Two methods have been compared for quantitating the Feulgen-DNA in the same 240 mature bovine spermatozoa, using a fixed light beam cytophotometer. The two-wave-length method measured absorbance of single stained nuclei in a circular light beam having a diameter slightly larger than the long axis of the spe~n head and eliminated the need for nuclear-size determinations. An over-all Feulgen-DNA coeffcient of variability of 20.4% and a within sample coefficient of 14.6% were found. The other method measured nuclear absorbance of a monochromatic light beam with a slightly smMler diameter than the nuclear width and required an accurate nuclear volume determination related to the volume traversed by the light beam. Nuclear volume was estimated from linear measurements using three different formulae. All yielded Yeulgen-DNA values with over-all coefficients of variability ranging from 12.3 to 12.9% and within sample coefficients of 6.5 to 7.3%: Two formulae gave falsely precise Feulgen-DNA values due to systematic errors in area cMculation resulting from false assumptions of sperm nuclear shape. Nuclear area of each cell cMeulated by the van Duijn formula multiplied by its extinction value for a light beam of known area gave the best estimate of sperm nuclear Feulgen-DNA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Torre et al. (1964) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: