000165168 001__ 165168
000165168 005__ 20251219174251.0
000165168 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1007/s13592-019-00659-y
000165168 0248_ $$2sideral$$a114973
000165168 037__ $$aART-2019-114973
000165168 041__ $$aeng
000165168 100__ $$0(orcid)0000-0001-5316-1703$$aYániz, Jesús$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000165168 245__ $$aEffect of chamber characteristics, incubation, and diluent on motility of honey bee (Apis mellifera) drone sperm
000165168 260__ $$c2019
000165168 5060_ $$aAccess copy available to the general public$$fUnrestricted
000165168 5203_ $$aIn this study, we compared the effect of five different sample viewing devices (slide coverslips, Makler, Leja10, Leja20, and ISAS10 chambers), incubation time, analysis time, microscopic field analysis, and diluent used on honey bee semen motility parameters. Using media without proteins, a lower proportion of total motile and of freely motile sperm (those non-adhering to the glass surface) were observed for slide coverslip and slide coverslip–Makler chambers, respectively, than in other chambers, while the percentage of circular sperm followed an opposite trend. Significant increases in all motility parameters were observed when loaded Leja10 chambers were maintained at 35 °C. During microscopic field analysis in the Leja Chamber, the percentage of freely motile sperm decreased and those of circular sperm increased in the last fields evaluated. The addition of 2% of BSA to the diluent clearly reduced the sperm adhesion to glass surface when using slide coverslip and Makler chambers. This study confirms that the choice of chamber and diluent used to assess honey bee drone sperm motility has a significant effect on the results wherein traditional slide coverslips are contraindicated.
000165168 536__ $$9info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/DGA/A07-17R$$9info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/MINECO/AGL2017-85030-R
000165168 540__ $$9info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess$$aAll rights reserved$$uhttp://www.europeana.eu/rights/rr-f/
000165168 590__ $$a1.828$$b2019
000165168 591__ $$aENTOMOLOGY$$b28 / 101 = 0.277$$c2019$$dQ2$$eT1
000165168 592__ $$a0.948$$b2019
000165168 593__ $$aInsect Science$$c2019$$dQ1
000165168 655_4 $$ainfo:eu-repo/semantics/article$$vinfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
000165168 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0003-1228-535X$$aPalacín, Inmaculada$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000165168 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0001-8991-325X$$aSantolaria, Pilar$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000165168 7102_ $$12008$$2700$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. Produc.Animal Cienc.Ali.$$cÁrea Producción Animal
000165168 773__ $$g50, 4 (2019), 472-481$$pApidologie$$tAPIDOLOGIE$$x0044-8435
000165168 8564_ $$s162456$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/165168/files/texto_completo.pdf$$yPostprint
000165168 8564_ $$s613338$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/165168/files/texto_completo.jpg?subformat=icon$$xicon$$yPostprint
000165168 909CO $$ooai:zaguan.unizar.es:165168$$particulos$$pdriver
000165168 951__ $$a2025-12-19-14:42:14
000165168 980__ $$aARTICLE