Journal of Andrology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Published-Ahead-of-Print August 23, 2006, DOI:10.2164/jandrol.106.000216
Journal of Andrology, Vol. 28, No. 1, January/February 2007
Copyright © American Society of Andrology
DOI: 10.2164/jandrol.106.000216

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
28/1/92    most recent
Author Manuscript (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sutovsky, P.
Right arrow Articles by Sutovsky, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sutovsky, P.
Right arrow Articles by Sutovsky, M.

Relative Levels of Semen Platelet Activating Factor-Receptor (PAFr) and Ubiquitin in Yearling Bulls With High Content of Semen White Blood Cells: Implications for Breeding Soundness Evaluation

P. SUTOVSKY*,{dagger}, W. PLUMMER{ddagger}, K. BASKA*, K. PETERMAN{ddagger}, J. R. DIEHL§ AND M. SUTOVSKY*

From the * Division of Animal Sciences and the {dagger} Departments of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, Missouri; the {ddagger} Animal Science Department, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California; and the § Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina.

Correspondence to: P. Sutovsky, Division of Animal Sciences, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO 65211 (e-mail: SutovskyP{at}missouri.edu).
Received for publication April 7, 2006; accepted for publication August 21, 2006.

   Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
High content of the platelet activating factor (PAF) and its plasma membrane receptor (PAFr) in semen is thought to benefit fertility in farm animals and humans. We used flow cytometric, biochemical, and immunocytochemical analysis to examine PAFr levels alone (Trial 1, n = 156 bulls) or in a dual assay with sperm defect marker ubiquitin (UBI; Trial 2, n = 88 bulls), in semen samples from 160 yearling bulls undergoing Breeding Soundness Evaluations (BSE). In both trials, we observed increased PAFr levels in semen samples with high content of white blood cells (WBC). Consequently, PAFr levels within such semen samples correlated negatively with several subjective parameters of BSE, including palpation, satisfaction of evaluation, and scrotal circumference. Due to a high WBC content, increased semen sample dilution had to be applied for microscopic evaluation. There was a negative correlation between semen PAFr and conventional sperm morphology, while the increased levels of PAFr correlated positively with sperm UBI content. Immunofluorescence microcopy revealed high expression of PAFr on the surface of leukocytes and morphologically normal spermatozoa, while reduced immunoreactivity was observed in defective spermatozoa immunoreactive to anti-UBI antibodies. A single PAFr band of appropriate mass was observed in Western blots of ejaculated spermatozoa, while testicular and epididymal spermatozoa also displayed several larger bands indicative of posttranslational processing or modification. Collectively, these data suggest that high levels of semen PAFr in young bulls are indicative of semen contamination with WBC. In the future, objective protein marker-based semen analyses in young bulls will likely require additional parameters distinguishing between marker expression in the spermatozoa and in the contaminating WBC. While identification of high sperm PAFr levels may support fertility, this assay alone is not reliable, due to the expression of PAFr in WBC that contaminate semen samples.

     Key words: Bull, sperm, PAF, fertility



Breeding Soundness Evaluations (BSE) are commonly performed on yearling bulls at the age of 11–14 months. The goal is to identify young bulls that are satisfactory for breeding based on a reproductive organ examination, including measurement of scrotal circumference and examination of semen (Chenoweth, 2004). Bull semen evaluation is traditionally performed by subjective, low-power light microscopic examination, prompting the search for novel methods based on objectively measurable sperm parameters. Currently, there are few objective semen evaluation technologies available. Examples include the computerized semen motility and morphometry analysis (CASA; Douglas-Hamilton, 1995), the sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA; Ballachey et al, 1987) aimed at recognizing spermatozoa with damaged DNA, and an immunological fertility assay based on quantification of a fertility-associated antigen (FAA; Bellin et al, 1998) in bull semen. Identification of sperm proteins associated with either normal or defective spermatozoa could serve as additional markers for automated, multifaceted semen evaluation (Sutovsky et al, 2004). A positive association of the platelet activating factor (PAF) and its sperm plasma membrane receptor (PAFr) with sperm motility and high fertility history has been demonstrated in breeding boars (Roudebush and Diehl, 2001). Yet other studies indicate an inverse relationship between bull fertility and expression of proteolytic peptide ubiquitin (UBI) on the defective sperm surface (Sutovsky et al, 2002). This approach identifies abnormal mammalian spermatozoa regardless of whether their morphology/appearance in a light microscope deviates from accepted standards. Thus, such a methodology avoids current problems with false detection of normal spermatozoa damaged during sample processing, and identifies mainly those spermatozoa that are defective but appear normal by conventional analysis. In addition, it recognizes all types of sperm defects, not only those due to DNA damage or absence of a single protein component from semen.

The platelet activating factor is an important phospholipid mediator in reproduction, affecting sperm motility (Minhas et al, 1991), sperm-oocyte interaction (Angle et al, 1993), and pregnancy establishment (Tiemann et al, 2001; Yang et al, 2002). Recent data indicate that PAF is associated with sperm motility and fertility (Roudebush and Diehl, 2001). The pleiotropic functions of PAF are mediated through a membrane-bound receptor (PAFr). Characterization of the PAFr gene and its role in mediating PAF actions implicated in reproduction has been discussed (Honda et al, 1991). It is not surprising that PAF and PAFr are present in the mammalian spermatozoa (Kuzan et al, 1990; Reinhardt et al, 1999; Roudebush et al, 2000). The PAFr-encoding mRNA and PAFr protein are found in a variety of other cells and tissues, including oocytes (Stojanov and O'Neill 1999), preimplantation and peri-implantation embryos, endometrium (Tiemann et al, 2001; Yang et al, 2002); leukocytes, platelets, Kupffer cells, epithelial cells, and several internal organs (Ishii and Shimizu, 2000). The expression patterns of PAFr are tissue-dependent and species-specific (Ishii and Shimizu, 2000; Yang et al, 2002). Our hypothesis postulates that high levels of PAF and PAFr correlate positively with sperm motility and normal morphology, and thus PAF/PAFr can serve as a measurable fertility marker in bulls, boars and humans. It is expected that the highly fertile subpopulations of spermatozoa should have a higher level of PAFr expression which enhances utilization of PAF and is associated with specific motility parameters and subsequently higher fertility.

Ubiquitin (UBI) is a small protein involved in the degradation of either damaged or normal proteins that are targeted for turnover (reviewed by Hershko and Ciechanover, 1998; Pickart, 1998). A molecule of ubiquitin consists of 76 amino acids (AA), with a molecular mass of 8.5 kd. Ubiquitin attaches covalently to other proteins via its C-terminal, glycine residue (G-76) forming an isopeptide bond with an internal lysine residue on the substrate protein. Similarly, UBI molecules can bind to each other, forming multiubiquitin chains of various lengths linked through G-76 residue of one molecule and an internal lysine residue (K-7, 27, 29, 31, 33, 48, 63) of the other UBI molecule. A single UBI molecule, which can exist free or attached to a substrate protein, is referred to as monoubiquitin. Chains of higher orders are commonly referred to as polyubiquitin chains. Based on such nomenclature of UBI chains, the attachment of single or multiple ubiquitin molecules to the substrate is referred to as mono-, di-, tri-, tetra-, or polyubiquitination. The basic function of ubiquitination is the degradation of outlived or damaged proteins (Hershko and Ciechanover, 1998). The common signal for protein degradation is tetraubiquitination, that is, the formation of a 4-UBI molecule-long chain on a substrate protein. Tetra-ubiquitin and polyubiquitin chains target and dock the tetraubiquitinated substrate towards the 26S proteasome, a multisubunit protease common in most eukaryotic cells (Pickart, 1998). Although monoubiquitination does not target substrate protein towards 26S proteasome, it has been implicated in the endocytosis of membrane receptors and possibly other proteins (Strous and Govers, 1999) and degradation by a lysosome.

Ubiquitin has been implicated in the processing of defective epididymal spermatozoa (UBI-dependent sperm quality control; Sutovsky et al, 2001a), a process that may also involve specific epididymal secretory glycoproteins (Olson et al, 2004). The secretion of UBI by the epididymal epithelium was first suggested by Santamaria et al (1993) and supported by others (Sutovsky et al, 2001a; Hermo and Jacks, 2002; Jones, 2004). Our recent studies document that an active enzymatic system for UBI-substrate conjugation and recycling exists in the bovine epididymal fluid (Baska and Sutovsky, 2005). Lippert et al (1993) detected UBI in human seminal plasma, but found no correlation with fertility or sperm quality. In contrast, flow cytometric measurements of UBI associated with human sperm surface correlated with various measures of sperm quality in men with known and unexplained causes of infertility (reviewed by Baska and Sutovsky, 2005). Similar results were reported in bulls (Sutovsky et al, 2002), stallions (Sutovsky et al, 2003), and boars (Lovercamp et al, 2006). The flow cytometric sperm-ubiquitin tag immunoassay (SUTI; Sutovsky et al, 2001b) has been developed for objective, automated semen evaluation in infertility patients and farm animals. Immunocytochemical detection of UBI by SUTI reveals that cell surface ubiquitination occurs in ejaculated bull spermatozoa with gross morphological abnormalities (Sutovsky et al, 2001a), but also in the seemingly morphologically standard spermatozoa with intrinsic defects such as postapoptotic or necrotic DNA fragmentation (dual ubiquitin-TUNEL assay; Sutovsky et al, 2002). The present study explores the relationship between sperm ubiquitination and expression of fertility-associated sperm proteins, namely the PAFr, with particular focus on the application of objective flow cytometric assays in the breeding soundness evaluation in yearling sires.


   Materials and Methods
 Top
 Abstract
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Animals and BSE

A total of 160 young bulls, age 310–400 days, were examined by chute-side fertility evaluation during a week-long BSE trial at the Cal Poly Bull Test site, San Luis Obispo, Calif. Of those bulls, 156 were examined by flow cytometric analysis of PAFr alone (Trial 1), and 88 bulls were examined by dual assay of PAFr and UBI (Trial 2). Of those 88 bulls in Trial 2, 84 bulls overlapped with Trial 1. Most bulls were of Black Angus breed (BA; n = 103), with additional animals being Red Angus (AR; n = 6), Brangus (BN; n = 5), Continental Composite (CC; n = 2), Charolais (CH; n = 7), Gelbvieh (GV; n = 2), Hereford (HH; n = 27), Limousin (LM; n = 3), and Simmental (SM; n = 4). One animal was not sold (n = 1). Due to uneven representation of individual breeds, interbreed differences in individual BSE and flow cytometric parameters were not assessed. Bulls were maintained on the 2003 Cal Poly Yearling Bull Test. Bulls between 7 and 10 months of age arrived in mid-May 2003, had access to water ad libitum, and were fed to gain 2.75 lbs/day. Bulls were weighed at 28-day intervals and vaccinated for all endemic diseases. Pens averaged 3 acres each, with feed and water at opposite ends. Slopes of pens varied from 2° to 14°. BSE tests were conducted in early September 2003.

Reproductive Soundness Exam

Semen from yearling bulls was collected using an electroejaculator (ElectroJac 5; Neogen Corp, Lexington, Ky). At the time of collection each bull was given a reproductive soundness exam. Scrotal circumference was measured; scrotum, sheath, and vesicular glands were palpated; and semen was collected. Bulls were divided into 4 groups based on the outcome of vesicular gland palpation (group 1 = excellent, group 2 = good, group 3 = minor inflammation, group 4 = major inflammation), and into 5 groups based on semen-WBC content (group 0 = less than 20 WBC per field in a Makler counting chamber under 20x primary lens magnification, group 1 = more than 20 WBC per field in light microscope at 20x lens magnification, group 2 = paired WBC present, group 3 = clumped WBC present, group 4 = amorphous debris and/or puss present). Bulls that produced samples with a high white blood cell count were treated with antibiotics and were reevaluated every 3 days until they were clean or had been through 5 treatments. The final evaluation was based on BSE (above) and semen analysis (below). Bulls were divided into 3 groups based on overall satisfaction of evaluation: 1) satisfactory (WBC group of 0, minimum 50% motility and less than 40% abnormal spermatozoa; 2) not satisfactory (WBC group 1–4 and/or less than 50% motility and/or more than 40% abnormal sperm); 3 = marginal (sexually immature; high % of secondary sperm abnormalities).

Semen Analysis

Based on sample concentration or density, the semen was either evaluated raw (not diluted) or diluted in 0.01 mol phosphate buffered saline (PBS with BSA, Sigma P-3688, 0.138 mol NaCl, 0.0027 mol KCl, pH 7.4) to one of the following dilutions: 1:1, 4:1, 8:1, 12:1, saline solution to semen. The temperature of the saline was maintained at 37°C using a slide warmer. Once the fresh samples were appropriately diluted, they were evaluated for motility, morphology, and concentration related to fertility using an inverted light microscope (Olympus Inc, Center Valley, Pa) at 20x and a Makler counting chamber (Irvine Scientific, Santa Ana, Calif). Approximately 15 µL of the semen sample was placed on the center of the Makler chamber and used to evaluate sperm parameters. To estimate the sperm motility in a sample, the number of progressively motile spermatozoa moving in a forward direction in a 3x3 grid on the Makler chamber was counted. Concentration was calculated by counting the total number of sperm cells in 10 squares on the Makler chamber, then counting the total number of sperm cells contained in a different set of 10 squares, and an average concentration value was determined from those respective values. Morphology was determined by evaluating 100 spermatozoa per sample and assigning to them either the normal characteristics, primary abnormalities, or secondary abnormalities as defined by the Society for Theriogenology (Chenoweth et al, 1993). Based on these numbers, the percent of normal sperm morphology was calculated. In addition to these primary sperm parameters, concentration of sperm per ejaculate and volume of semen were also calculated for each sample.

Sample Handling and Fixation

Raw semen was spun in a 15-mL Falcon tube at 400 x g for 4 minutes, then the supernatant was decanted. Sperm TL medium (1.84 mL lactic acid, 2.920 g NaCl, 1.190 g HEPES, 1.050 g NaHCO3, 0.115 g KCl, 0.0174 g Na2HPO4, 0.005 g phenol red, 0.155 g CaCl2, 0.40 g MgCl2 per 500 mL volume; pH 7.0; osmolarity 290–300 mOsm) was added to bring volume to 8 mL, then spun at 400 x g for 4 minutes, and the supernatant was decanted. Three milliliters of 2% formaldehyde (10% Ultra Pure EM Grade formaldehyde from Polysciences, Warrington, Pa, was diluted in DPBS from Sigma, St Louis, Mo) was added and the sample incubated at room temperature for a minimum of 40 minutes, then spun at 400 x g for 4 minutes, and the supernatant was decanted. After adding 3 mL DPBS and spinning at 400 x g for 4 minutes, the supernatant was decanted. Enough DPBS to bring the volume to 2 mL was added and the sample split into two 1-mL NUNC tubes (Fisher Scientific, Pittsburgh, Pa). Samples were labeled, wrapped in parafilm, and stored in refrigerator. Fixed samples were shipped on wet ice to University of Missouri, Columbia, Mo, for flow cytometric and microscopic analyses completed within 4 weeks after collection.

Sample Processing for Flow Cytometry

Processing was performed in 15-mL Falcon tubes using a clinical bench-top centrifuge with fixed rotor at 350 x g. All solutions were filtered by using 0.22-µm syringe filters (Fisher Scientific) or, for large volumes, 0.22-µm Stericub disposable filtration bottles (Millipore Corp, Billerica, Mass). For flow cytometry processing, 200 µL of each fixed semen sample in PBS were transferred to a 15-mL Falcon tube and collected by centrifugation. Supernatants were removed by using a glass Pasteur pipette attached to a small vacuum pump and samples were resuspended in 100 µL of blocking and permeabilizing solution composed of 2% normal goat serum (NGS; Sigma) and 0.1% Triton-X-100 (TX-100; Sigma) in PBS. After 1 hour of blocking, sperm pellets were collected by centrifugation.

In trial 1 (n = 156), sperm pellets were incubated with 100 µL of a rabbit affinity purified serum raised against a synthetic peptide corresponding to amino acids 1–17 from the human PAF receptor (MEPHDSSHMDSEFRYTL; Nakamura et al, 1991; purchased from Cayman Chemicals, Ann Arbor, Mich; dilution 1/100 in PBS+1% NGS). After an overnight incubation at 4°C, a goat anti-rabbit IgG conjugated to FITC (GAR-FITC; Zymed) was added at dilution of 1/80 directly to 15-mL Falcon sample tubes containing a mixture of spermatozoa in PBS with anti-PAFr antibody and allowed to incubate for 40 minutes at room temperature under an aluminum foil wrap to reduce fluorochrome quenching. Omitting sample washing between first and second antibody incubation accelerated the procedure and reduced sample losses during centrifugation and supernatant removal without causing increased background fluorescence (comparison data not shown). Blank negative control samples were prepared by substituting a nonimmune rabbit serum (Sigma) for the anti-PAFr antibody. After the last incubation, 5 mL of filtered washing solution composed of filtered PBS with bovine serum albumin (BSA, 3 mg/mL; Sigma) were added to each sample. Sperm pellets were collected after 5 minutes washing by centrifugation and 500 µL of filtered PBS with no other additives was added to each tube. Samples were transferred into 5-mL cell strainer-cap flow cytometry tubes (#352235; Falcon brand; Becton Dickinson Labware, Franklin Lakes, NJ) and stored in dark at 4°C until the analysis, performed on the same day. The quality of processing was monitored randomly by epifluorescence microscopy of multiple processed samples.

In trial 2 (n = 88), samples of 200 µL of sperm-PBS suspension were pelleted by centrifugation, permeabilized, and blocked as described above. First, overnight incubation was with a mixture of rabbit polyclonal anti-PAFr antibody (dil 1/100), described above, and mouse monoclonal anti-UBI antibody MK-12-3 (dil 1/100; MBL, Nagoya, Japan; Sutovsky et al, 2001a). Secondary antibodies, added directly to sperm suspensions at a dilution of 1/80, included red fluorescent goat-anti-mouse-TRITC to detect ubiquitin and goat anti-rabbit-FITC to detect PAFr (both antibodies from Zymed Inc, San Francisco, Calif). Double-negative controls samples were generated by the replacement of anti-ubiquitin and anti-PAFr antibodies with a mixture of nonimmune rabbit and mouse sera (purchased from Sigma).

Flow Cytometry Data Acquisition and Analysis

Samples were analyzed by using FACS Scan Analyzers (Becton Dickinson) at 488 nm for FITC emission and at 568 nm for TRITC. In PAFr analysis (trial 1), only the FITC channel was acquired. In dual analysis (trial 2), both channels were acquired simultaneously. Relative levels of red (UBI) and green (PAFr) fluorescence in 10 000 individual cells were recorded for each sample. A sample of PBS buffer used for labeling and washing was used to adjust the output to suppress nonspecific fluorescence and to calibrate the cytometer; a blank sample from a corresponding sire, labeled with secondary antibody alone, was measured before each antibody-labeled sample. Scatter diagrams of visible light and histograms of relative fluorescence were generated for each channel (red/TRITC and green/FITC). The median values of relative fluorescence (UBI/PAFr median) were recorded for each sample. Median values are relative (no units), represent the channel number about which half the cells are dimmer and half the cells are brighter, and increase with the increase in the number of brighter cells. Dual analysis was performed in a dual acquisition mode. In the resultant dual flow cytometric diagram, the x-axis represented the green, PAFr-induced fluorescence, and the y-axis was the red, ubiquitin-induced fluorescence. The data were entered into Microsoft Excel tables and analyzed by statistical analysis tools and the SAS (version 8.2) statistical package. Pearson's correlation coefficients (r) and P values were calculated for PAFr and UBI medians, % PAFr/UBI-positive cells, and semen field analysis data. Scatter diagrams were drawn and supplemented with regression lines. Single-factor analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine if there is a significant degree (P < .05) of variation among individual sperm samples.

Immunofluorescence

Dual detection of PAFr and UBI was performed by using a described procedure (Sutovsky, 2004). Sperm samples were mounted onto poly-L-lysine coated coverslips and fixed in 2% formaldehyde in 0.1% phosphate buffered saline (PBS) for 40 minutes. Samples were washed, permeabilized for 40 minutes with 0.1% TX-100, then blocked in 5% NGS in PBS for 25 minutes. Samples were then incubated for 40 minutes with a mixture of mouse monoclonal anti-ubiquitin IgG (dil 1/100; MK12-3; MBL, Nagoya, Japan) and rabbit-anti-PAFr serum (dil 1/100; Cayman Chemicals), followed by a brief wash in PBS and incubation for 40 minutes with a mixture containing goat anti-rabbit IgG-TRITC (Zymed, dil 1:80), goat-anti mouse IgG-FITC (Zymed, #81-6114; dil 1:80) and DNA-stain DAPI (#D1306; Molecular Probes, Eugene, Ore). In some experiments, the colors were reversed (ie, PAFr-FITC and ubiquitin-TRITC detection). After second antibody incubation, coverslips were washed in PBS and mounted on microscopy slides in VectaShield mounting medium (#H-1000; Vector Laboratories, Inc, Burlingame, Calif). Images were captured by using a Nikon Eclipse E800 microscope equipped with a CoolSnap HQ CCD camera operated by the MetaMorph software.


Figure 1
View larger version (52K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 1. Histograms of relative fluorescence induced by the binding of fluorescently tagged anti-PAFr and anti-UBI antibodies in a dual flow cytometric analysis of PAFr (left column) and UBI (center column) in bull semen samples. Samples with high relative levels of PAFr or UBI display a shift of the histogram to the right. The PAFr median (PM) is a relative measure of PAFr-induced fluorescence within the sample; a relative measure of sperm UBI content is the ubiquitin median (UM). Right column shows corresponding scatter diagrams of visible light in 10 000 cells measured per sample, each dot representing 1 measured cell. The tight focus of dots in the center of scatter diagram represents the cells of prevailing size within the measured population, which correspond to spermatozoa of normal size. Increased number of dots/cells in the upper right corner thus reflects high content of large cells (macrocephalic spermatozoa, WBC) and the increased number of dots in the lower left column represents small cells (microcephalic spermatozoa, separated sperm heads and tails, cell fragments). Examples of bulls with varied sperm morphology and varied PAFr and UBI levels are shown. Each histogram and scatter diagram represents 10 000 cells. (A) Semen sample with excellent sperm morphology (97% normal spermatozoa), low content of PAFr (PM = 321.8), and low UBI (UM = 9.3). This was likely a bull with excellent semen quality, low content of WBC, and low content of defective, ubiquitinated spermatozoa. (B) A bull with 60% normal morphology by conventional analysis, and high PAFr and UBI content. This was presumably a bull with poor semen quality. (C) A bull with acceptable sperm morphology (79%) but high content of WBC and high content of ubiquitinated spermatozoa, reflected by high PM and UM values. (D) After antibiotic treatment and re-collection of bull from panel C, the conventional sperm morphology remained unchanged, while PAFr and UBI levels were reduced substantially. (E) Curves representing PAFr and UBI histograms from panels A–D. Note the reduction of PAFr and ubiquitin content in bull #219 after treatment for inflammation and recollection (sample #219rec).

 
Western Blotting

Pellets of ejaculated spermatozoa were collected as described above, and motile sperm fraction was separated on a discontinuous 45/90% Percoll gradient. Testicular and caput, corpus, and cauda epididymal spermatozoa were collected by mincing of appropriate tissues and separated from other cell types on 45/90% Percoll gradient. Sperm proteins were extracted by adding sample extraction buffer (50 mmol Tris HCL, 1 mol NaCl, 20 mmol imidazole, 1 mmol ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid [EDTA], and 5 mmol benzamidine; pH 6.0) supplemented with Protease Inhibitor Cocktail (Sigma), PMSF and 10% TX-100. The extraction buffer was added to the sperm sample at 1:1 and ground for 5 minutes using a pestle attached to a 9.6-V Black and Decker electric drill. Samples were centrifuged in a refrigerated Sorvall Fresco Biofuge centrifuge at 4°C at 16 000 x g for 60 minutes. The protein loads were standardized by using the Bradford protein estimation assay (Bio-Rad Protein Assay kit; Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, Calif) measured at 595 nm wavelength absorbance. All samples were adjusted to an equal final protein concentration by dilution using a 2x loading buffer (2% SDS, 10% glycerin, 0.0125% bromephenol blue, 5% beta mercaptoethanol, 62.5 mmol Tris-HCl; pH 6.8) and distilled water. Samples were boiled in a hot water bath for 3 minutes and resolved by electrophoresis on a 10% Tris-glycine polyacrylamide gel (Cambrex Bio Science Rockland, Inc, Rockland, Me) using 6 µg of protein in each lane. Ten microliters of Prosieve Color Protein Marker (Cambrex Bio Science Rockland) were added as the molecular weight marker. After 1 hour of electrophoresis, the proteins were transferred to a polyvinylidene fluoride membrane (Immobilin-P Transfer Membranes, Millipore Corp, Bedford, Mass) using a wet transfer system (Owl Scientific, Inc, Woburn, Mass). The membranes were sequentially incubated with 10% nonfat milk (1 hour), rabbit anti-PAFr serum (1/2000 dilution, overnight), HRP-conjugated goat anti-rabbit antibody (1/10 000 dilution, 1 hour), and chemiluminescence substrate (SuperSignal, Pierce, Rockford, Ill). Membranes were used to expose Kodak BioMax Light Film, developed by using the Kodak M35A X-OMAT processor. Images of films were captured by the Kodak DC 290 camera. Image analysis was performed by Kodak 1D Image Analysis software (Kodak Scientific Imaging Systems, New Haven, Conn). Negative controls were performed by the substitution of anti-PAFr serum for a nonimmune rabbit serum.


Figure 2
View larger version (44K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 2. Scatter diagrams illustrating the relationship between semen PAFr, ubiquitin, and selected parameters of reproductive soundness measured during BSE. (A) A near-linear relationship between the percentage of PAFr-positive cells from trial 1 and trial 2 demonstrates the repeatability of the assay. (B) A similar relationship was observed between PAFr median values from trials 1 and 2. (C) Positive correlation between the percentage PAFr-positive cells and UBI-positive cells in trial 2. (D–F) Moderate negative correlation was found between percentage of normal sperm morphology by conventional semen analysis and percentage of PAFr and UBI-positive cells by flow cytometric evaluation. (G–I) Low correlation was observed between sperm motility and PAFr or UBI values. (J–L) Scrotal circumference showed low correlation with sperm motility, conventional sperm morphology, and flow cytometric PAFr and UBI levels. (M–O) Sperm concentration showed a negative correlation with percentage of PAFr–positive cells in trial 1 but not in trial 2, where the cells with medium-levels of PAFr and UBI seemed to show highest concentrations.

 
Experimental Design

Two trials were performed. The first trial measured PAFr only after detection with a green-fluorescent, FITC-conjugated second antibody. Second trial measured both PAFr (detected with FITC-conjugated secondary antibody) and ubiquitin in a dual flow cytometric assay. In the second trial, we detected ubiquitin with a red-fluorescent, TRITC-conjugated secondary antibody. Measuring PAFr in 2 independent trials allowed us to make correlations between PAFr levels in the first and second trials for a subset of samples that overlapped between these respective trials (n = 84). In trial 2, we detected the binding of mouse monoclonal anti-UBI antibody concomitantly with PAFr detection by using a green-fluorescent, FITC-conjugated anti-mouse IgG. Single-channel flow cytometric analysis was performed for PAFr alone in trial 1, and dual flow cytometric analysis was used to assess the relationship between PAFr and UBI in trial 2. Two flow cytometric measures were used in the analysis. First, the overall median fluorescence of the whole semen sample (10 000 measured cells per sample), induced by the detection of fluorescently labeled anti-PAFr and anti UBI antibodies. These values will be referred to as PAFR-median and UBI-median. Second, the histograms of the 10 000 measured cells in each sample were arbitrarily divided by 2 markers into low- (marker M1) and high-fluorescence (marker M2) cells, corresponding to cells with low and high content of PAFr or UBI (Figure 1). These values will be referred to as percentage of PAFr or UBI-positive cells (%M2-PAFr and %M2-Ubiquitin, respectively). Dual analysis in trial 2 allowed us to determine a correlation between semen content of PAFr and UBI, as well as between PAFr/UBI and various conventional semen and BSE parameters (Figure 2).


   Results
 Top
 Abstract
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Flow Cytometric Analysis

Both PAFr and UBI medians and %M2-values PAFr and UBI were initially evaluated within subgroups divided based on selected BSE parameters. As an additional parameter, the percentage of morphologically normal spermatozoa (further referred to as "normal sperm morphology") was evaluated to compare the informative value of objective markers with that of a subjective light microscopic semen evaluation. By palpation result, the lowest PAFr levels in both trials were recorded in group 1 ("excellent" palpation result), and increased PAFr levels were present in groups 2–4 (Tables 1A and 2A). Some of the PAFr differences were statistically significant (Table 1A). Significant reduction in normal sperm morphology and numerically increased UBI-levels accompanied the changes in PAFr levels in the second trial (Table 2A).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 1. Average relative levels and standard errors of PAFr measurements in 156 yearling bulls from trial 1*
 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 2. Average relative levels and standard errors of PAFr and ubiquitin (Ubi) measurements in 88 yearling bulls from trial 2*
 

Related to palpation results, the content of WBC was also evaluated and used to subdivide the bulls into 5 groups, ranging from those with no WBC (group 0) to those with large masses of amorphous debris and WBC clumps (group 4). Data were compared among all groups and between group 0 (no WBC) and combined groups 1–4 (WBC present). Both UBI and PAFr levels increased proportionally to the increased content of WBC (Tables 1B and 2B). The increases in PAFr (P = .03 in the first trial) and ubiquitin content (P = .03 in second trial) were statistically significant, while no significant differences between these groups were seen for sperm morphology. Consequently, there were few significant differences in PAFr and UBI levels among the 3 groups of bulls divided based on subjective sperm morphology (Tables 1C and 2C).

Based on motility division (70% motile sperm margin), a numerical increase in PAFr levels but a reduction in UBI levels was observed among semen samples with lesser sperm motility (Tables 1D and 2D). This reduced UBI measurement was attributable to the increased presence of a large proportion of UBI-negative WBC in samples with lesser motility, as discussed below. There was a statistically significant reduction in normal sperm morphology in samples with low motility in both trials (Tables 1D and 2D).

Measured scrotal circumference (SC) was compared with the expected SC based on body weight, and bulls were divided into 2 groups (acceptable SC and not acceptable SC). Both PAFr and UBI (Tables 1E and 2E) levels were increased in bulls with unacceptable SC. The increase in sperm ubiquitin levels was statistically significant (Table 2E). Surprisingly, normal morphology was slightly better in the bulls with unacceptable SC (Tables 1E and 2E).

The overall satisfaction of evaluation (Tables 1F and 2F; 1 = satisfactory, 2 = not satisfactory, 3 = marginal) favored bulls with high percentage of normal morphology, one of the major parameters impacting this categorization, while the PAFr and UBI measurements were numerically increased in the "marginal" group 3. Altogether, our data revealed that a measurable relationship exists between semen PAFr and UBI content in yearling bulls (Figure 1).

Correlation Analysis

Two trials were performed with some overlapping and some unique samples; the high degree of correlation between PAFr measurements of the overlapping subgroup (n = 84) in trial 1 and 2 (r = .71) illustrates the repeatability of assay. Breed effects were not assessed, since 186/273 bulls were Angus. The other 9 breeds were represented disproportionately (2–34 bulls/breed). Extensive statistical analysis was conducted to compare the informative value of flow cytometric PAFr and UBI measurements with the value of conventional semen and BSE workup. Analyses were conducted for all screened animals divided by semen WBC content (Table 3), palpation results (Table 4), and satisfaction of evaluation (Table 5). The most significant correlations are depicted in Figure 2. We have found a close correlation between PAFr measurements between Trials 1 and 2, demonstrating the repeatability of the assay (Figure 2A and B). A positive correlation between the percentage PAFr-positive cells and UBI-positive cells in trial 2 indicated higher incidence of ubiquitinated, defective spermatozoa in poor-quality semen samples with high PAFr content (Figure 2C). Only a moderate negative correlation was found between percentage normal sperm morphology by conventional semen analysis and percentage PAFr/UBI positive cells by flow cytometric evaluation (Figure 2D through F). This can be explained by the known shortcoming of conventional sperm morphology. Frequently, the ubiquitinated spermatozoa carry hidden defects (eg, sperm DNA fragmentation; Sutovsky et al, 2002) and appear to be morphologically normal in conventional sperm morphology analysis. Low correlation was also observed between sperm motility and PAFr/UBI values (Figure 2G through I). Sperm motility was the only semen characteristic that showed a substantial positive correlation with percentage of morphologically normal spermatozoa in conventional analysis (r = .53; Table 4, all groups), suggesting that conventional sperm morphology evaluation was confounded with sperm damage introduced by sample processing. SC, thought to be related to fertility, showed low correlation with sperm motility, conventional sperm morphology, and flow cytometric PAFr/UBI levels (Figure 2J through L). Sperm concentration showed a negative correlation with percentage of PAFr–positive cells in trial 1 but not in trial 2, where the cells with medium-levels of PAFr and UBI seemed to show highest concentrations (Figure 2M through O). Overall a high degree of statistical correlation (r = .79 for all 88 bulls in trial 2) was observed between semen content of PAFr and UBI (Table 6).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 3. Correlation analysis of all samples from both trials divided based on WBC classification*
 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 4. Correlation analysis of all samples from both trials divided based on palpation result*
 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 5. Correlation analysis of all samples from both trials divided based on satisfaction of evaluation*
 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 6. Relationship between PAFr and UBI in various subgroups of Trial 2*
 

Immunofluorescence Analysis

Most morphologically normal spermatozoa displayed a distinct labeling with anti-PAFr antibodies in the postacrosomal sheath of the sperm head and in the principal piece of the sperm tail (Figure 3A–A''). A reduced immunoreactivity to anti-PAFr antibodies was observed in the defective spermatozoa immunoreactive to anti-UBI antibodies (Figure 3A–A''). Frequently, clusters of UBI-coated spermatozoa were observed (Figure 3B and C). While we initially expected that semen samples with high leukocyte content and poor sperm morphology would display high UBI and low PAFr levels, there was a strong positive correlation between ubiquitin and PAFr in flow cytometric analysis. This discrepancy was reconciled by immunofluorescence analysis revealing high expression of PAFr on the surface of a subpopulation of leukocytes (Figure 3D and E), which were common semen contaminants in bulls from palpation groups 2–4 with poor sperm morphology and semen quality. This is consistent with previous finding that platelets, monocytes, neuthrophils, and B-cells, but not the resting T-cells and natural killer cells, express PAFr (Muller et al, 1993). Neither PAFr nor UBI labeling were detected in negative control samples processed with nonimmune rabbit and mouse sera and appropriate secondary antibodies and fluorochromes (Figure 3F). The presence of ubiquitinated spermatozoa and PAFr-expressing WBC varied greatly among individual sires (Figure 4). Altogether, the findings obtained by immunofluorescence microscopy corroborated the flow cytometric measurements (compare Figure 1 and Figure 3).


Figure 3
View larger version (88K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 3. Colocalization of PAFr (red) and ubiquitin (green) in bull spermatozoa and semen-contaminating WBC. DNA was counterstained with DAPI (blue). Epifluorescence images were superimposed on parfocal differential interference contrast (DIC) images (gray). (A–A'') Epifluorescence channel separation series shows the presence of PAFr in the sperm head postacrosomal sheath and sperm tail principal piece of morphologically normal spermatozoa. Reduced PAFr expression is seen in a presumed defective spermatozoon on extreme right side which shows intense ubiquitin labeling despite displaying normal morphology. (B) Clustering of amorphous cellular debris with normal and defective spermatozoa. (C) Clustering of defective, ubiquitin-containing spermatozoa. (D) Detection of PAFr in some, but not all, of the WBC types found in semen. (E) Clustering of normal and defective spermatozoa with WBC. Note that WBC in panels D and E do not show high expression of ubiquitin. Such cells may lower the overall reading of UBI in semen samples with high WBC content. (F) Negative control spermatozoa incubated with nonimmune mouse and rabbit sera followed by appropriate secondary antibodies.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (99K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 4. Colocalization of PAFr (center column) and ubiquitin (right column) in bull spermatozoa and semen-contaminating WBC in bulls with varied sperm morphology, revealed by DIC microscopy (left column). (A) Bull with excellent sperm morphology, and low PAFr and UBI levels. Data from this sample are also shown in Figure 1A. (B) Bull with average-to-good sperm morphology and PAFr/UBI levels. (C) Recollected bull semen sample corresponding to sample depicted in Figure 1D. Note that many seemingly morphologically normal spermatozoa show an intense UBI-labeling. (D) Bull with poor sperm morphology (60%) and increased PAFr levels. Presence of UBI-negative WBC caused a reduced flow cytometric value of UBI median, despite the fact that many UBI-positive spermatozoa were present. (E) Bull with poor sperm morphology, high PAFr/ubiquitin readings, and presence of amorphous debris in the ejaculate. (F) Bull with extremely poor sperm morphology by conventional semen analysis, paralleled by high content of WBC and high values of PAFr and UBI medians in flow cytometric assay.

 
Western Blotting

By Western blotting, the PAFr antibody recognized the appropriate single band of approximately 52 kd corresponding to molecular mass of a mature glycosylated PAFr molecule (Yang et al, 2001) in the ejaculated spermatozoa (Figure 5A). In contrast, bands of higher molecular mass, probably reflective of posttranslational modification and processing of PAFr, were predominantly observed in testicular and epididymal sperm protein extracts (Figure 5B). Since these preparations were separated on Percoll gradients, the presumed sperm PAFr-protein bands were not likely to be contributed by contaminating WBC, erythrocytes, testicular cells, or epididymal epithelial cells.


Figure 5
View larger version (81K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Figure 5. Western blotting of bull sperm protein extracts with a peptide-specific anti-PAFr antibody. (A) Motile sperm fraction extracted from ejaculated bull spermatozoa on Percoll gradient shows a single band of appropriate molecular mass (lane 1), while no bands are seen in extracts probed with a nonimmune rabbit serum (lane 2). (B) Sperm extracts of spermatozoa purified on Percoll gradient from testis (lane 1) and caput (lane 2) and cauda epididymis (lane 3). Migration of the PAFr bands above 70 kd suggests that PAFr may be posttranslationally modified as it is inserted in the sperm plasma membrane in the testis or when spermatozoa undergo maturation during epididymal passage. Protein loads in all samples were standardized by Bradford assay, and contaminating WBC and epithelial cells were eliminated prior to protein extraction by Percoll gradient separation.

 

   Discussion
 Top
 Abstract
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Our previous studies correlated the increased semen content of proteolytic marker ubiquitin with poor sperm morphology and reduced fertility (reviewed by Baska and Sutovsky 2005). We have hypothesized that posttranslational modification of defective sperm surface by covalent ligation of multiubiquitin chains to sperm surface proteins, a process termed ubiquitination, will hinder the expression of sperm surface proteins associated with normal sperm function, in this case the PAFr. We have found that in immunocytochemical sperm analysis, the UBI-immunoreactive spermatozoa indeed displayed reduced immunoreactivity to antibodies recognizing PAFr. However, the relationship between semen content of PAFr and UBI was confounded significantly by elevated PAFr expression in the WBC, found as a significant semen contaminant in approximately 37% of evaluated animals. Our findings are discussed in the context of breeding soundness evaluation in yearling bulls. The purpose of BSE is to identify yearling bulls suitable for sale to customers with intent to breed. Conversely, only the yearlings with major reproductive disorders or gonadal abnormalities are eliminated. In our 2003 trial, only 35 yearlings (14%) were eliminated from the total evaluated pool of 246 bulls based on the findings of BSE. As such, BSE provides somewhat limited information on semen quality of yearling bulls that pass. However, as we will discuss below, the semen analysis component of BSE could be improved substantially by automated semen evaluation adjusted for unique properties of immature yearling semen, such as high content of WBC and high content of immature spermatozoa.

The present study identifies the WBC content as a major factor in the semen quality evaluation during BSE. While WBC content was reflected by the increased relative content of PAFr in semen, it had no effect on sperm morphology evaluated by conventional light microscopic analysis (Tables 1B and 2B). In contrast, semen samples with low WBC content showed a statistically significant reduction in semen UBI content, indicating the potential value of UBI-based semen evaluation for BSE. We attribute this discrepancy between light microscopic sperm morphology and sperm UBI measurements to the fact that anti-UBI antibodies bind to visibly anomalous spermatozoa as well as to spermatozoa that are seemingly normal by conventional light microscopic evaluation standards, but may carry intrinsic defects such as post-apoptotic or necrotic nuclear DNA-fragmentation (Sutovsky et al, 2002). In our dual immunofluorescence analysis, the ubiquitinated spermatozoa often lack visible morphological anomalies but display a reduced immunoreactivity to anti-PAFr antibodies (eg, Figure 3A-A").

The only parameter that showed substantial correlation with percentage of morphologically normal spermatozoa was sperm motility. Motility is perhaps the least informative semen characteristic with regard to semen quality and fertility in humans and farm animals, due mainly to a rapid motility decline after sample isolation and during sample processing for analysis (Drobnis, 1992; Eliasson, 1981). The fact that motility and morphology correlated positively in the present trial could be explained by high incidence of secondary sperm defects, such as sperm tail coiling, that are not necessarily reflective of primary sperm abnormalities generated by deviant spermatogenesis. Sperm tail coiling is rather an effect of cold shock and/or mixing of sperm with WBC-containing seminal plasma components contributed by sex accessory glands. In contrast, the levels of sperm surface expression of UBI are established in the individual cells during epididymal sperm maturation and thus are not altered by semen handling and processing technique.

In chute-side evaluation of trial 1 (Table 1F), only 21/156 bulls were identified as unsatisfactory, and 8/156 bulls were identified as marginal. In trial 2 (Table 2F), only 6/88 and 4/88 bulls were identified as unsatisfactory and marginal, respectively. While these bulls showed greater variability in the levels of PAFr, the average UBI values were not significantly different from the "satisfactory" group. This is most likely due to the fact that this category was greatly affected by the outcome of conventional light microscopic semen analysis, which will reliably account for the presence of WBC but likely miss many of the ubiquitinated spermatozoa without obvious morphological defects. We recorded a number of bulls with acceptable sperm morphology and field analysis criteria, but increased ubiquitin immunoreactivity.

Comparison of Figure 1C and D illustrates how antibiotic treatment reduced semen levels of both PAFr and UBI in a bull treated for inflammation without changing the percentage of morphologically normal spermatozoa that can be captured by conventional semen analysis. Bulls were further divided into 4 groups by scrotal palpation test, in which mean UBI and PAFR levels were elevated in groups 3 and 4 with pathological finding, as compared to groups 1 and 2 with excellent or good palpation result (Table 2A). This observation is not surprising, as the poor palpation result indicates inflammation and coincides with increased presence of WBC in semen. Inflammation will likely affect sperm maturation in the epididymis, a stage at which surface ubiquitination occurs in the defective spermatozoa (Sutovsky et al, 2001a). Ubiquitin indeed showed a robust negative correlation with sperm count and percentage normal morphology in groups 1 and 2 (Table 3).

Our data on expression of PAFr in both WBC and spermatozoa illustrate the complexity of objective semen evaluation based on protein markers not unique to male gametes. In this case, high expression of PAFr on WBC surface could have resulted in mistaken proclamation of high semen quality in young bulls which actually suffered from reproductive tract inflammation. Without the additional parameter of UBI expression, the value of PAFr as a fertility marker could also have been misinterpreted. It is thus likely that assays most useful for a large-scale objective semen analysis will have to screen concomitantly for more than 1 marker.

In summary, the present study shows that sperm WBC content in yearling bulls correlates with increased sperm PAFr and UBI content, but not with the results of a conventional sperm morphology analysis. It will be desirable to factor the WBC parameter into BSE determinations and to further develop objective semen quality assays that will distinguish between fertility marker expression in spermatozoa versus WBC. High UBI expression and poor sperm morphology correlate with reduced PAFr expression in bull spermatozoa alone, while high PAFr expression in semen contaminating WBC may reduce the value of PAFr as a lone fertility marker in young bulls. Dual PAFr-UBI semen analysis may provide more accurate fertility evaluation than the chute-side morphology-based system. We concluded that both the increased presence of ubiquitin and PAFr are indicators of poor semen quality and, if properly applied, could be useful as markers for automated bull semen analysis and breeding soundness evaluation. In general, UBI is a stronger indicator of sperm quality than PAFr, while PAFr is indicative of semen contamination with leukocytes. Leukocyte presence in semen of yearlings greatly affects the outcome of semen evaluation during BSE. Both conventional and automated semen evaluation could be more productive at a later age. Dual analysis could be further improved by combining the measurement of ubiquitin and PAFr fluorescence with DNA stains that will allow determining DNA content and ploidy of each measured cell, to assess separately the expression of PAFr and UBI in diploid contaminating WBC and haploid spermatozoa. Overall, sperm morphology and motility evaluation during BSE may be of limited value and could be replaced by semen marker-based analysis in the future.


   Acknowledgments
 
We thank Nicole Leitman for technical assistance and Kathryn Craighead for clerical assistance and manuscript editing.


   Footnotes
 
Supported by National Research Initiative Competitive Grant 2002-35203-12237 from the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (P.S.). Seed funding to P.S. was provided by the Food for the 21st Century Program of the University of Missouri-Columbia. Partial funding for this project has been made available by the California State University Agriculture Research Initiative (W.P.) and South Carolina Pork Producers Association (J.R.D.).


   References
 Top
 Abstract
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Angle MJ, Tom R, Jarvi K, McClure RD. Effect of platelet-activating factor (PAF) on human spermatozoa-oocyte interactions. J Reprod Fertil. 1993;98: 541 –548.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Ballachey BE, Hohenboken WD, Evenson DP. Heterogeneity of sperm nuclear chromatin structure and its relationship to bull fertility. Biol Reprod. 1987; 36: 915 –925.[Abstract]

Baska KM, Sutovsky P. Protein modification by ubiquitination and its consequences for spermatogenesis, sperm maturation, fertilization, and pre-implantation embryonic development. In: Tokumoto T, ed. New Impact on Protein Modifications in the Regulation of Reproductive System. Kerala: Research Signpost; 2005; 83 –114.

Bellin ME, Oyarzo JN, Hawkins HE, Zhang H, Smith RG, Forrest DW, Sprott LR, Ax RL. Fertility-associated antigen on bull sperm indicates fertility potential. J Anim Sci. 1998; 76: 2032 –2039.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Chenoweth P. Beyond Bull Breeding Soundness Evaluations (BSEs). In: Proceedings, Applied Reproductive Strategies in Beef Cattle; North Platte, NE; Sep. 1–2, 2004. Lincoln: University of Nebraska; 2004; 161 –171.

Chenoweth PJ, Spitzer JC, Hopkins F. A new bull breeding soundness evaluation form. In: Proceedings of the Society for Theriogenology. Jacksonville, Florida; 1993; 63 –68.

Douglas-Hamilton DH. Validation procedures for the Hamilton Thorne Integrated Visual Optical System sperm and cell analyzer. Qual Assur. 1995;4: 340 –347.[Medline]

Drobnis EZ. Capacitation and the acrosome reaction. In: Scialli AR, Zinaman MJ eds. Fertility and Reproductive Failure. New York: Pergamon Press; 1992; 77 –132.

Eliasson R. Analysis of semen. Burger H, de Kretser D, eds. The Testis . New York: Raven Press; 1981; 381 –399.

Hermo L, Jacks D. Nature's ingenuity: bypassing the classical secretory route via apocrine secretion. Mol Reprod Dev. 2002;63: 394 –410.[CrossRef][Medline]

Hershko A, Ciechanover A. The ubiquitin system. Annu Rev Biochem. 1998;67: 425 –479.[CrossRef][Medline]

Honda Z, Nakamura M, Miki I, Minami M, Watanabe T, Seyama Y, Okado H, Toh H, Ito K, Miyamoto T, Shimizu T. Cloning by functional expression of platelet-activating factor receptor from guinea-pig lung. Nature. 1991;349: 342 –346.[CrossRef][Medline]

Ishii S, Shimizu T. Platelet-activating factor (PAF) receptor and genetically engineered PAF receptor mutant mice. Prog Lipid Res. 2000;39: 41 –82.[CrossRef][Medline]

Jones R. Sperm survival versus degradation in the mammalian epididymis: a hypothesis. Biol Reprod. 2004; 71: 1405 –1411.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Kuzan FB, Geissler FT, Henderson WR Jr. Role of spermatozoal platelet-activating factor in fertilization. Prostaglandins. 1990; 39: 61 –74.[CrossRef][Medline]

Lippert TH, Seeger H, Schieferstein G, Voelter W. Immunoreactive ubiquitin in human seminal plasma. J Androl. 1993; 14: 130 –131.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Lovercamp KW, Van Leyen K, Safranski TJ, Fischer KA, Manandhar G, Sutovsky M, Herring W, Sutovsky P. Arachidonate 15-lipoxygenase and ubiquitin as putative fertility markers in boars. Theriogenology. In press.

Minhas BS, Kumar R, Ricker DD, Robertson JL, Dodson MG. The presence of platelet-activating factor-like activity in human spermatozoa. Fertil Steril. 1991; 55: 372 –376.[Medline]

Olson GE, Winfrey VP, NagDas SK, Melner MH. Region-specific expression and secretion of the fibrinogen-related protein, fgl2, by epithelial cells of the hamster epididymis and its role in disposal of defective spermatozoa. J Biol Chem. 2004; 279: 51266 –51274.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Pickart CM. Polyubiquitin chains. In: Peters J-M, Harris JR, Finley D, eds. Ubiquitin and the Biology of the Cell. New York: Plenum Press; 1998; 19 –63.

Reinhardt JC, Cui X, Roudebush WE. Immunofluorescent evidence of the platelet-activating factor receptor on human spermatozoa. Fertil Steril. 1999; 71: 941 –942.[CrossRef][Medline]

Roudebush WE, Diehl JR. Platelet-activating factor content in boar spermatozoa correlates with fertility. Theriogenology. 2001; 55: 1633 –1638.[CrossRef][Medline]

Roudebush WE, Wild MD, Maguire EH. Expression of the platelet-activating factor receptor in human spermatozoa: differences in messenger ribonucleic acid content and protein distribution between normal and abnormal spermatozoa. Fertil Steril. 2000; 73: 967 –971.[CrossRef][Medline]

Santamaria L, Martin R, Paniagua R, Fraile B, Nistal M, Terenghi G, Polak JM. Protein gene product 9.5 and ubiquitin immunoreactivities in rat epididymis epithelium. Histochemistry. 1993; 100: 131 –138.[CrossRef][Medline]

Stojanov T, O'Neill C. Ontogeny of expression of a receptor for platelet-activating factor in mouse preimplantation embryos and the effects of fertilization and culture in vitro on its expression. Biol Reprod. 1999;60: 674 –682.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Strous GJ, Govers R. The ubiquitin-proteasome system and endocytosis. J Cell Sci. 1999; 112: 1417 –1423.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Sutovsky P, Geary T, Baska KM, Manandhar G, Feng D, Lovercamp KW, Sutovsky M. Ubiquitin as an objective marker of semen quality and fertility in bulls. In: Proceedings, Applied Reproductive Strategies in Beef Cattle; North Platte, NE; Sep. 1–2, 2004. Lincoln: University of Nebraska. 2004; 173 –183.

Sutovsky P, Moreno R, Ramalho-Santos J, Dominko T, Thompson WE, Schatten G. A putative, ubiquitin-dependent mechanism for the recognition and elimination of defective spermatozoa in the mammalian epididymis. J Cell Sci. 2001a;114: 1665 –1675.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Sutovsky P, Neuber E, Schatten G. Ubiquitin-dependent sperm quality control mechanism recognizes spermatozoa with DNA defects as revealed by dual ubiquitin-TUNEL assay. Mol Reprod Dev. 2002; 61: 406 –413.[CrossRef][Medline]

Sutovsky P, Terada Y, Schatten G. Ubiquitin-based sperm assay for the diagnosis of male factor infertility. Hum Reprod. 2001b; 16: 250 –258.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Sutovsky P, Turner RM, Hameed S, Sutovsky M. Differential ubiquitination of stallion sperm proteins: possible implications for infertility and reproductive seasonality. Biol Reprod. 2003; 68: 688 –698.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Tiemann U, Tomek W, Schneider F, Wollenhaupt K, Kanitz W, Becker F, Pöhland R, Alm H. Platelet-activating factor (PAF)-like activity, localization of PAF receptor (PAF-R) and PAF-acetylhydrolase (PAF-AH) activity in bovine endometrium at different stages of the estrous cycle and early pregnancy*. Prostaglandins. 2001; 65: 125 –141.[Medline]

Yang W, Diehl JR, Grapes L, Rothschild MF, Roudebush WE. The pig platelet-activating factor receptor gene is expressed at the mRNA level in different tissues and is mapped to chromosome 6. Anim Reprod Sci. 2002;70: 277 –282.[CrossRef][Medline]




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ReproductionHome page
P. Sarradin, S. Melo, C. Barc, C. Lecomte, O. Andreoletti, F. Lantier, J.-L. Dacheux, and J.-L. Gatti
Semen from scrapie-infected rams does not transmit prion infection to transgenic mice
Reproduction, March 1, 2008; 135(3): 415 - 418.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
28/1/92    most recent
Author Manuscript (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sutovsky, P.
Right arrow Articles by Sutovsky, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sutovsky, P.
Right arrow Articles by Sutovsky, M.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS