Intro
Air pollution has a detrimental effect on health ( Pothirat et al. , 2019 ). There are various pollutants in
the air including PM10, PM2.5, nitrogen dioxide, and ozone ( Pothirat et al. , 2019 ). Ambient PM2.5
(particulate matter smaller or equal to 2.5 micrometer; PM 2.5) is associated with
respiratory problems and cardiovascular disease ( Pothirat et al. , 2019 ; Nakharutai et al. , 2022 ). Exposure to ambient PM2.5 and
nitrogen dioxide has the highest impact on all-cause mortality in northern Thailand
( Pinichka et al .
2017 ).
PM2.5 inhalation directly affects alveolar cells, increases oxidative stress and
causes pulmonary injury ( Saffari et
al. , 2014 ; Snow et
al. , 2014 ; Liu et
al. , 2020 ). It also relates to systemic inflammation ( Chin, 2015 ). Furthermore, PM2.5 exposure causes
testicular injury and germ cell apoptosis in rats ( Liu et al. , 2017 ).
Studies regarding air pollution affecting sperm quality encompasses various reports
that ranged from both high to low impact. The various constituents of air
pollutants; amount and duration of exposure, might explain this contradiction ( Hansen et al ., 2010 ; Wu et al ., 2017 ; Wu et al ., 2021 ; Lao et al ., 2018 ; Nobles et al ., 2018 ; Chansuebsri et al ., 2022 ).
Strong correlations of PM2.5 exposure, 2-3 months before the time of semen analysis,
gave hits that such exposure could play a role in the detrimental effect on
spermatogenesis ( Hammoud et al. ,
2010 ; Wu et al. ,
2017 ).
Chiang Mai is a northern province of Thailand, located in a basin-like terrain
surrounded by mountains. People in the rural area mostly work in agriculture. The
dry season is the smoky haze pollution period in Chiang Mai ( Thepnuan et al. , 2020 ). During this highly
intense smoky period, the source of PM2.5 is a mixture of burning biomass, traffic
exhaust fumes and transboundary pollution ( Thepnuan
et al. , 2020 ; Chansuebsri et al. , 2022 ).
There are few reports about male fertility being affected by seasonal PM2.5 from the
agricultural process. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the effect of
ambient PM2.5 on male fertility.
Methods
Data were collected from the medical records of men living in northern Thailand who
underwent semen analysis at the Infertile Clinic, Chiang Mai University between
January 2017 and December 2021. The data included demographics, sperm parameters and
outcome of fertility treatment.
The semen analysis was carried out using an HTM IVOS II computer assisted semen
analysis (CASA; Hamilton Throne Biosciences, Beverly, MA), equipped with Clinical
Human Motility II Software to determine: sperm concentration, progressive motility
and morphology.
Monthly data of Chiang Mai ambient PM2.5 concentration, between January 2017 and
December 2021, were collected from the Thai Pollution Control Department. Both the
mean and maximum value of ambient PM2.5 were reported during the study period. A
level of ambient PM2.5 over 50 µg/m 3 was considered unhealthy.
This study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Faculty of Medicine, Chiang
Mai University with the exemption of the informed consent (OBG-2564-08563).
In order to compare the difference between two groups of data, the t-test was applied
for continuous data, with normal distribution. Otherwise, the non-parametric test
was used. The comparison between various groups of continuous data was carried out
by the ANOVA test. The difference of categorical datasets was determined by the
Chi-squared test. The relationship between ambient PM2.5 concentration and sperm
parameters were analyzed by Pearson’s correlation coefficients. Univariable and
multivariable logistic regression was conducted to identify the potential factors
associated with the chemical pregnancy rate.
All statistical tests were performed with the statistical package for social science
(SPSS, USA version 22.0). A p -value of less than 0.05 was
considered statistically significant.
Results
During the study period, there was a high level of PM2.5 in a particular period of
each year. There was a difference of ambient PM2.5 concentration in these five years
(2017 to 2021). The mean ambient PM2.5 was highest in 2019 and lowest in 2017. The
maximum ambient PM2.5 was highest in 2019 and lowest in 2020, as shown in Table 1a .
Average of mean and maximum ambient PM2.5 concentration between 2017 and
2021.
p <0.001 both mean and maximum value.
According to the difference in levels of ambient PM2.5 in individual years, the data
was broken down into two groups. Group 1 had the data from 2017, 2018 and 2020 and
Group 2 the years with higher ambient PM2.5, which were 2019 and 2021 ( Table 1b ).
Comparison of ambient PM2.5 concentration between Group 1 (2017, 2018 and
2020) and 2 (2019 and 2021).
The participants comprised 1,109 men attending the Infertile Clinic for semen
analysis during the 5-year study period (2017 to 2021). The majority of them were
reported as healthy and were involved in fertility management. The mean age was 34.6
years and the mean body mass index was 25.2 kg/m 2 . The demographic data
of men undergoing semen analysis in Groups 1 and 2 were not statistically
significant, as shown in Table 2 .
Characteristics of the study subjects in Group 1 (2017, 2018 and 2020) and 2
(2019 and 2021).
Data on homogenous sperm parameters were available during the study period, while
PM2.5 values had seasonal variation, as shown in Figures 1 - 4 .
Figure 1 Ambient PM2.5 in each month and pool data of sperm concentration.
Ambient PM2.5 in each month and pool data of sperm concentration.
Figure 4 Ambient PM2.5 in each month and pool data of normal sperm morphology
percentage.
Ambient PM2.5 in each month and pool data of normal sperm morphology
percentage.
Overall data revealed weak positive correlation of the progressive sperm motility
percentage and normal morphology at the time of PM2.5 exposure, as shown in Table 3 .
Correlation of monthly mean ambient PM2.5 (µg/m 3 )
concentration between 2017 and 2022 and sperm parameters in different
periods of exposure.
Subgroup analysis of the correlation between ambient PM2.5 and sperm parameters in
years with better climate revealed weak positive correlation of progressive motile
sperm percentage following 1 month of PM2.5 exposure and 2 months of normal
morphologic sperm percentage (r=0.08, p =0.05 and r=0.1,
p =0.02), as shown in Table
4 . However, there was a negative correlation between each sperm parameter
and level of PM2.5, especially following 3 months exposure before semen analysis in
the year with worse climate (r=-0.12, p =0.01, r=-0.11,
p =0.003, r=-0.15, p =0.004), as shown in Table 5 .
Correlation of monthly mean ambient PM2.5 (µg/m 3 )
concentration between 2017, 2018 and 2020 and sperm parameters in different
periods of exposure (Group 1; n=678).
Correlation of monthly mean ambient PM 2.5 (µg/m 3 )
concentration between 2019 and 2021 and sperm parameters in different
periods of exposure (Group 2; n=431).
Eighty-six men underwent fertility treatment within 1 month after semen analysis. The
univariable analysis among these men revealed that PM2.5 exposure did not affect the
chance of conception. The infertility treatment was the only factor affecting
chemical pregnancy rate, as shown in Table
6 .
Associated factors of conception among men who received fertility treatment
within 1 month after semen analysis (n=86).
Discussion
Air pollution is an important global issue. The extent of the problem is reported
differently by countries, periods, years and various aspects of volatile toxins and
a variety of particular matter ( Wu et
al. , 2017 ; Qi et
al. , 2020 ; Franzin et
al. , 2021 ; Chansuebsri
et al. , 2022 ; Kahraman & Sivri, 2022 ; Pereira
Barboza et al. , 2023 )
Air pollution affects health by both direct inhalation and indirect pathways. The
indirect effect from air pollution on male fertility is seen clearly in rat studies
( Liu et al. , 2017 ; Liu et al ., 2019 ). The
pathogenesis would be systemic inflammation and oxidative stress ( Chin, 2015 ; Liu
et al. , 2017 ; Liu
et al ., 2019 ).However, there is still no clear
explanation among human data.
The effect of ambient PM2.5 on sperm quality in this study is quite moderate. PM2.5
exposure for 2-3 months before semen analysis affects sperm quality more than
exposure on time. It seems that PM2.5 affects the spermatogenesis process, which
takes 70-90 days ( Hammoud et al. ,
2010 ; Wu et al. ,
2017 ). Moderate results are similar to those in studies when ambient
PM2.5 was not extremely high ( Hansen et
al ., 2010 ; Lao et
al ., 2018 ; Nobles et
al ., 2018 ). The constituents of air pollution could be
another important factor. The PM2.5 caused by industrial and traffic fumes contains
more toxin and might have more detrimental effect on health and sperm quality ( Hammoud et al. , 2010 ; Wu et al. , 2017 ; Wu et al ., 2021 ; Chansuebsri et al. , 2022 ). The
seasonal smoke haze from burning might be less harmful in that cell and tissue
injury could have more time to self-repair.
A year with better climate and low level of ambient PM2.5, had a weak positive
correlation between sperm quality and level of ambient PM2.5. This is contrary to
the hypothesis of adverse effect on health from PM2.5. The result of weak positive
correlation also was found in other studies ( Hansen
et al. , 2010 ; Lao
et al. , 2018 ), where the level of ambient PM2.5 was
not extremely high. It was hypothesized that the compensatory process might occur
before the worst outcome, when chronic exposure or higher levels of PM2.5 appeared
( Lao et al. , 2018 ).
Further studies are necessary to confirm this hypothesis.
The outcome of fertility treatment among this small subgroup, within 1 month after
semen analysis, revealed that the level of PM2.5 exposure did not impact the chance
of conception. Nevertheless, a larger sample size is needed to conclude this
hypothesis. The different types and levels of air pollution might have different
effects on fertility outcome.
Air pollution has various aspects of volatile toxins and varied particular matter
( Wu et al. , 2017 ; Chansuebsri et al. , 2022 ). This
study explored only PM2.5, and no other aspects of air pollution. Other confounding
factors affecting sperm quality could be temperature and humidity, which were not
included in this study. The subjects in this study were rather homogenous in
demography, which might not answer similar questions in other groups of the
population. This study did not have data on the protection and habits among
individuals regarding air pollution, such as outdoor activity, air filtering or
filtered masks ( Allen & Barn, 2020 ).
Further study on oxidative stress and DNA fragmentation would fill the knowledge gap
between air pollution and sperm quality.
In conclusion, exposure to a high levels of PM2.5 affects sperm quality negatively in
Chiang Mai males. More studies are needed to explain the pathogenesis of PM2.5
affecting spermatogenesis.
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.