Skip to main content
. 2020 Jul 15;14(2):84–90. doi: 10.22074/ijfs.2020.5896

Table 2.

Comparison of sperm parameters (± SD) between the experimental groups after frozen-thawed and treatment with 10 μg/ml Calligonum (CGM) extract and LIPUS (pulsed mode and continues wave)


GroupsSperm parameters Control Frozen -thawed Frozenthawed+CGMextract Frozenthawed+continueswave of ultrasound Frozenthawed+continueswave oftrasound+CGMextract Frozenthawed+pulsedmode ofultrasound Frozenthawed+pulsedmode of ultrasound +CGMextract

Viability (%) 94.17c ± 5.97 87.52 ± 4.75 90.11 ± 6.12 82.76b ± 5.68 86.70 ± 7.12 81.82b ± 2.87 87.94 ± 4.25
Total motility(%) 89.37 ± 3.74 81.30 ± 3.74 85.42 ± 4.28 76.76ab ± 5.29 81.65 ± 5.18 75.86ab ± 3.47 81.90 ± 3.93
Progressivemotility (%) 38.80 ± 2.57 34.81a ± 3.28 37.81 ± 4.13 33.04ab ± 2.98 37.24 ± 5.11 32.60ab ± 3.58 36.18a ± 4.78
Normalmorphology (%) 30.11 ± 3.16 26.58 ± 3.54 28.41 ± 4.27 27.58 ± 3.95 30.82 ± 2.75 28.35 ± 4.82 30.05 ± 3.66

a; Significant difference with control group in the same row (P≤0.05), b; Significant difference with freeze and thawed group + CGM extract, in the same row P≤0.026, and c; Significant difference with other groups in the same row (P≤0.047).