English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Human sperm motility response to three mechanical stimuli, gravity, fluid flow shear and rigid boundaries, was measured in a tube of 310 X 400 microns calibre. Data were gathered by cine recordings at various focussing levels d across the tube and analysed with a computerized image analysis system. The most influential stimulus was the tube wall near (more than 'at') which the swimmers tended to accumulate, leaving the fluid beyond 100 microns from the wall (d = 100) vacant of motile spermatozoa. The boundary effect was evident as soon as the spermatozoa could be viewed after loading, and accumulation, measured as frequency, as a function of d did not change with time t. This response was not significantly altered by the addition of laminar flow with a centre line velocity of about 400 microns/sec. In flow shear, spermatozoa aligned positively (in the flow direction) at the wall but negatively by about 30 microns from the wall where the velocity gradient (= shear rate) was about 3.5 sec-1. The response to gravity was relatively weak with 11 spermatozoa positive (swimming downwards) for each 9 negative. Neither the boundary effect nor the 'rheotaxic' effect were influenced by gravity as there was no statistical difference in orientation or distribution patterns between vertically and horizontally flowing suspensions. It is suggested that the boundary effect cannot be ignored in in-vitro manipulations, particularly when spermatozoa are observed or extracted. Its importance in vivo lies in the degree to which the tubes transporting motile spermatozoa seem to have mechanisms for reversing the wall accumulation tendency.

Observations on the response of human spermatozoa to gravity, boundaries and fluid shear