2021 / 05

Next Paper
DOI: 10.24075/brsmu.2021.048

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Microbiota of semen samples with normozoospermia: analysis of real-time PCR data

Voroshilina ES1,2, Zornikov DL1, Ivanov AV3,4, Pochernikov DG5, Panacheva EA1,2
About authors

1 Ural State Medical University, Yekaterinburg, Russia

2 Medical Center “Garmonia”, Yekaterinburg, Russia

3 Yeltsin Ural Federal University, Yekaterinburg, Russia

4 Institute of Mathematics and Mechanics, Yekaterinburg, Russia

5 Ivanovo State Medical Academy, Ivanovo, Russia

Correspondence should be addressed: Еkaterina S. Voroshilina
Repina, 3, Yekaterinburg, 620014; moc.liamg@anilihsorov

About paper

Acknowledgments: the authors would like to thank VN Khayutin, director of “Garmonia” Medical Center, for allowing them to conduct the study in the clinic's laboratory department.

Author contribution: Voroshilina ES — organization of the study, data analysis, writing the article; Zornikov DL — data analysis, writing the article; Ivanov AV — statistical processing, data analysis, writing the article; Pochernikov DG — patient selection, writing the article; Panacheva EA — literature review, data analysis, patient selection, conducting semen analyses and PCR tests, writing the article.

Compliance with ethical standards: the study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Ural State Medical University, Federal State Budget Educational Institution of Higher Education under the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Protocol № 7 dated September 20, 2019). All patients signed the informed written consent to participation in the study.

Received: 2021-09-16 Accepted: 2021-10-06 Published online: 2021-10-28
|
Fig. 1. Results of cluster analysis of semen microbiota analyzed by means of real-time PCR (n = 107). The ordinate shows the values of the features in the centroid. Diagrams of the predominant groups of microorganisms are highlighted using red rectangles. Cluster 1 (n = 43) is characterized by the predominance of obligate anaerobes (А); cluster 2 (n = 22) is characterized by the predominance of Lactobacillus spp. (B); cluster 3 (n = 27) is characterized by the predominance of gram-positive facultative anaerobes (C); cluster 4 (n = 15) is characterized by the predominance of Enterobacteriaceae spp. / Enterococcus spp. (D)
Fig. 2. Results of the cluster stability analysis 1 (A), 2 (B), 3 (C), 4 (D). The blue marker shows the cluster stability index on a set of the f volume. EE — Enterobacteriaceae spp. / Enterococcus spp.; GPFA — gram-positive facultative anaerobes; OA — obligate anaerobes
Table 1. Detection rate of specific bacterial groups in quantities exceeding the threshold value (n = 227)*
Note: * — for Ureaplasma urealyticum, Ureaplasma parvum, Mycoplasma hominis threshold values are > 0, for other bacterial groups they are ≥ 103 GE/ml.
Table 2. Clustering quality values given different number of clusters