Sperm RNA: a New Class of Fertility Biomarkers for Birds

Chathathayil Muhammedali Shafeeque¹, Sanjeev Kumar Sharma², Kochiganti Venkata Hanumat Sastry², Jag Mohan², Ram Pratap Singh^1*

*Corresponding author: [email protected]

ARTICLE CITATION: Shafeeque CM, Sharma SK, Sastry KVH, Mohan J, Singh RP (2014). Sperm RNA: a new class of fertility biomarkers for birds. Adv. Anim. Vet. Sci. 2 (3): 155 – 158.
Received: 2014–01–23, Revised: 2014–02–11, Accepted: 2014–02–13
The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at ( http://dx.doi.org/10.14737/journal.aavs/2014/2.3.155.158 ) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited

ABSTRACT

Leeuwenhoek discovered and named spermatozoa but could not convince the scientific world the potentiality of the sperm. Similarly, transcriptionally quiescent genetic material was marked by a state of tranquil among researchers until the breakthrough of RNA transcript residing inside the sperm. Even though, queries and enigmas highlight throughout sperm research, most reports favor us in thinking about role of these transcripts in fertilization and early embryonic development. Many sperm transcripts have been confirmed as bio–fertility marker in human and other mammalian specie. With this review, we are attempting to summarize spermatozoal work conducted so far in other vertebrate classes and thus representing a potential to serve as bio–fertility marker through such a non–invasive approach in birds.

INTRODUCTION

Among all the bird species, poultry, the descendent of jungle fowl has the proud history as food animal for serving mankind and also as a model species for research. The modern chicken has evolved through conventional breeding which has dramatically increased the body weight. However, this long term selection for body weight has resulted in decreased fertility rate because of impaired metabolic processes (Hockins et al., 1989). In addition to this, environmental exposures including chemical, thermal and biological agents pose serious threats to reproductive success in both poultry and wild birds.
Male fertility requires the production of an adequate number of normal mature spermatozoa with sufficient motility and the ability to undergo acrosome reaction in order to bind and penetrate the egg membrane for fertilization. Defects in any of these necessary characteristics can lead to male infertility. Therefore, selection of high fertility potential males could be beneficial for poultry breeding and captive breeding programmes of wild birds. Till date only phenotypic traits viz. comb area, testicular weight and semen characteristics are considered for male selection (McGary et al., 2002). Another method of male selection is based on physical and biochemical characterization of semen viz. visualization of sperm motility, semen colour, ejaculate volume, sperm concentration, sperm metabolism and enzymes (Froman et al., 2007). Further, many of these semen tests evaluate a single characteristic of sperm and do not account for the complex process of fertility. The phenotypic traits are not promising and do not guarantee higher male fertility. Hence, unsuitability of above conventional methods for fertility evaluation inspires scientists to explore the reliable sperm based fertility biomarkers.
Recent interest in spermatic RNA has been motivated by the potential which may offer as a diagnostic tool for infertility as evident in human and other mammalian species (Johnson et al., 2011). Transcriptionally silent sperm is thought to comprise genetic material ‘DNA’ alone and sperm is simply a mediator carries this to the egg. The role of paternal genome in fertilization was not given much importance until the breakthrough of transcript population of about 10–20 fg as mRNA and small non–coding RNA (snc RNA) of varying length in sperm. Different researchers have their own opinion about origin of the traces of these spermatozoal transcripts in a transcriptionally quiescent sperm cell; Kramer and Krawetz (1997) proposed those as remnant untranslated RNAs during spermatogenesis, and are strongly appreciated after observing same spermatozoan transcript in both testes. Uncovering of spermatozoal RNA transcripts and their probable role in poultry and other bird species as already stated among other vertebrates (Goodrich et al., 2007; Gilbert et al., 2007; Lalancette et al., 2008; Yang et al., 2009; Das et al., 2010) may provide important breakthrough in identifying fertility biomarkers. In this review, we discuss the possibilities of using sperm RNAs as fertility / infertility biomarkers based on the available literature for mammalian and other species because few reports are available on this particular subject on chicken sperm.

SPERM RESEARCH AT A GLANCE

The presence of sperm in semen was first termed as parasitic animal, and thereafter the term spermatozoa were coined (Ruestow 1983). Leeuwenhoek then compared sperm as “seed” which implanted in nutrient soil so called “egg”. Later his co–discoverer Nicolas Hartsoeker drew the picture of “homunculus” within human sperm (Pinto–correia, 1997). Unfortunately these works couldn’t convince science at earlier times and implied these particles as an enormous waste of potential life. However, with subsequent advancement in sperm research the most remarkable achievement in the field of sperm biology happened during the 21st century when functional spermatozoa were raised from bone marrow stem cell (Nayernia, 2006) and the role of sperm RNAs in fertilization and post fertilization was discovered. Before 21st century, it was assumed that sperm facilitate only paternal genome to the egg at the time of fertilization. However, with the advancement in sperm biology research, we now know that sperm not only carry paternal genome but also deliver a variety of RNAs to the egg at the time of fertilization, and those RNAs have specific functions in the fertilization and early embryonic developmental process thereby serving as a diagnostic tool for fertility/ infertility (Johnson et al., 2011).

MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES AND PACKAGING OF SPERM

Spermiogenesis is a unique process in cytodifferentiation without any further cell division. It is considered as an integral and important part of spermatogenesis in animals. Chicken spermiogenesis constitutes various actions to process round spermatid to an elongated acrosome, stretched mitochondria and slimmer nucleus bearing spermatozoa (Lake, 1956; Nagano, 1962; McIntosh and Porter, 1967; Okamura and Nishiyama, 1976). Where morphology is concerned, chicken sperm are vermiform cells with a maximum width of 0.5–0.7 µm and length of 75–90 µm (Gunawardna and Scott, 1977). They contain a conical acrosome, a slightly bend cylindrical nucleus which extend posteriorly from acrosome to neck region and a helix of 25–30 mitochondria that extends back to annulus, surrounding proximal portion of long flagellum, which account for approximately 84% of the cell’s length (Thurston and Hess, 1987).
The maturation from spermatid to spermatozoa delivers not only changes in sperm morphology but also several changes in chromatin structure and function. During chromatin remodeling most somatic histones are replaced by DNA packaging proteins that are specific for germ lines (Caron et al., 2005). Even though the chromatin structure in the sperm nucleus is similar to those somatic cells, organization and packaging is based on looped domains attached at their bases to the nuclear matrix (Ward, 2010). Process of packaging involves various molecular interactions, namely, DNA–DNA, DNA–histone and protein–protein interactions (Roux et al., 2004). A study depicts 85% nucleoprotamines associated with sperm chromatin of mice (Adham et al., 2001), which shows the role of this arginine rich basic protein in packaging. It is thought that sperm packaging is a conserved process among the species mainly because of two reasons: 1) similarity in proteomic sequence of protamine (Nakano et al., 1976, Olivia and Dixon, 1988); and 2) sperm nucleohistones are replaced with nucleoprotamine in many species (Chiva et al., 1987). Fowl protamine is particularly interesting among the vertebrate due to its content of serine residue, possibly which could regulate through reversible post–transcriptional modification such as enzymatic phosphorylation and de–phosphorylation of serine in vivo (Louie and Dixon, 1972).

ROLE OF SPERM RNA

First report for the transcript in sperm was an mRNA within the condensed chromatin from the mature sperm nucleus of fern Scolopendrium (Rejon et al., 1988). The very next year, Pessot (1989) visualized RNA in mature spermatozoa using the RNase colloidal gold procedure. The first specific RNA to be identified in mature spermatozoa was that of U1 and U2 snRNA (Concha et al., 1993) whereas proto–oncogene c–myc was the first mRNA reported (Kumar et al., 1993). Subsequently, human leukocyte antigen (Chiang et al., 1994), β–actin, protamine (Miller et al., 1994) and aromatase (Lambard et al., 2003) mRNAs were observed in spermatozoa.
Presence of specific mRNA zfp59, a zinc finger protein which is usually expressed in post meiotic male germline cells is seen accumulated in the nuclei of rodent spermatozoa, suggest to having a role in DNA organization and condensation during terminal differentiation (Passananti et al., 1995). Adhesive β1 integrin protein on the surface of ejaculated spermatozoa (Glander and Schaller, 1993) and on spermatogenic cells of human testis (Schaller et al., 1993) may play role in adhesion during fertilization (Rohwedder et al., 1996). Transcript corresponding to round spermatid transcribed human PRM1, PRM2 and TNP2 identified in both epididymal and ejaculate spermatozoa (Wykes et al., 1997) have a role in chromatin condensation. Transcripts of progesterone receptors PR–A and PR–B (Sachdeva et al., 2000), estrogen receptors-α and -β (O’Donnell et al., 2001), leptin receptor at tail region (Jope et al., 2003) and androgen receptor (Solakidi et al., 2005) in ejaculated sperm has been associated with fertility. Presence of testis–specific serine/ threonine kinase 6 (TSSK6) both in the head of elongated spermatid and equatorial segment of the ejaculated spermatozoa of mice (Spirindov et al., 2005; Xu et al., 2007) have the potential to phosphorylate basic protein, thus its role in spermatogenesis and fertility.
Some of spermatozoal transcripts thought to play significant role in fertilization as reported, ERα gene knockout mice are infertile and have poor quality sperm (Eddy et al., 1996). Leptin level in seminal plasma negatively correlated with sperm progressive movement (Abavisani et al., 2011). mRNA of the TSSK6 gene deleted in azoospermia like (DAZL) and Pumilio–2 (PUM2), which are essential for the germ cell development (Fox et al., 2005). Expression of TNP1 and 2 were significantly lower in spermatozoa from asthenozoospermic men compared to normal (Jedrzejczak et al., 2007).
However, most recent researches reported that spermatozoa comprise abundant population of non–coding RNAs (ncRNA) – about 24000 estimated in individual sperm (Krawetz et al., 2011). Sperm–borne micro RNA miR34c (Liu et al., 2012), two siRNA like IGF2 receptor antisense and antisense sequence for Dickkopf–2 gene (Krawetz, 2005), small RNAs in low copy number from piRNA locus (Kawano et al., 2012) tRNA derived small RNA (Peng et al., 2012) also have specific post fertilization functions. Furthermore, RNA molecules confined in sperm are now considered as key vectors of epigenetic variation (Kiani and Rassoulzadegan, 2012). However, very little information is available on this subject on chicken sperm. Hence, transcription profiling of avian sperm may lead to explore their function significance during sperm formation and in early embryonic development. Since, sperm RNAs are the indirect measure of success of spermatogenesis process, they have the potential to serve as an excellent fertility/ infertility biomarkers.

SPERMATOZOAL RNA IN BIRDS

Transcript analysis from avian sperm is challenging as there was no optimized RNA isolation protocol so far. This is because of various reasons; the accessory reproductive organs like lymphatic folds are either in proximity to or are an integral part of the cloaca (Fujihara, 1992). Their secretion along with semen is a primary cause of somatic cell contamination with lymphocytes. Moreover, the reduction in cytoplasmic and nuclear volume to a 3% of initial spermatid cell volume in rooster sperm (Sprando and Russel, 1988) make it difficult in adopting the classical RNA isolation methods (Chomczynski, 1933, Chomczynski and Mackey, 1995).
In chicken, we believe, morphologically normal healthy sperm occupy significantly greater amount of the total RNA than unfit and abnormal counterpart as it is already stated in human (Roudebush et al., 2004). These transcripts may positively correlate to direct fertilization success and early embryonic gene expression and may soon be utilized as marker for male fertility (Johnson et al., 2011). In one of our recent studies, we could amplify protamine transcripts from chicken sperm, which can be used as bio–marker for fertility prediction (Shafeeque et al., 2013).

CONCLUSION

All the transcripts which either represent the remnant of transcript sharing or lack of means of their degradation may have some role in fertilization and early embryonic development in birds. Hopefully a better understanding and characterization of these transcripts by modern technology in avian sperm will provide insight in development of a non–invasive approach to evaluate male fertility. These non–invasive fertility biomarkers will have immense value in captive breeding programs of endangered birds.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors gratefully acknowledge the Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB), Department of Science and Technology, Government of India for the support of this research program (SERB/FT/LS–147/2011).

REFERENCES

Abavisani A, Baghbanzadeh A, Shayan P, Dehghani H (2011). Leptin mRNA in bovine spermatozoa. Res. Vet. Sci. 90(3): 439 – 442.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rvsc.2010.07.009
PMid:20728190

Adham IM, Nayernia K, Burkhardt–Göttges E, Topaloglu O, Dixkens C, Holstein AF, Engel W (2001). Teratozoospermia in mice lacking the transition protein (Tnp2). Mol. Hum. Reprod. 7: 513 – 520.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molehr/7.6.513
PMid:11385107

Caron C, Govin J, Rousseaux S, Khochbin S (2005). How to pack the genome for a safe trip. Prog. Mol. Subcell. Biol. 38: 65 – 89.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-27310-7_3
PMid:15881891

Chiang MH, Steuerwald N, Lambert H, Main EK, Steinleitner A (1994). Detection of human leukocyte antigen class I messenger ribonucleic acid transcripts in human spermatozoa via reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction. Fert. Ster. 61: 276 – 280.
PMid:7507866

Chiva M, Kasinsky HF, Subiranaa JA (1987). Characterization of protamines from four avian species. FEBS Lett. 215: 237 – 240.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0014-5793(87)80153-9

Chomczynski P (1993). A reagent for the single–step simultaneous isolation of RNA, DNA and proteins from cell and tissue samples. Biotechniques 15: 532 – 537.
PMid:7692896

Chomczynski P, Mackey K (1995). Short technical reports. Modification of the TRI reagent procedure for isolation of RNA from polysaccharide– and proteoglycan–rich sources. Biotechniques. 19: 942 – 945.
PMid:8747660

Concha II, Urzua U, Ya-ez A, Schroeder R, Pessot C, Burzio LO (1993). U1 and U2 snRNA are localized in the sperm nucleus. Exp. Cell. Res. 204: 378 – 381.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/excr.1993.1046
PMid:8440334

Das PJ, Paria N, Gustafson–Seabury A, Vishnoi M, Chaki SP, Love CC, Varner DD, Chowdhary BP, Raudsepp T (2010). Total RNA isolation from stallion sperm and testis biopsies. Theriogenol. 74: 1099 – 1106.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.04.023
PMid:20615536

Eddy EM, Washburn TF, Bunch DO, Goulding EH, Gladen BC, Lubahn DB, Korach KS (1996). Targeted disruption of the estrogen receptor gene in male mice causes alteration of spermatogenesis and infertility. Endocrinol. 137: 4793 – 4805.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1210/en.137.11.4796
http://dx.doi.org/10.1210/endo.137.11.8895349
PMid:8895349

Fox M, Urano J, Reijo Pera RA (2005). Identification and characterization of RNA sequence to which human PUMILIO–2 (PUM2) and deleted in Azoospermia–like (DAZL) bind. Genomics. 85: 92 – 105.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygeno.2004.10.003
PMid:15607425

Froman DP (2007). Sperm motility in birds: insights from fowl sperm. Society Reprod. Fert. Suppl. 65: 293 – 308.
PMid:17644970

Fujihara N (1992). Accessory reproductive fluids and organs in male domestic birds. Worlds Poult. Sci. J. 48: 39 – 56.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/WPS19920005

Gilbert I, Bissonnette N, Boissonneault G, Vallée M, Robert C (2007). A molecular analysis of population of mRNA in bovine spermatozoa. Reprod. 133: 1073 – 1086.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1530/REP-06-0292
PMid:17636162

Glander HJ, Schaller J (1993). Beta 1 integrins of spermatozoa: a flow cytophotometric analysis. Int. J. Androl. 16: 105 – 111.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2605.1993.tb01162.x
PMid:7685742

Goodrich R, Johnson G, Krawetz SA (2007). The preparation of human spermatozoal RNA for clinical analysis. Arch. Androl. 53: 161 – 167.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01485010701216526
PMid:17612875

Gunawardna VK, Scott MG (1977). Ultrastructural studies on the differentiation of spermatids in the domestic fowl. J. Anat. 124(3): 741 –755.

Hocking PM, Waddington D, Walker MA, Gilbert AB (1989). Control of the development of the ovarian follicular hierarchy in broiler breeder pullets by food restriction during rearing. British Poult. Sci. 30: 161 – 174.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00071668908417134
PMid:2743171

Jedrzejczak P, Kempisty B, Bryja A, Mostowska M, Depa–Martynow M, Pawelczyk L, Jagodzinski PP (2007). Quantitative assessment of transition protein 1, 2 spermatid–specific linker histone H1 like protein transcripts in spermatozoa from normozoospermic and asthenozoospermic men. Arch. Androl. 53: 199 – 205.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01485010701426430
PMid:17852044

Johnson GD, Lalancette C, Linnemann AK, Leduc F, Boissonneault G, Krawetz SA (2011). The sperm nucleus: chromatin, RNA, and the nuclear matrix. Reprod. 141: 21 – 36.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1530/REP-10-0322
PMid:20876223

Jope T, Lammert A, Kratzsch J, Paasch U, Glander HJ (2003). Leptin and leptin receptor in human seminal plasma and in human spermatozoa. Int. J. Androl. 26: 335 – 341.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2605.2003.00434.x
PMid:14636218

Kawano M, Kawaji H, Grandjean V Kiani J, Rassoulzadegan M (2012). Novel small non coding RNAs in mouse spermatozoa, zygotes and early embryos. PLoS One. 7: e44542.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044542
PMid:22984523 PMCid:PMC3440372

Kiani J, Rassoulzadegan M (2012). A load of small RNAs in the sperm – how many bits of hereditary information? Cell Res. 23: 18 – 19.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/cr.2012.181
PMid:23266892 PMCid:PMC3541666

Kramer JA, Krawetz SA (1997). RNA in spermatozoa: implication for the alternative haploid genome. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 3: 473 – 478.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molehr/3.6.473
PMid:9239735

Krawetz SA (2005). Paternal contribution: new insights and future challenges. Nat. Rev. Genet. 6: 633 – 642.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrg1654
PMid:16136654

Krawetz SA, Kruger A, Lalancette C, Tagett R, Anton E, Draghici S, Diamond MP (2011). A survey of small RNAs in human sperm. Hum. Reprod. 26: 3401 – 3412.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der329
PMid:21989093 PMCid:PMC3212879

Kumar G, Patel D, Naz RK (1993). c–MYC mRNA is present in human sperm cells. Cell. Mol. Biol. Res. 39: 111 – 117.
PMid:8220581

Lake (1956). The Structure of the germinal epithelium of the fowl testis with special reference to the presence of multinuclear cells. Quart. J. Microscop. Sci. 97: 487 – 497.

Lalancette C, Thibault C, Bachand I, Caron N, Bissonnette N (2008). Transcriptome analysis of bull semen with extreme non–return rate: use of suppression–subtractive hybridization to identify functional markers of fertility. Biol. Reprod. 78: 618 – 635.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.106.059030
PMid:18003951

Lambard S, Galeraud Denis I, Bouraïma H, Bourguiba S, Chocat A, CarreauS (2003). Expression of aromatase in human ejaculated spermatozoa: a putative marker of fertility. Mole. Hum. Reprod. 9: 117 – 124.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molehr/gag020
PMid:12606587

Liu WM, Panga RTK, Chiua PCN, Wonga BPC, Laoc K, Leea KF, Yeunga WSB (2012). Sperm–borne microRNA34c is required for the first cleavage division in mouse. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 109: 490 – 494.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1110368109
PMid:22203953 PMCid:PMC3258645

Louie JA, Dixon GH (1972). Kinetics of enzymatic modification of the protamines and a proposal for their binding to chromatin. J. Biol. Chem. 247: 7962 – 7968.
PMid:4640934

McGary S, Estevez I, Bakst MR, Pollock DL (2002). Phenotypic traits as reliable indicators of fertility in male broiler breeders. Poult. Sci. 81: 102 –111.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ps/81.1.102
PMid:11885889

McIntosh JR, Porter KR (1967). Microtubules in the spermatids of the domestic fowl. J. Cell. Biol. 35(1): 153 – 173.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1083/jcb.35.1.153
PMid:6061713 PMCid:PMC2107123

Miller D, Tang PZ, Skinner C, Lilford R (1994). Differential RNA fingerprinting as a tool in the analysis of spermatozoal gene expression. Hum. Reprod. 9: 864 – 869.
PMid:7929733

Nagano (1962). Observations on the fine structure of the developing in the domestic chicken. J. Cell Biol. 14: 193 – 205.

Nakano M, Tobita T, Ando T (1976). Studies on a protamine (galline) from fowl sperm. 3. The total amino acid sequence of intact galline molecule. Int. J. Pept. Protein. Res. 8: 565 – 578.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3011.1976.tb02537.x
PMid:992941

Nayernia K, Lee JH, Drusenheimer N, Nolte J, Wulf G, Dressel R, Gromoll J, Engel W (2006). Derivation of male germ cells from bone marrow stem cells. Lab. Invest. 86: 654 – 663.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/labinvest.3700429
PMid:16652109

O'Donnell L, Robertson KM, Jones ME, Simpson ER (2001). Estrogen and spermatogenesis. Endocr. Rev. 22: 289 – 318.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1210/er.22.3.289
http://dx.doi.org/10.1210/edrv.22.3.0431
PMid:11399746

Okamura F, Nishiyama H (1976). The early development of the tail and the transformation of the shape of the nucleus of the spermatid of the domestic fowl, Gallus gallus. Cell. Tissue Res.169 (3): 345 – 359.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00219607
PMid:949728

Olivia R, Dixon G H (1988). Chicken protamine genes are intronless. The complete genomic sequence and organization of the two loci. J. Biol. Chem. 246: 12472 – 12481.

Passananti C, Corbi N, Paggi MG, Russo MA, Perez M, Cotelli F, Stefanini M, Amati P (1995) The product of Zfp59 (Mfg2), a mouse gene expressed at the spermatid stage of spermatogenesis, accumulates in the spermatozoa nuclei. Cell Growth Diff. 6: 1037 – 1044.
PMid:8547218

Peng H, Shi J, Zhang Y, Zhang H, Liao S, Li W, Lei L, Han C, Ning L, Cao Y, Zhou Q, Chen Q, Duan E (2012). A novel class of tRNA–derived small RNAs extremely enriched in mature mouse sperm. Cell Res. 22: 1609 – 1612.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/cr.2012.141
PMid:23044802 PMCid:PMC3494397

Pessot C A (1989). Presence of RNA in the sperm nucleus. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 158(1): 272 – 278.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0006-291X(89)80208-6

Pinto–correia (1997). The ovary of eve: eggs and sperm and preformation. University of Chicago press, Chicago.

Rejon E, Bajon C, Blaize A, Robert D (1988). RNA in the nucleus of a motile plant spermatozoid: characterization by enzyme–gold cytochemistry and in situ hybridization. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 1: 49 – 56.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrd.1080010108
PMid:2483090

Rohwedder A, Liedigk O, Schaller J, Glander HJ, Werchau H (1996). Detection of mRNA transcripts of ß integrins in ejaculated human spermatozoa by nested reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 2: 499 – 505.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molehr/2.7.499
PMid:9239659

Roudebush WE, Massey JB, Dorothy JZ, Hilton M, Kort HI, Elsner CW (2004). Morphologically normal sperm have significantly greater total–RNA content than abnormal sperm. Fert. Reprod. Med. 1271: 193 – 196.

Roux C, Tripogney C, Joanne C, Bresson JL. (2004). Nuclear quality of the spermatozoon: exploration tests of the chromatin of human spermatozoa (nuclear proteins). Gynecol. Obstet. Fert. 32: 792 – 798.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1297-9589(04)00199-7
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gyobfe.2004.06.014
PMid:15380764

Ruestow EG (1983). Images and ideas: Leeuwenhoek's perception of the spermatozoa. J. Hist. Biol. 16: 185 – 224.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00124698
PMid:11611237

Sachdeva G, Shah CA, Kholkute SD, Puri CP (2000). Detection of progesterone receptor transcript in human spermatozoa. Biol. Reprod. 62: 1610 – 614.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod62.6.1610
PMid:10819762

Schaller J, Glander HJ, Dethloff J (1993). Evidence of ß Integrins and fibronectin on spermatogenic cells in human testis. Hum. Reprod. 8: 1873 – 1878.
PMid:7507130

Shafeeque CM, Sharma SK, Sastry KVH, Mohan J, Tyagi JS, Singh RP (2013). Protamine transcripts in chicken sperm: Bio–marker for fertility prediction. Proceedings of XXX Conference & National Symposium of Indian Poult. Sci. Ass. pp: 115.

Solakidi S, Psarra AM, Nikolaropoulos S, Sekeris CE (2005). Estrogen receptor alpha and beta (ER alpha and ER beta) and androgen receptor (AR) in human sperm: localization of ERbeta and AR in mitochondria of the midpiece. Hum. Reprod. 20: 3481 – 3487.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dei267
PMid:16123086

Spiridonov NA, Wong L, Zerfas PM, Starost MF, Pack SD, Paweletz CP, Johnson GR (2005). Identification and characterization of SSTK, a serine/threonine protein kinase essential for male fertility. Mol. Cell. Biol. 25: 4250 – 4261.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/MCB.25.10.4250-4261.2005
PMid:15870294 PMCid:PMC1087724

Sprando RL, Russell LD (1988). Spermiogenesis in the red–ear turtle (Pseudemys scripta) and the domestic fowl (Gallus domesticus): a study of cytoplasmic events including cell volume changes and cytoplasmic elimination. J. Morphol. 108(1): 95 – 118.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmor.1051980110
PMid:3199450

Thurston RJ, Hess RA (1987). Ultra structure of spermatozoa from domesticated birds: comparative study of turkey, chicken and guinea fowl. Scanning Microsc. 1(4): 1829 – 1838.
PMid:3433064

Ward S (2010). Function of sperm chromatin structural elements in fertilization and development. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 16: 30 – 36.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molehr/gap080
PMid:19748904 PMCid:PMC2790366

Wykes SM, Visscher DW, Krawetz SA (1997). Haploid transcripts persist in mature human spermatozoa. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 3(1): 15 – 19.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molehr/3.1.15
PMid:9239704

Xu B, Hao Z, Jha KN, Digilio L, Urekar C, Kim YH, Pulido S, Flickinger CJ, Herr JC (2007). Validation of a testis specific serine/threonine kinase (TSSK) family and the substrate of TSSK1&2, TSK, as contraceptive targets. Soc. Reprod. Fert. Suppl. 63: 87 – 101.
PMid:17566264

Yang CC, Lin YS, Hsu CC, Wu SC, Lin EC, Cheng WT (2009). Identification and sequencing of remnant messenger RNA found in domestic swine (Sus scorfa) fresh ejaculated spermatozoa. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 113: 143 –155.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2008.08.012
PMid:18786788