Journal of Andrology Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on the Epididymis
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Published-Ahead-of-Print July 29, 2010, DOI:10.2164/jandrol.109.008870
Journal of Andrology, Vol. 32, No. 1, January/February 2011
Copyright © American Society of Andrology
DOI: 10.2164/jandrol.109.008870

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
32/1/2    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 Berndtson, W. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Berndtson, W. E.

Review

The Importance and Validity of Technical Assumptions Required for Quantifying Sperm Production Rates: A Review

WILLIAM E. BERNDTSON

From the Department of Biological Sciences, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire.

Correspondence to: Dr William Berndtson, Department of Biological Sciences, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824 (e-mail: bill.berndtson{at}unh.edu).



Abstract

All approaches for quantifying treatment effects on sperm production require one or more technical assumptions. Their validity can impact the integrity of the resulting data, but most had not been subjected to thorough, critical examination. This review was undertaken to 1) identify the assumptions required with each of several popular histometric methods for quantifying treatment effects on sperm production, 2) cite examples in which each assumption had failed, 3) assess potential consequences of the failure of each technical assumption, and 4) consider safeguards by which one might avoid misleading outcomes in the event that a specific assumption did not hold.

     Key words: Spermatogenesis, testis, histometric evaluation




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J AndrolHome page
W. E. Berndtson
Replication Needed to Distinguish Alterations in Cell Ratios, the Frequency of Individual Stages of the Cycle of the Seminiferous Epithelium, or the Appearance of Abnormalities in the Testes of Rodents, Rabbits, or Humans
J Androl, November 1, 2010; 31(6): 593 - 606.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J AndrolHome page
W. E. Berndtson
Replication Needed to Detect Alterations in the Composition of Rodent, Rabbit, or Human Testes via Volume Density Approaches
J Androl, November 1, 2010; 31(6): 607 - 616.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2011 by The American Society of Andrology.