steril. 1992;58(4):798–802.
26. SchwartzD, LaplancheA, JouannetPet al. Within-subject variability of human semen in regard to sperm count, volume, total number of spermatozoa and length of abstinence. J Reprod Fertil. 1979;57(2):391–5.
27. MortimerD, TempletonAA, LentonEAet al. Influence of abstinence and ejaculation-to-analysis delay on semen analysis parameters of suspected infertile men. Arch Androl. 1982;8(4):251–6.
28. LeushuisE, van der SteegJW, SteuresPet al. Reproducibility and reliability of repeated semen analyses in male partners of subfertile couples. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(7):2631–5.
29. CarlsenE, PetersenJH, AnderssonAMet al. Effects of ejaculatory frequency and season on variations in semen quality. Fertil Steril. 2004;82(2):358–66.
30. CagnacciA, MaxiaN, VolpeA. Diurnal variation of semen quality in human males. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(1):106–9.
31. YogevL, KleimanS, ShabtaiEet al. Seasonal variations in pre- and post-thaw donor sperm quality. Hum Reprod. 2004;19(4):880–5.
32. CentolaGM, EberlyS. Seasonal variations and age-related changes in human sperm count, motility, motion parameters, morphology, and white blood cell concentration. Fertil Steril. 1999;72(5):803–8.
33. CarlsenE, AnderssonAM, PetersenJHet al. History of febrile illness and variation in semen quality. Hum Reprod. 2003;18(10):2089–92.
34. JungA, SchuppeHC. Influence of genital heat stress on semen quality in humans. Andrologia. 2007;39(6):203–15.
35. DomesT, LoKC, GroberEDet al. The incidence and effect of bacteriospermia and elevated seminal leukocytes on semen parameters. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(5):1050–5.
36. LambDJ. Semen analysis in 21st century medicine: the need for sperm function testing. Asian J Androl. 2010;12(1):64–70.
37. LiuDY, BakerHW. Evaluation and assessment of semen for IVF/ICSI. Asian J Androl. 2002;4(4):281–5.
38. NataliA, TurekPJ. An assessment of new sperm tests for male infertility. Urology. 2011;77(5):1027–34.
39. De JongeC. Semen analysis: looking for an upgrade in class. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(2):260–6.
40. OatesRD. Clinical evaluation of the infertile male with respect to genetic etiologies. Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2011;57(1–2):72–7.
41. TaylorSL, YoonSY, MorshediMSet al. Complete globozoospermia associated with PLCzeta deficiency treated with calcium ionophore and ICSI results in pregnancy. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;20(4):559–64.
42. MangoliV, MangoliR, DandekarSet al. Selection of viable spermatozoa from testicular biopsies: a comparative study between pentoxifylline and hypoosmotic swelling test. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(2):631–4.
43. CooperTG, NoonanE, von EckardsteinSet al. World Health Organization reference values for human semen characteristics. Hum Reprod Update. 2010;16(3):231–45.
44. HammoudSS, NixDA, HammoudAOet al. Genome-wide analysis identifies changes in histone retention and epigenetic modifications at developmental and imprinted gene loci in the sperm of infertile men. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(9):2558–69.
45. HammoudSS, NixDA, ZhangHet al. Distinctive chromatin in human sperm packages genes for embryo development. Nature. 2009;460(7254):473–8.
46. CarrellDT, HammoudSS. The human sperm epigenome and its potential role in embryonic development. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010;16(1):37–47.
47. HamataniT. Human spermatozoal RNAs. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(2):275–81.
48. KrawetzSA, KrugerA, LalancetteCet al. A survey of small RNAs in human sperm. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(12):3401–12.
49. SchulteRT, OhlDA, SigmanMet al. Sperm DNA damage in male infertility: etiologies, assays, and outcomes. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2010;27(1):3–12.
50. TempladoC, VidalF, EstopA. Aneuploidy in human spermatozoa. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2011;133(2–4):91–9.
51. KazerooniT, AsadiN, JadidLet al. Evaluation of sperm’s chromatin quality with acridine orange test, chromomycin a3 and aniline blue staining in couples with unexplained recurrent abortion. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2009;26(11–12):591–6.
52. ShamsiMB, ImamSN, DadaR. Sperm DNA integrity assays: diagnostic and prognostic challenges and implications in management of infertility. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2011;28(11):1073–85.
53. BurkmanLJ, CoddingtonCC, FrankenDRet al. The hemizona assay (HZA): development of a diagnostic test for the binding of human spermatozoa to the human hemizona pellucida to predict fertilization potential. Fertil Steril. 1988;49(4):688–97.
54. YanagimachiR, YanagimachiH, RogersBJ. The use of zona-free animal ova as a test-system for the assessment of the fertilizing capacity of human spermatozoa. Biol Reprod. 1976;15(4):471–6.
55. SanchezR, Toepfer-PetersenE, AitkenRJet al. A new method for evaluation of the acrosome reaction in viable human spermatozoa. Andrologia. 1991;23(3):197–203.
56. MillerD, BrinkworthM, IlesD. Paternal DNA packaging in spermatozoa: more than the sum of its parts? DNA, histones, protamines and epigenetics. Reproduction. 2010;139(2):287–301.
57. AstonKI, CarrellDT. Genome-wide study of single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with azoospermia and severe oligozoospermia. J Androl. 2009;30(6):711–25.
58. TuttelmannF, SimoniM, KlieschSet al. Copy number variants in patients with severe oligozoospermia and Sertoli-cell-only syndrome. PLoS One. 2011;6(4):e19426.
59. HuZ, XiaY, GuoXet al. A genome-wide association study in Chinese men identifies three risk loci for non-obstructive azoospermia. Nat Genet. 2012;44(2):183–6.
60. du PlessisSS , KashouAH, BenjaminDJet al. Proteomics: a subcellular look at spermatozoa. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2011;9:36.