The Actual Science of Canine Male + Human Female gamete interactions

...horse sperm can penetrate the egg...
...horsecsoerm will attach to human egg surface and even go inside...

Let's be careful with our words here. You're both going much further than what's being said.
It's saying that the sperm did bind with the zona, but not that it went "inside" or penetrated the egg.
The zona is a thick layer. While it was observed that the marmoset sperm did appear to burrow into the human zona, the paper was clear that they did not test for the acrosome status
The capacitation and acrosome status of the horse and maromset zonae wre not studied; therefore, it is unknown if the sperm from these species that bound to the human zona are acrosome intact or reacted.

So at this point all we have is that horse sperm are sticky when it comes to human zona, and that marmoset sperm will burrow somewhat into the zona. Nothing more can be claimed from this study.

That may actually start a fertilization and divisdion, but no conclussion about it here.
Division would never occur unless there was a single viable fused cell, which only happens in full fertilization by the joining of the DNA strands.
 
Like Christ it’s purely fantasy material.
Did you read the title of this thread... the actual science

You should see how people with like, actual rape fantasies or free use or whatever talk about stuff if you wanna hear “dehumanizing”
In a fantasy thread that's fine... This isn't a fantasy thread.

Stop being pearl clutching moralizing dorks goddamn. Can neither of you comprehend the word “fantastical”?
You have an entire fucking forum to wank off about your fantasies... can you leave one single fucking solitary thread clean of your masturbatory fantasies?
 
No. You don’t like it, shut the fuck up & move the fuck on. 🙏
Did a little checking on your account... you're clearly just here to troll. You've been on this site for a while but only commented in this thread in an off topic way.
You come into a science thread... and immediately talk about being horny.

FWIW.... This thread is in the "how-to / educational" section... not the fantasy/story section
 
Did a little checking on your account... you're clearly just here to troll. You've been on this site for a while but only commented in this thread in an off topic way.
You come into a science thread... and immediately talk about being horny.
I’m not a troll you goddamn retard, what exactly do you expect people to say about something like this that’s been a running topic on this? Pull the whole entire stick out of your ass.

You’re on a fucking animal sex website chimping out because people aren’t speaking solely in terms of the scientific method. Get a grip.
 
what exactly do you expect people to say about something like this that’s been a running topic on this?

Considering this thread is about the scientific aspect of oocyte reactions in the educational section... I'd expect people to view it accordingly.
Which everyone else other than you has seemed to do.
There's tons of other forums and threads around fantasy.

You’re on a fucking animal sex website chimping out because people aren’t speaking solely in terms of the scientific method. Get a grip.
JFC.. I make animal porn and post it on this site. This is not about not liking the content of this site or having an issue with it. It's about having one thread where this stuff can be talked about from an actual scientific perspective without all the fantasy comments that get posted all the time in everywhere else in this forum.
People are free to post idiotic comments everywhere else in the forum... no one is stopping you from doing that. But you're apparently so inconsiderate of others that you have to find the one thread where people are keeping fantasy out of it... and inject your fantasy wank off comments.
 
I’m not a troll you goddamn retard
The fact that until now you've made ZERO other comments on the entire forum... and all your account activity is about shitposting in this thread... is pretty clear evidence that you're just trolling. (I expect that now that I've called you out on it... you'll make some other random comments in other threads soon to give yourself some cover for what is clearly obvious behavior.)
1675527353310.png
 
It's saying that the sperm did bind with the zona, but not that it went "inside" or penetrated the egg.
The zona is a thick layer. While it was observed that the marmoset sperm did appear to burrow into the human zona, the paper was clear that they did not test for the acrosome status
Indeed. I saw the number that penetrated and totally missed it refered just to the outer zone. 👍
Division would never occur unless there was a single viable fused cell, which only happens in full fertilization by the joining of the DNA strands.
The chance for testing that part was specifically avoided in the study, so no conclussion expected about that. (Not that I'd expect to even reach morula status before it failed, anyway)
Now, with the DNA not reaching inside, no chance under these tested conditions
 
Indeed. I saw the number that penetrated and totally missed it refered just to the outer zone. 👍

The chance for testing that part was specifically avoided in the study, so no conclussion expected about that. (Not that I'd expect to even reach morula status before it failed, anyway)
Now, with the DNA not reaching inside, no chance under these tested conditions
One thing I learned the very hard way in university was to read papers multiple times to make sure I wasn't missing anything. Some of my professors were brutal on reports I turned in that were due to me quickly reading over something and coming to false conclusions. They weren't being mean to me, but making it clear I had to break myself of that habit.
No worries, we all do it from time to time, I know I still do occasionally.
The study is definitely interesting, but I wish they would have gone... just a little further. And oh yea, included canine semen in the test. haha
My main curiosity is how far things get before the fail and if that renders the egg 'ruined'.
 
(I expect that now that I've called you out on it... you'll make some other random comments in other threads soon to give yourself some cover for what is clearly obvious behavior.)
Proved correct....
My post at 4:16...
1675528236077.png

Yours at 4:18...
1675528207277.png


Trolls think they are clever, but they are so obvious. Also, bright idea for the one post you do make that's not in this thread to be an attack on a mod. Smooth move there buddy.
 
Yes, *that* is the real professors work. Not teaching knowledge but the right way to adquire them in a reliable way, be it reading or investigating. 😁


My main curiosity is how far things get before the fail and if that renders the egg 'ruined'.
Same here 😁

On that point and on a different forum someone placed a reason against fencehopping about that. If you jeopardize the chance for a foal or calf you are damaging the owner. And if it happens there are chances they get rid of the animal as "unfit for reproducing, cause unknown".

The moment I asked for some base on that assumption I was pointed to google the hamster egg fertility test. Sort of make some sense as unwanted risk
 
The moment I asked for some base on that assumption I was pointed to google the hamster egg fertility test. Sort of make some sense as unwanted risk
Yea, it's a touchy subject. I'm curious why the researchers picked those two specific species to test, sadly that's not explained. I can only assume its due to the fact that they were able to obtain the oocytes easily.
 
This is a post I originally posted at the AoZ forum thing several years ago before I stopped going there, because for some reason TOR was getting blocked all the time.

Anywho, this is a copy I have of what I posted. There's long been a discussion about women getting pregnant from dogs. IDK why this keeps coming back up. It's simply not possible. The people who claim its possible or that it 'might' be possible always come up with anecdotes or some very very stretched reasoning to back up their position.

While there are many threads along the same lines as this, this is specifically intended to serve as a thread for scientific discussion on the issue. Hopefully we can put this claim to bed once and for-all.

I would ask one thing from any participants in this thread. If you are going to make a claim about something... provide a source. You don't have to source every sentence you make, but if you're relying on some principle to back up your claim, you better do your damn diligence and have something to back it up.

I went into this knowing that a successful synthesis of a human ovum and a canine sperm is not possible. But my curiosity lies in how far it can get -before- it fails. I have a BS in Biology and I'm working on my Masters right now. I dont know everything... I'll admit there's a lot I dont know, but I when I want to know something, I try to research it and learn it.


Ok... so without further ado... Here's the original post: (With some basic grammar and spelling corrections)


The Science of Canine Male + Human Female gamete interactions

A look into the cellular mechanics behind canine sperm and human egg interactions.
Warning: Nerd alert - this is very science-y


Disclaimer: I'm a bio major and This has sort of been a pet research project for me for the past couple years. I have posted this elsewhere before, but I'm not sure how many places its been repeated. But lets get one thing crystal clear. It is impossible for a human to get pregnant by a dog. Anyone claiming otherwise is either outright lying or an idiot. It's definitely a fantasy of mine, not going to lie, but its 100% impossible.

Others will claim that the human egg and canine sperm will fuse and the single cell will live a few days before dying. This is also 100% impossible and a total lie. Due to chromosomal mismatch, a complete DNA strand cannot form, thus no viable living single cell at all.
My main point of researching this was to see if Canine sperm will do anything with the egg at all. If the proteins are not right the sperm will just wiggle around and try to do their thing. I'm curious if the sperm will chemically try to bond with the egg and breach the egg cell wall and try (and fail) to fuse with the egg nucleus. This is unknown and I haven't been able to find the necessary information to see if this can happen. Most likely there isn't enough research out there in the differences between all the human/canine proteins to know... so I'd need to actually take some canine sperm and a human egg and try artificial insemination and use an electron microscope to see what happens. But lets be real... that's never going to get approved at my university so I'm not even going to bother to ask. lol

Anywho, lets get on with this... by starting with how it works in a HS/HS situation:

Between humans, spermatozoa and oocyte fusion in the membrane adhesion area requires the presence of 3 membrane proteins (spermatozoa IZUMO1; oocyte receptor Juno and Cd9). The first one being the important one on the spermatozoa side, the latter on the oocyte side.

That would proceed as shown in the article image Source here: Image is missing, because of the repost

In Humans this ultimately leads to the formation of a zygote pronuclei as the Male and Female haploid nuclei approach each other and nuclear membranes break down.

After this then the DNA starts to bond together and divide into a multi cell blastocyst. If everything goes well this all happens within the first 24 hours.

So what would actually happen here biologically if it were K9 spermatozoa / HS oocyte? It’s obvious that a human female cannot get pregnant by a canine… but a canine’s spermatozoa don’t know where they are. Would Oocyte Activation ever occur and the intracellular machinery of the oocyte would try to process the DNA of the spermatozoa cell or not?

I assume the spermatozoa would attempt to fertilize the oocyte. With humans the spermatozoa have to sort of burrow their way in and then bond with the egg with certain proteins. Would canine spermatozoa be able to bind with the external layer of a human oocyte and attempt to fertilize the oocyte? That's what I want to determine.

This is the first question; would the k9 spermatozoa actually fuse with the oocyte? If it can’t then the rest of the discussion is pointless, but if it does, things are at least one step further down the path before failure. As I sated above, in humans it is the IZUMO1 protein that is important on the spermatozoa side. For more than obvious reasons I was unable to find any research into if the spermatozoa Human zona pellucida protein (ZP2) would effectively be a reciptor for the K9 spermatozoa. If Human ZP2 does not receive the k9 spermatozoa, then membrane fusion cannot occur.

I did find the following on page 317 tonight while reading https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=95XqDQAAQBAJprintsec=frontcover#v=onepageqf=false

It states that Dogs have a Izoumo1R gene, and that it’s located in a similar location as human spermatozoa. It states that it its plausible but untested that the purpose of IZUMO1 and JUNO in canines allows the spermatozoa to fuse with oocytes during fertilization like it does in Humans. Sadly the google books preview I found doesn’t have the pages surrounding that to get the rest of the context.

I have not yet found the breakdown of the differences in the IZUMO1 gene and the protein it codes for in Humans and the IZUMO1R gene in Canines. So this is where I will be focusing first. I’m not sure how much research has gone into Canine reproduction, so there may be no answers.
However, lets make sure we dont lose our grasp on reality, even if Oocyte activation is possible, a Canine/Human hybrid is not possible.

There is no way the embryo should be able to develop, since there is no way that the DNA could match up. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, while Canines have 39. There is no way that the DNA would be able to be spliced together enough to create a viable cell that could even start to divide. By day 2 a properly fertilized oocyte is already a multi-cell blastocyst. Since Human and K9 DNA is not compatible, there is no way that it could reach this phase.

Binding of mammalian spermatozoa to the zona pellucida and the induction of the acrosome reaction are prerequisites for successful oocyte fertilization. The human oocyte coat, zona pellucida (ZP), is composed of four glycoproteins designated as zona pellucida glycoprotein (ZP1, ZP2, ZP, and ZP4) respectively. The zona proteins possess the archetypal ‘ZP domain’, a signature domain comprised of approximately 260 amino acid (aa) residues.
Mice which are used as the initial basis for fertitlity research for humans have 3 glycoproteins (ZP1, ZP2, and ZP3). The reason mice are used is that the similiarity in fertilization is very similar.

I have not seen much research into Canine/Human similarities, but I have found Canine/Mouse research.

We also know that canines are similar to Mice in that they have 3 glycoproteins, but they are (ZP2, ZP3, and ZP4. And research points to them having the same roles. Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9361810
Anti-ZP3 vaccine for canines which reduces fertility in canines, has been shown to reduce fertility in mice. This suggests that ZP3 responsibility is similar between canines and mice. Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27667457


Since we already know that ZP3 in humans is similar to ZP3 in mice we can ~assume~ that there are similarities between Human and Canine CP3. This may in fact be false. Example is the following sets: {0,1}, {1,2}, {2,3} The 1st and 2nd set are similar, and the 2nd and 3rd are similar, however the 1st and 3rd are not. So they may be similiar or they may not be. I have yet to find enough research to prove this one way or the other.

When I search the Protein Data Bank, http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do

I do find distinctions for ZP2 in mice, however for ZP3, all I find is “mammalian spermatozoa receptor ZP3”, I do not find any species specific ZP3 proteins. I have read in other research papers about the similarity of Human/Mouse ZP3, so this may be why there is not species specific protein data. However this does not mean that they are similar, it may mean that focused research has not been submitted on the specific species. Once again, the research is scant on the topic. Lack of evidence is not evidence of lacking.

There is some research pointing to the role of ZP1 in humans, but it’s not well studied. Studies suggest that the ‘ZP domain’ module of human ZP1 has functional activity and may have a role during fertilization in humans, but it’s extent is not known. Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20831819

However in Humans, while all the ZP glycoproteins are responsible in some way for spermatozoa/ooctye fusion, the primary role is ZP2. In mice, this is somewhat different. In the mouse, ZP1 is the homodimeric filament crosslinker, held together by intermolecular disulphides. ZP2 is the ‘secondary receptor’, which is cleaved by oocyte proteases after oocyte activation. The mouse ZP3 protein appears to be the ‘primary receptor’, which is responsible for species-specific binding of spermatozoa to the oocyte and the induction of the acrosome reaction. Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10526650


Information about ZP2 in mice:
Crystal structure of the ZP-N1 domain of mouse spermatozoa receptor ZP2: http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5II6


Crystal structure of the ZP-C domain of mouse ZP2: http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5BUP


With respect to Canines, Anti-ZP3 vaccine reduces fertility in canines, has been shown to reduce fertility in mice. This suggests that ZP3 responsibility in oocyte bonding is similar between canines and mice. Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27667457


If things weren’t already confusing enough, it’s about to get worse. There has been research between Human spermatozoa and Mice Oocytes.

This has been achieved using purified native/recombinant human zona proteins and transgenic mice expressing human ZP glycoproteins. The proposed model in mice of ZP glycoprotein-3 (ZP3) acting as primary spermatozoa receptor and ZP glycoprotein-2 (ZP2) as secondary spermatozoa receptor has been modified for spermatozoa/ooctye binding in humans. ZP glycoprotein-1 (ZP1), ZP3, and ZP glycoprotein-4 (ZP4) have been shown to bind to the capacitated human spermatozoa. ZP2 binds to the acrosome-reacted human spermatozoa. Further, the eggs obtained from transgenic mice expressing human ZP2 alone or in conjunction with other human instead of mouse zona proteins showed binding of human spermatozoa, suggesting that ZP2 might also play a role in spermatozoa/ooctye binding. This function has been mapped to a domain corresponding to amino acid residues 51-144 of ZP2.

Here is the key point: “In contrast to mice, where ZP3 is the primary agonist for inducing the acrosome reaction, in humans, the acrosome reaction can be mediated by ZP1, ZP3, and ZP4.” Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25445843

So spermatozoa bonding in humans, by all the zpa Proteins, and we know that Canines do share three glycoproteins with each other. (though somewhat different due to gene expression)

So far I’ve been focusing on the oocyte side of things, one of these days I’m going to try to turn to the spermatozoa size soon.

I’ve heard a claim about proteins covering the oocyte determining what spermatozoa will fuse and fighting off other spermatozoa; but ive never seen it backed by research. Yes there is a protein coating around the oocyte, which spermatozoa have to bond with and burrow through. But it would make no sense for females oocytes to evolve to know how to deal with other species spermatozoa. At most (from what I have found) is that the Spermatozoa would not bond with the zona pellucida and would instead continue attempting to bond and fail. (Poor little fellas) But this happens all the time, spermatozoa’s are the smartest things in the book, they just swim till they bump into something and then keep bumping around till they finally get bonded with something.

Along with the ‘intellegent oocyte’ claim, I’ve already read online that the oocyte has an immunize system will ‘attack’ the hostile sperm. I’ve never read anything about this. What I have read is that the overall female reproductive track can exhibit preference for one sperm over another, as described in: https://academic.oup.com/beheco/article/10/3/304/201626

There has been some research on spermatozoa selection showing an anti-inbreeding bias in other animals. Source: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jeb.12545/abstract

But again, I have not found any research stating that oocytes can determine the species of spermatozoa and attack non compatibles ones.


Somewhat related…

Sperm count in canines:
Total sperm/ejaculate: A bare minimum of 10 million/sperm/pound bodyweight (i.e. a 30# dog will have at least 300 million sperm). Most normal dogs exceed these numbers by 2‐3x or more.
Source: http://www.akcchf.org/educational-r.../Canine-Semen-Evaluation-Dr-Cheryl-Lopate.pdf

Sperm count in humans:
The sperm count in a normal semen analysis should be between 20 million to over 200 million.
Source: https://www.healthline.com/health/semen-analysis#normal-results


Additional information that came up in further discussion in another thread I had posted this in:


Some people will claim that the Human and Canine Zona Pellucida is mostly the same. No one has ever provided sources to back this up. If they exist I'd be interested to see them.

Some people will claim that a clump of cells will form but ultimately fail. This cannot possibly be true. The syntesis of human and canine DHA will not work.
Canines have ~19,000 genes encoded in their DNA., compared to around ~30,000 for humans.
Of the 19,000 reported canine genes, 14,200 represent 1-1-1 orthologs between dog, human, and mouse. Source: https://genome.cshlp.org/content/15/12/1706.full.html

You will not get a viable cell when that many genes will not be able to be formed because of issues.
While interbreeding is possible in the animal kingdom it is only possible when the species are close enough. An example of this is Horses, Donkeys, and Zebras. They are close enough genetically that they can interbreed. Humans and Dogs are not.

Some will claim that RH factor in blood will be the reason it fails. I always thought this was a cute argument to make. There is no point to even bring up Rh factor other than to sound smart and sciency. Rh Factor is irrelevant in this situation, because its only relevant when dealing with blood types mixing. That would require uterine implantation to actually occur and be viable. If Implantation doens't occur... no placenta can develop. If no placenta can develop... there can be no mixing of blood types. If there is no mixing of blood types... Rh Factor is irrelevant.
I really love ur work on this. Thank U. When someone has tried to debate this with me, my simple answer to the non-scientific types has been: With all of the people around the world having sex with so many different animals, there would absolutely be interspecies hybrids all over the place if this kind of hybrid was possible. Plus, in today's world of news reporting, people would see this on the local news channels. My point is: It's not happening because it's simply not possible.
 
Okay Ally, you know my fetishes and my interest in human egg/canine sperm interactions.

I am trying to get all of this, the concepts are there but I can't seem to understand how far along... whatever gets. I know I am never having Max's pups, that was evident when I fucked Shady for a decade with nothing. However I just want to know what is exactly happening to my egg here.
it is an impressive fidelity, but could you answer me a question if it doesn't bother you, if it really happened what would you do in this situation?
 
This is a post I originally posted at the AoZ forum thing several years ago before I stopped going there, because for some reason TOR was getting blocked all the time.

Anywho, this is a copy I have of what I posted. There's long been a discussion about women getting pregnant from dogs. IDK why this keeps coming back up. It's simply not possible. The people who claim its possible or that it 'might' be possible always come up with anecdotes or some very very stretched reasoning to back up their position.

While there are many threads along the same lines as this, this is specifically intended to serve as a thread for scientific discussion on the issue. Hopefully we can put this claim to bed once and for-all.

I would ask one thing from any participants in this thread. If you are going to make a claim about something... provide a source. You don't have to source every sentence you make, but if you're relying on some principle to back up your claim, you better do your damn diligence and have something to back it up.

I went into this knowing that a successful synthesis of a human ovum and a canine sperm is not possible. But my curiosity lies in how far it can get -before- it fails. I have a BS in Biology and I'm working on my Masters right now. I dont know everything... I'll admit there's a lot I dont know, but I when I want to know something, I try to research it and learn it.


Ok... so without further ado... Here's the original post: (With some basic grammar and spelling corrections)


The Science of Canine Male + Human Female gamete interactions

A look into the cellular mechanics behind canine sperm and human egg interactions.
Warning: Nerd alert - this is very science-y


Disclaimer: I'm a bio major and This has sort of been a pet research project for me for the past couple years. I have posted this elsewhere before, but I'm not sure how many places its been repeated. But lets get one thing crystal clear. It is impossible for a human to get pregnant by a dog. Anyone claiming otherwise is either outright lying or an idiot. It's definitely a fantasy of mine, not going to lie, but its 100% impossible.

Others will claim that the human egg and canine sperm will fuse and the single cell will live a few days before dying. This is also 100% impossible and a total lie. Due to chromosomal mismatch, a complete DNA strand cannot form, thus no viable living single cell at all.
My main point of researching this was to see if Canine sperm will do anything with the egg at all. If the proteins are not right the sperm will just wiggle around and try to do their thing. I'm curious if the sperm will chemically try to bond with the egg and breach the egg cell wall and try (and fail) to fuse with the egg nucleus. This is unknown and I haven't been able to find the necessary information to see if this can happen. Most likely there isn't enough research out there in the differences between all the human/canine proteins to know... so I'd need to actually take some canine sperm and a human egg and try artificial insemination and use an electron microscope to see what happens. But lets be real... that's never going to get approved at my university so I'm not even going to bother to ask. lol

Anywho, lets get on with this... by starting with how it works in a HS/HS situation:

Between humans, spermatozoa and oocyte fusion in the membrane adhesion area requires the presence of 3 membrane proteins (spermatozoa IZUMO1; oocyte receptor Juno and Cd9). The first one being the important one on the spermatozoa side, the latter on the oocyte side.

That would proceed as shown in the article image Source here: Image is missing, because of the repost

In Humans this ultimately leads to the formation of a zygote pronuclei as the Male and Female haploid nuclei approach each other and nuclear membranes break down.

After this then the DNA starts to bond together and divide into a multi cell blastocyst. If everything goes well this all happens within the first 24 hours.

So what would actually happen here biologically if it were K9 spermatozoa / HS oocyte? It’s obvious that a human female cannot get pregnant by a canine… but a canine’s spermatozoa don’t know where they are. Would Oocyte Activation ever occur and the intracellular machinery of the oocyte would try to process the DNA of the spermatozoa cell or not?

I assume the spermatozoa would attempt to fertilize the oocyte. With humans the spermatozoa have to sort of burrow their way in and then bond with the egg with certain proteins. Would canine spermatozoa be able to bind with the external layer of a human oocyte and attempt to fertilize the oocyte? That's what I want to determine.

This is the first question; would the k9 spermatozoa actually fuse with the oocyte? If it can’t then the rest of the discussion is pointless, but if it does, things are at least one step further down the path before failure. As I sated above, in humans it is the IZUMO1 protein that is important on the spermatozoa side. For more than obvious reasons I was unable to find any research into if the spermatozoa Human zona pellucida protein (ZP2) would effectively be a reciptor for the K9 spermatozoa. If Human ZP2 does not receive the k9 spermatozoa, then membrane fusion cannot occur.

I did find the following on page 317 tonight while reading https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=95XqDQAAQBAJprintsec=frontcover#v=onepageqf=false

It states that Dogs have a Izoumo1R gene, and that it’s located in a similar location as human spermatozoa. It states that it its plausible but untested that the purpose of IZUMO1 and JUNO in canines allows the spermatozoa to fuse with oocytes during fertilization like it does in Humans. Sadly the google books preview I found doesn’t have the pages surrounding that to get the rest of the context.

I have not yet found the breakdown of the differences in the IZUMO1 gene and the protein it codes for in Humans and the IZUMO1R gene in Canines. So this is where I will be focusing first. I’m not sure how much research has gone into Canine reproduction, so there may be no answers.
However, lets make sure we dont lose our grasp on reality, even if Oocyte activation is possible, a Canine/Human hybrid is not possible.

There is no way the embryo should be able to develop, since there is no way that the DNA could match up. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, while Canines have 39. There is no way that the DNA would be able to be spliced together enough to create a viable cell that could even start to divide. By day 2 a properly fertilized oocyte is already a multi-cell blastocyst. Since Human and K9 DNA is not compatible, there is no way that it could reach this phase.

Binding of mammalian spermatozoa to the zona pellucida and the induction of the acrosome reaction are prerequisites for successful oocyte fertilization. The human oocyte coat, zona pellucida (ZP), is composed of four glycoproteins designated as zona pellucida glycoprotein (ZP1, ZP2, ZP, and ZP4) respectively. The zona proteins possess the archetypal ‘ZP domain’, a signature domain comprised of approximately 260 amino acid (aa) residues.
Mice which are used as the initial basis for fertitlity research for humans have 3 glycoproteins (ZP1, ZP2, and ZP3). The reason mice are used is that the similiarity in fertilization is very similar.

I have not seen much research into Canine/Human similarities, but I have found Canine/Mouse research.

We also know that canines are similar to Mice in that they have 3 glycoproteins, but they are (ZP2, ZP3, and ZP4. And research points to them having the same roles. Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9361810
Anti-ZP3 vaccine for canines which reduces fertility in canines, has been shown to reduce fertility in mice. This suggests that ZP3 responsibility is similar between canines and mice. Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27667457


Since we already know that ZP3 in humans is similar to ZP3 in mice we can ~assume~ that there are similarities between Human and Canine CP3. This may in fact be false. Example is the following sets: {0,1}, {1,2}, {2,3} The 1st and 2nd set are similar, and the 2nd and 3rd are similar, however the 1st and 3rd are not. So they may be similiar or they may not be. I have yet to find enough research to prove this one way or the other.

When I search the Protein Data Bank, http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do

I do find distinctions for ZP2 in mice, however for ZP3, all I find is “mammalian spermatozoa receptor ZP3”, I do not find any species specific ZP3 proteins. I have read in other research papers about the similarity of Human/Mouse ZP3, so this may be why there is not species specific protein data. However this does not mean that they are similar, it may mean that focused research has not been submitted on the specific species. Once again, the research is scant on the topic. Lack of evidence is not evidence of lacking.

There is some research pointing to the role of ZP1 in humans, but it’s not well studied. Studies suggest that the ‘ZP domain’ module of human ZP1 has functional activity and may have a role during fertilization in humans, but it’s extent is not known. Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20831819

However in Humans, while all the ZP glycoproteins are responsible in some way for spermatozoa/ooctye fusion, the primary role is ZP2. In mice, this is somewhat different. In the mouse, ZP1 is the homodimeric filament crosslinker, held together by intermolecular disulphides. ZP2 is the ‘secondary receptor’, which is cleaved by oocyte proteases after oocyte activation. The mouse ZP3 protein appears to be the ‘primary receptor’, which is responsible for species-specific binding of spermatozoa to the oocyte and the induction of the acrosome reaction. Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10526650


Information about ZP2 in mice:
Crystal structure of the ZP-N1 domain of mouse spermatozoa receptor ZP2: http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5II6


Crystal structure of the ZP-C domain of mouse ZP2: http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5BUP


With respect to Canines, Anti-ZP3 vaccine reduces fertility in canines, has been shown to reduce fertility in mice. This suggests that ZP3 responsibility in oocyte bonding is similar between canines and mice. Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27667457


If things weren’t already confusing enough, it’s about to get worse. There has been research between Human spermatozoa and Mice Oocytes.

This has been achieved using purified native/recombinant human zona proteins and transgenic mice expressing human ZP glycoproteins. The proposed model in mice of ZP glycoprotein-3 (ZP3) acting as primary spermatozoa receptor and ZP glycoprotein-2 (ZP2) as secondary spermatozoa receptor has been modified for spermatozoa/ooctye binding in humans. ZP glycoprotein-1 (ZP1), ZP3, and ZP glycoprotein-4 (ZP4) have been shown to bind to the capacitated human spermatozoa. ZP2 binds to the acrosome-reacted human spermatozoa. Further, the eggs obtained from transgenic mice expressing human ZP2 alone or in conjunction with other human instead of mouse zona proteins showed binding of human spermatozoa, suggesting that ZP2 might also play a role in spermatozoa/ooctye binding. This function has been mapped to a domain corresponding to amino acid residues 51-144 of ZP2.

Here is the key point: “In contrast to mice, where ZP3 is the primary agonist for inducing the acrosome reaction, in humans, the acrosome reaction can be mediated by ZP1, ZP3, and ZP4.” Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25445843

So spermatozoa bonding in humans, by all the zpa Proteins, and we know that Canines do share three glycoproteins with each other. (though somewhat different due to gene expression)

So far I’ve been focusing on the oocyte side of things, one of these days I’m going to try to turn to the spermatozoa size soon.

I’ve heard a claim about proteins covering the oocyte determining what spermatozoa will fuse and fighting off other spermatozoa; but ive never seen it backed by research. Yes there is a protein coating around the oocyte, which spermatozoa have to bond with and burrow through. But it would make no sense for females oocytes to evolve to know how to deal with other species spermatozoa. At most (from what I have found) is that the Spermatozoa would not bond with the zona pellucida and would instead continue attempting to bond and fail. (Poor little fellas) But this happens all the time, spermatozoa’s are the smartest things in the book, they just swim till they bump into something and then keep bumping around till they finally get bonded with something.

Zusammen mit der Behauptung „intelligente Eizelle“ habe ich bereits online gelesen, dass die Eizelle ein Immunsystem hat, das die feindlichen Spermien „angreift“. Ich habe noch nie etwas darüber gelesen. Was ich gelesen habe, ist, dass die gesamte weibliche Fortpflanzungsbahn eine Präferenz für ein Sperma gegenüber einem anderen aufweisen kann, wie beschrieben in: https://academic.oup.com/beheco/article/10/3/304/201626

Es gab einige Untersuchungen zur Spermienauswahl, die eine Anti-Inzucht-Voreingenommenheit bei anderen Tieren zeigten. Quelle: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jeb.12545/abstract

Aber noch einmal, ich habe keine Forschung gefunden, die besagt, dass Eizellen die Art der Spermien bestimmen und nicht kompatible angreifen können.


Etwas verwandt…

Spermienzahl bei Hunden:
Gesamtes Sperma/Ejakulat: Ein absolutes Minimum von 10 Millionen/Sperma/Pfund Körpergewicht (dh ein 30-jähriger Hund hat mindestens 300 Millionen Spermien). Die meisten normalen Hunde überschreiten diese Zahlen um das 2- bis 3-fache oder mehr.
Quelle: http://www.akcchf.org/educational-r.../Canine-Semen-Evaluation-Dr-Cheryl-Lopate.pdf

Spermienzahl beim Menschen:
Die Spermienzahl bei einer normalen Samenanalyse sollte zwischen 20 Millionen und über 200 Millionen liegen.
Quelle: https://www.healthline.com/health/semen-analysis#normal-results


Zusätzliche Informationen, die in weiteren Diskussionen in einem anderen Thread auftauchten, in dem ich dies gepostet hatte:


Einige Leute werden behaupten, dass die Zona Pellucida von Mensch und Hund größtenteils gleich ist. Niemand hat jemals Quellen bereitgestellt, um dies zu belegen. Wenn es sie gibt, würde ich sie gerne sehen.

Einige Leute werden behaupten, dass sich ein Zellklumpen bilden wird, aber letztendlich versagen. Das kann unmöglich wahr sein. Die Synthese von humanem und caninem DHA funktioniert nicht.
Hunde haben ungefähr 19.000 Gene, die in ihrer DNA kodiert sind, verglichen mit ungefähr 30.000 beim Menschen.
Von den 19.000 gemeldeten Hundegenen repräsentieren 14.200 1-1-1-Orthologe zwischen Hund, Mensch und Maus. Quelle: https://genome.cshlp.org/content/15/12/1706.full.html

Sie werden keine lebensfähige Zelle bekommen, wenn so viele Gene aufgrund von Problemen nicht gebildet werden können.
Während im Tierreich Kreuzungen möglich sind, ist dies nur möglich, wenn die Arten nahe genug sind. Ein Beispiel hierfür sind Pferde, Esel und Zebras. Sie sind sich genetisch nah genug, dass sie sich kreuzen können. Menschen und Hunde sind es nicht.

Einige werden behaupten, dass der RH-Faktor im Blut der Grund dafür sein wird, dass es nicht funktioniert. Ich fand das immer ein nettes Argument. Es hat keinen Sinn, den Rh-Faktor überhaupt anzusprechen, außer um klug und wissenschaftlich zu klingen. Der Rh-Faktor ist in dieser Situation irrelevant, da er nur relevant ist, wenn es um das Mischen von Blutgruppen geht. Das würde erfordern, dass eine Uterusimplantation tatsächlich stattfindet und durchführbar ist. Wenn keine Einnistung stattfindet... kann sich keine Plazenta entwickeln. Wenn sich keine Plazenta entwickeln kann, kann es keine Vermischung von Blutgruppen geben. Wenn es keine Vermischung von Blutgruppen gibt ... Der Rh-Faktor ist irrelevant.
 
I've got some additional information to add to this thread... but I'm having trouble figuring out how to format it so it makes the most sense and flows logically.
I've been trying to figure out the best way to present the information and it's taken me a while... but new data is coming soon. :)
 
The research continues...


The human ovum itself does not produce specific proteins that control the acrosomal reaction. Rather, it is the proteins and glycoproteins found on the zona pellucida (the extracellular matrix surrounding the ovum) that interacts with sperm proteins to facilitate the acrosomal reaction. The zona pellucida is composed of several glycoproteins, as mentioned in my prior post, these include: ZP1, ZP2, ZP3, ZP4.
There are more but I'll touch on them later.

Among these glycoproteins, ZP3 is the primary molecule responsible for initiating the acrosomal reaction in the sperm. ZP3 acts as a sperm receptor, binding to proteins on the sperm's surface. This binding triggers a signaling cascade within the sperm that results in the release of enzymes from the sperm's acrosome.

These enzymes help the sperm to digest the zona pellucida, allowing it to penetrate and reach the ovum's plasma membrane for fertilization.

The acrosomal reaction is an extremely complex multistep process that involves various proteins and signaling pathways in both the sperm and the egg.. Researchers are still working to fully understand all the molecular mechanisms involved. The acrosomal reaction is a crucial step in the fertilization process where the sperm's acrosome, a specialized organelle, releases its enzymes to facilitate penetration through the protective layers surrounding the egg (oocyte), such as the zona pellucida.

Other proteins on the ovum that involved are, CD9 and JUNO.

CD9 is a cell surface protein present on the oocyte plasma membrane, known as the oolemma. CD9 is involved in the fusion of the sperm and oocyte plasma membranes during fertilization, which follows the acrosomal reaction. CD9 is a member of the tetraspanin family, has been shown to play a crucial role in sperm-egg fusion. CD9-deficient eggs have reduced sperm binding and fusion capabilities, leading to impaired fertility in mice. It is thought that CD9 may help organize other proteins on the egg's surface, including integrins like Integrin α6β1.

Integrin α6β1, a heterodimeric transmembrane protein, has been implicated in sperm-egg interactions as a potential receptor for the sperm protein ADAM2 (Fertilin beta). In a study by Almeida et al. (1995), the researchers demonstrated that blocking Integrin α6β1 function impaired sperm-egg binding and fusion in mouse eggs.

Some studies have suggested that CD9 may associate with Integrin α6β1, and together, they could form a functional complex on the egg surface. This complex would then be involved in sperm-egg binding and fusion. For instance, Le Naour et al. (2000) found that CD9 and Integrin α6β1 co-immunoprecipitated from the egg's membrane, suggesting that they might be part of a protein complex.

JUNO (also known as IZUMO1R) is an oocyte membrane receptor that interacts with the sperm protein IZUMO1. JUNO is a member of the folate receptor family, and it is classified under the Pfam03024 family. However, its primary role in the fertilization process, specifically in mediating sperm-egg recognition and adhesion, is distinct from the typical function of other folate receptor proteins.

While these proteins are involved in the process of sperm-egg interaction, the regulation of the acrosomal reaction itself is primarily driven by intracellular calcium signaling in the sperm. Binding to the zona pellucida and the specific proteins mentioned above, along with other signaling molecules, triggers a rise in intracellular calcium in the sperm, which in turn stimulates the acrosomal reaction.

It's important to note that the molecular mechanisms and processes underlying fertilization are complex and multifaceted, with several proteins and signaling pathways working together to ensure successful fertilization.

On the sperm side we have; Izumo1, ADAM2, SPACA6, CRISP1, PLCzeta, SOF1, and PRSS37.

From what we know from research the ADAM2 and SPACA6 are primarily involved in sperm/egg fusion.

Izumo1 is a type I transmembrane protein that is composed of an extracellular immunoglobulin-like domain, a single transmembrane domain, and a short cytoplasmic tail. The extracellular domain is essential for the interaction between Izumo1 and its oocyte receptor, JUNO (IZUMO1R). Izumo1 is the sperm protein believed to be essential for sperm-egg fusion. It binds to its receptor, JUNO, on the egg surface, facilitating sperm-egg recognition and adhesion.

ADAM proteins: A Disintegrin And Metalloprotease (ADAM) family members, particularly ADAM2 and ADAM3, are present on the sperm surface and play a role in sperm-oocyte binding and the acrosome reaction. They function as metalloproteases and help in the processing and maturation of other proteins involved in fertilization. ADAM2, also known as Fertilin beta, is a sperm surface protein involved in sperm-egg interaction.

SPACA6 (Sperm acrosome-associated protein 6) is a protein found in the acrosome of mammalian spermatozoa. It is involved in the acrosome reaction however research on the importance of SPACA6 in the acrosomal reaction is limited. That being said, a study in mice demonstrated that the lack of SPACA6 leads to male infertility due to defects in the acrosome reaction. In this study, it was shown that sperm from SPACA6-deficient mice had a significantly reduced ability to undergo the acrosome reaction, which consequently hindered their ability to fertilize eggs.

CRISP1 (Cysteine-rich secretory protein 1)is a sperm protein that contributes to sperm-zona pellucida binding and is believed to play a role in the acrosome reaction but it is not known how if it does.

PLCzeta (PLCζ) is a sperm-specific protein that triggers calcium oscillations in the oocyte upon sperm-egg fusion. These calcium oscillations are essential for egg activation, initiating a series of events that lead to successful fertilization and the formation of a zygote.

SOF1 (Sperm Outer dense fiber protein 1) is found in the outer dense fibers of spermatozoa, and studies in mice have suggested a potential role in sperm-zona pellucida interaction and the acrosome reaction.

PRSS37 (Serine protease 37) is a testis-specific serine protease that has been suggested to be involved in the sperm-zona pellucida penetration. Research investigating the role of PRSS37 in sperm-zona pellucida penetration is relatively limited. A study conducted by Wei et al. (2013) provided evidence for the involvement of PRSS37 in sperm-zona pellucida penetration.

In this study, the authors generated PRSS37-deficient male mice through gene targeting and examined the fertility of these mice. They found that while PRSS37-null male mice were infertile, their female counterparts were fertile. Further investigation revealed that the sperm from PRSS37-null male mice showed severely impaired penetration through the zona pellucida, indicating the importance of PRSS37 in this process.

Additionally, the study demonstrated that the acrosome reaction and motility of sperm from PRSS37-null male mice were not affected, suggesting that PRSS37 specifically plays a role in sperm-zona pellucida penetration rather than in the acrosome reaction or sperm motility.

The list above is not exhaustive, and other proteins are likely to be involved in the complex process of the acrosome reaction and subsequent events leading to fertilization. Many of these proteins are still being investigated to determine their precise functions and interactions during fertilization.

#############################

Now for a bit of additional information for those that wish to more fully understand the following material.

In the Pfam database, sequence alignments of protein families are represented using single-letter codes for amino acids. These single-letter codes are a standardized system for representing the 20 common amino acids found in proteins. In the sequence alignment, each letter corresponds to a specific amino acid residue in the protein sequence.

Here is the list of the 20 common amino acids and their corresponding single-letter codes:

Alanine (A)
Arginine (R)
Asparagine (N)
Aspartic acid (D)
Cysteine (C)
Glutamine (Q)
Glutamic acid (E)
Glycine (G)
Histidine (H)
Isoleucine (I)
Leucine (L)
Lysine (K)
Methionine (M)
Phenylalanine (F)
Proline (P)
Serine (S)
Threonine (T)
Tryptophan (W)
Tyrosine (Y)
Valine (V)

Additionally you may see sequence alignments may include specific symbols or characters to represent gaps, insertions, or deletions in the alignment. For example:

A dash (-) represents a gap in the alignment, indicating that a residue is missing or not conserved at that position in the protein sequence for a particular species.
An "X" signifies that the amino acid residue at a particular position is not known or could not be determined.
A "B" stands for either aspartic acid (D) or asparagine (N), when the specific amino acid cannot be determined.
A "Z" represents either glutamic acid (E) or glutamine (Q) when the specific amino acid cannot be determined.
These single-letter codes and symbols provide a compact and efficient way to represent protein sequences and display alignments across multiple species, highlighting conserved regions and variations within protein families.


So for instance if we wanted to compare CD9 between Humans, Dogs, Horses, and Mice, we would have the following Protein sequences:


Human:
MPVKGGTKCIKYLLFGFNFIFWLAGIAVLAIGLWLRFDSQTKSIFEQETNNNNSSFYTGV
YILIGAGALMMLVGFLGCCGAVQESQCMLGLFFGFLLVIFAIEIAAAIWGYSHKDEVIKE
VQEFYKDTYNKLKTKDEPQRETLKAIHYALNCCGLAGGVEQFISDICPKKDVLETFTVKS
CPDAIKEVFDNKFHIIGAVGIGIAVVMIFGMIFSMILCCAIRRNREMV

Dog:
MPVKGGTKCIKYLLFGFNFVFWLAGIAVLAVGLWLRFDSQTKSIFEQDTQPSSFYTGVYI
LIGAGALMMLVGFLGCCGAVQESQCMLGLFFGFLLVIFAIEIAAAIWGYSHKDEVIKEVQ
EFYKDTYSKLKSKDEPQRDTLKAIHYALNCCGLVGGVEQFISDICPQKDVLSSITVKPCP
EAIKEVFQNKFHIIGAVGIGIAVVMIFGMIFSMILCCAIRRSREMV

Horse:
MPVKGGTKCIKYLLFGFNFVFWLAGIAVLAIGLWLRFDSQTKSIFEQENNNSSFYTGVYI
LIGAGALIMVVGFLGCCGAVQESQCMLGLFFCFLLVIFAIEIAAAIWGYSHKDEVIKDIQ
EFYKDTYNKLKTKDEPQRETLKAIHYAVGHLCKDPDPCGLSGGRLCTWDACHTSLCRSSF
YLFLSPPSLSLQLDCCGIVGGVEQFISDICPQKDVLSSFTTKPCPEAIKEVFDNKFHIIG
AVGIGIAVVMIFGMIFSMILCCAIRRSREMV

Mouse:
MPVKGGSKCIKYLLFGFNFIFWLAGIAVLAIGLWLRFDSQTKSIFEQENNHSSFYTGVYI
LIGAGALMMLVGFLGCCGAVQESQCMLGLFFGFLLVIFAIEIAAAVWGYTHKDEVIKELQ
EFYKDTYQKLRSKDEPQRETLKAIHMALDCCGIAGPLEQFISDTCPKKQLLESFQVKPCP
EAISEVFNNKFHIIGAVGIGIAVVMIFGMIFSMILCCAIRRSREMV

Sources:
Human: https://www.ensembl.org/Homo_sapien...010278;r=12:6200400-6238266;t=ENST00000009180
Dog: https://www.ensembl.org/Canis_lupus...3;r=27:39099221-39131485;t=ENSCAFT00845052450
Horse: https://www.ensembl.org/Equus_cabal...02;r=6:34796287-34828525;t=ENSECAT00000111308
Mouse: https://www.ensembl.org/Mus_musculu...;r=6:125437229-125471754;t=ENSMUST00000032492


#############################

When preforming comparative analysis, these will be length matched with gaps added to find the common amino acids in the protein.

When length correcting CD9 we get the following Comparison.

The similarity between human and dog is 93.04%.
The similarity between human and horse is 76.92%.
The similarity between human and mouse is 90.11%.

The reason I choose these three animals is due to the fact that mice are most commonly used for testing due to their similarity to humans in many regards. I included horse, because of the results that were shown in a study mentioned here: https://www.zoovilleforum.net/threads/dog-semen-human-egg-fertilization.7841/post-1702428

I was curious to see if any inference could be made as to if canine sperm would behave the same way as Horse Sperm do with a human ovum.


Ok, so lets go down the list of Proteins and see what's what. Note, all of these comparisons are length corrected. This might not be 100% accurate as it can be very difficult to deduce where to cut and lengthen a string to match.


ZP2:
The similarity between human and dog 65.15%.
The similarity between human and horse 66.53%.
The similarity between human and mouse 47.12%.

ZP3:
The similarity between human and dog 67.29%.
The similarity between human and horse <10%.
The similarity between human and mouse 66.20%.

ZP4:
The similarity between human and dog 62.54%.
The similarity between human and horse <10%.
The similarity between human and mouse 69.81%.

JUNO:
The similarity between human and dog is 54.09%. (The dogs protein has a very different length, if we lop off that end bit our similarity is = 67.45%)
The similarity between human and horse is 74.00%.
The similarity between human and mouse is 64.40%.

ADAM2:
The similarity between human and dog is 69.64%.
The similarity between human and horse is 40.62%.
The similarity between human and mouse is 50.07%.

SPACA6:
The similarity between human and dog 70.46%.
The similarity between human and horse 81.23%.
The similarity between human and mouse 53.24%.

PRSS37:
The similarity between human and dog 85.53%.
The similarity between human and horse 85.11%.
The similarity between human and mouse 82.28%.


The following do not seem to have analogous proteins between the four species so I didn't spend the time to analyze these. Someone else can if they want. ;)

ZP1, ADAM3, CRISP1, PLCzeta, GLIPR1L1.

#############################

So what in all this am I focusing on. Research does tend to show that CD9 is more important for sperm-zona pellucida interaction than IZUMO1R.

CD9 (Cluster of Differentiation 9) is a cell surface protein expressed on both the oocyte and sperm surfaces that is involved in a variety of biological processes, including cell adhesion, migration, and fusion. CD9 is known to interact with other proteins, including integrins and ADAMs, to mediate sperm-egg fusion.

IZUMO1R (Izumo1 receptor) is a protein expressed on the oocyte surface that is involved in the recognition and binding of IZUMO1 on the surface of sperm. IZUMO1R plays a critical role in the fusion of sperm and egg membranes during fertilization, but it is not directly involved in sperm-zona pellucida interaction.

On the sperm side of the matter research tends to show that while both ADAM2 and SPACA6 are involved in sperm-zona pellucida interaction in human reproduction, but ADAM2 is considered more important.

ADAM2 plays a crucial role in sperm-egg interaction by binding to a glycoprotein on the surface of the egg called zona pellucida glycoprotein 3 (ZP3).

On the other hand, SPACA6 is also involved in sperm-egg interaction, but its exact function is not yet fully understood. It is believed to play a role in the formation of the acrosome, a structure on the head of the sperm that helps it penetrate the zona pellucida.

So lets look at the ones that stand out as important, but cataloged by species instead of protein.

Dog similarity to Human:
CD9: 93.04%
ZP3: 67.29%
JUNO: 54.09% (at best 67.45%)
ADAM2: 69.64%
SPACA6: 70.46%

Horse similarity to Human:
CD9: 76.92%
ZP3: <10%
JUNO: 74.00%
ADAM2: 40.62%
SPACA6: 81.23%

Mouse similarity to Human:
CD9: 90.11%
ZP3: 66.20%
JUNO: 64.40%
ADAM2: 50.07%
SPACA6: 53.24%

With research seemingly indicating that CD9, ZP3, and ADAM2 being the playing the primary roles in Sperm/Egg interaction and initial capture, the numbers show that Dogs are more similar to Humans than Horses are.

So we can tentatively infer that the interaction between Canine Sperm and a Human Ovum should behave somewhere between the interaction of Horse Sperm and a Human Ovum and a Human Sperm and Human Ovum.

To what extent that is, I have no idea. We cannot infer much more than this... and anyone who reads this and thinks "The Science is settled" is an idiot and deserves to be mocked relentlessly. I have not ready every study on this, so there may be studies out there that contradict my inferences. Furthermore, this is an inferrence based on nothing more than protien similarity, but those amino acid differences between proteins matter. They will affect the way the protein folds and interacts with other proteins. This is very much an inference based on an inference based on an assumption.
This is not proven in any meaning of the word. This is effectively nothing more than an educated guess backed by logical deduction.

It is important to keep in mind that we are only talking about Sperm Capture.

This does not mean that the Acrosomal Reaction occurs.
This does not mean ZP Penetration occurs.
This does not mean Fertilization occurs.
This does not mean a Hybrid is formed.
This does not mean a Zygote will implant in the uterine wall.
This only means... at best... that canine sperm may 'stick' to a human egg... nothing more.


Ok now that that is out of the way for the tards that will think this means their dreams will come true...

I am actually somewhat surprised that Dogs are protein sequence wise, more similar to Humans than Mice. I did not expect that to be the case. Outside of ZP2, ZP4, and JUNO, the Canine's protein sequence was all closer to humans.

Note: I may make minor corrections to this over time if I realize later I had any typos, grammatical errors, or I explained something incorrectly because it's late and I'm trying to quickly get this into a digestible format for people who don't have a degree in biology and spend free time reading up on micro-cellular biology. ;)

#############################

Source for those who want to go down the rabbit hole, in no particular order...
(I had to break these links so that the page wouldnt freak out trying to render previews. You can fix the link by removing the extra space.



https:/ /www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-62091-y
https:/ /www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/75202
https:/ /www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene?Db=gene&Cmd=DetailsSearch&Term=147650
https:/ /rgd.mcw.edu/rgdweb/report/gene/main.html?id=1588836
https:/ /www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9671554/
https:/ /www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.02.01.478669v2.full
https:/ /www.genecards.org/cgi-bin/carddisp.pl?gene=IZUMO1R
https:/ /swissmodel.expasy.org/repository/uniprot/A6ND01?range=20-228&template=5f4e.1.B
https:/ /www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbe/pdbe-kb/proteins/A6ND01/structures
https:/ /alphafold.ebi.ac.uk/entry/A6ND01
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Canis_lupus_familiaris/Transcript/Summary?db=core;g=ENSCAFG00845020509;r=21:6777062-6784386;t=ENSCAFT00845036118
https:/ /www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/607523
https:/ /www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/390243
https:/ /www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Structure/cdd/cddsrv.cgi?uid=397250
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Equus_caballus/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSECAG00000002989;r=12:24179479-24189489;t=ENSECAT00000003876
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Transcript/Sequence_Protein?db=core;g=ENSG00000149506;r=11:60867542-60875693;t=ENST00000278853
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Mus_musculus/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSMUSG00000024734;r=19:10891651-10897996;t=ENSMUST00000025641
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Canis_lupus_familiaris/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSCAFG00845004559;r=6:7406839-7415182;t=ENSCAFT00845008161
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Mus_musculus/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSMUSG00000004948;r=5:136008953-136017478;t=ENSMUST00000005073
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSG00000188372;r=7:76397518-76442071
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Equus_caballus/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSECAG00000008731;r=13:10561209-10570863;t=ENSECAT00000009170
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Canis_lupus_familiaris/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSCAFG00845002311;r=4:2343307-2350533;t=ENSCAFT00845004088
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSG00000116996;r=1:237877864-237890922
GLLLQQCWATPSTDPLSQPQWPILVKGCPYIGDNYQTQLIPVQKALDLPFPSHHQRFSIF
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Mus_musculus/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSMUSG00000020226;r=10:75893328-75946795;t=ENSMUST00000120757
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Equus_caballus/Transcript/Sequence_Protein?db=core;g=ENSECAG00000010697;r=1:74820305-74834029;t=ENSECAT00000101449
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Transcript/https://useast.ensembl.org/Equus_caballus/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSECAG00000011049;r=20:48856838-48887485
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Mus_musculus/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSMUSG00000025431;r=17:40604649-40630098;t=ENSMUST00000026498
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Canis_lupus_familiarisgermanshepherd/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSCAFG00805030125;r=16:26520796-26652100
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSG00000104755;r=8:39743735-39838227
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Equus_caballus/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSECAG00000000073;r=27:6427508-6562796
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Mus_musculus/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSMUSG00000022039;r=14:66264778-66315182
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSG00000156886;r=16:31393335-31426505;t=ENST00000389202
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Canis_lupus_familiaris/Gene/
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Canis_lupus_familiaris/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSCAFG00845030911;r=16:7300899-7306701;t=ENSCAFT00845054940
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSG00000165076;r=7:141836300-141841487;t=ENST00000350549
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Equus_caballus/Transcript/Sequence_Protein?db=core;g=ENSECAG00000007637;r=4:94708134-94713793;t=ENSECAT00000007704
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Mus_musculus/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSMUSG00000029909;r=6:40491758-40496442
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Canis_lupus_familiaris/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSCAFG00845003418;r=6:24381539-24393797;t=ENSCAFT00845006076
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSG00000103310;r=16:21197450-21214510
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Equus_caballus/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSECAG00000019961;r=13:26897628-26918256
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Mus_musculus/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSMUSG00000030911;r=7:119725995-119744514;t=ENSMUST00000033207
Reference:
https:/ /bmcbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12915-019-0701-1
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Canis_lupus_familiaris/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSCAFG00845020509;r=21:6777062-6784386;t=ENSCAFT00845036118
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Canis_lupus_familiaris/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSCAFG00845004847;r=1:105901344-105909988;t=ENSCAFT00845008679
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/homo_sapiens/Gene/Summary?g=ENSG00000182310&db=core
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Canis_lupus_familiaris/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSCAFG00845004847;r=1:105901344-105909988;t=ENSCAFT00845008679
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Equus_caballus/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSECAG00000006938;r=10:21663697-21676161
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Mus_musculus/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSMUSG00000080316;r=17:18047420-18063271;t=ENSMUST00000172097
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSG00000173401;r=12:75334670-75370560
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Canis_lupus_familiaris/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSCAFG00845017781;r=12:2582113-2583737;t=ENSCAFT00845031475
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Equus_caballus/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSECAG00000015592;r=28:4284888-4323990
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Mus_musculus/Gene/Summary?db=core;g=ENSMUSG00000020213;r=10:111896094-111914415;t=ENSMUST00000073617
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSG00000183560;r=11:94304580-94308146;t=ENST00000687084
https:/ /www.ensembl.org/Canis_lupus_familiaris/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSCAFG00845020509;r=21:6777062-6784386;t=ENSCAFT00845036118
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Equus_caballus/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSECAG00000007254;r=7:54977424-55001377;t=ENSECAT00000031919
https:/ /useast.ensembl.org/Mus_musculus/Transcript/ProteinSummary?db=core;g=ENSMUSG00000031933;r=9:14797110-14815245;t=ENSMUST00000034409


Other Studies:

Cho, C., Bunch, D. O., Faure, J. E., Goulding, E. H., Eddy, E. M., Primakoff, P., & Myles, D. G. (1998). Fertilization defects in sperm from mice lacking fertilin beta. Science, 281(5384), 1857-1859.

Blobel, C. P., Wolfsberg, T. G., Turck, C. W., Myles, D. G., Primakoff, P., & White, J. M. (1992). A potential fusion peptide and an integrin ligand domain in a protein active in sperm-egg fusion. Nature, 356(6366), 248-252.

Almeida, E. A., Huovila, A. P., Sutherland, A. E., Stephens, L. E., Calarco, P. G., Shaw, L. M., Mercurio, A. M., Sonnenberg, A., Primakoff, P., Myles, D. G., & White, J. M. (1995). Mouse egg integrin α6β1 functions as a sperm receptor. Cell, 81(7), 1095-1104.

Le Naour, F., Rubinstein, E., Jasmin, C., Prenant, M., & Boucheix, C. (2000). Severely reduced female fertility in CD9-deficient mice. Science, 287(5451), 319-321.

Wei, Z., Chen, X., Wang, W., Cao, Y., Zhang, S., Wang, X., He, Z., Zhou, P., & Dong, C. (2013). Disruption of testis-specific serine protease 37 (PRSS37) causes male infertility. The FASEB Journal, 27(12), 4867-4878.

Inoue, N., Ikawa, M., Isotani, A., & Okabe, M. (2005). The immunoglobulin superfamily protein Izumo is required for sperm to fuse with eggs. Nature, 434(7030), 234-238.

Bianchi, E., Doe, B., Goulding, D., & Wright, G. J. (2014). Juno is the egg Izumo receptor and is essential for mammalian fertilization. Nature, 508(7497), 483-487.

Aydin, H., Sultana, A., Li, S., Thavalingam, A., & Lee, J. E. (2016). Molecular architecture of the human sperm IZUMO1 and egg JUNO fertilization complex. Nature, 534(7608), 562-565.

Ohto, U., Ishida, H., Krayukhina, E., Uchiyama, S., Inoue, N., & Shimizu, T. (2016). Structure of IZUMO1-JUNO reveals sperm-oocyte recognition during mammalian fertilization. Nature, 534(7608), 566-569.

Fujihara, Y., Oji, A., Larasati, T., Kojima-Kita, K., Ikawa, M. (2018). Human Globozoospermia-Related Gene Spata16 Is Required for Sperm Formation Revealed by CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Mouse Models. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 19(10), 2909.
 
Last edited:
This may be off topic for your thread here, but I think somewhat related.

I've wondered about the possibility of a zooinotic (Sp?) virus actually swapping out bits of DNA from one species to another.

Keep in mind my area of study is electronics and I'm not near as well versed in biology.

But my curiosity was over a period of perhaps thousands if not tens of thousands of years or even longer, how much effect that could have on the DNA of either species..

Shoot me down if that was a dumb thought..
 
Only one comment, Miz Ally, because your analysis is pretty tight ( always a good thing😆 )
You state:

" Yes there is a protein coating around the oocyte, which spermatozoa have to bond with and burrow through. But it would make no sense for females oocytes to evolve to know how to deal with other species spermatozoa."

But it seems to me that throughout a long, long chain of evolutionary development, there are a lot of hanging processes that stay in the system and dont get weeded out over time because effectively they present as null. If a flatworm had such an ability, for instance, it might not get processed out of the gene pool if enough of the flatworm successors were reinforcing its presence. If such a trait jumped forward on the successive progression, from each slow move up the ladder, it might remain, even without a purpose. That the effects of Time can be cumulatively immense, we know. But is it not possible that there is a sort of living version of " If it ain't broke, don't fix it"?

The process of Evolution, as we see it today, is itself evolving. But it doesn't seem to DEvolve at as fast a rate.

I doubt that having the "skill" of kicking out the interloper in that fashion would change anything...nor is it ever going to be remotely possible for a human/insert species here to crossbreed. But living processes ARE conservative...otherwise our genes wouldnt show such a percentage variance in the presence of Neanderthal genes.
 
Only one comment, Miz Ally, because your analysis is pretty tight ( always a good thing😆 )
You state:

" Yes there is a protein coating around the oocyte, which spermatozoa have to bond with and burrow through. But it would make no sense for females oocytes to evolve to know how to deal with other species spermatozoa."

But it seems to me that throughout a long, long chain of evolutionary development, there are a lot of hanging processes that stay in the system and dont get weeded out over time because effectively they present as null.

You're correct, there's a lot of "legacy code" in our DNA, however specific to this discussion whatever remains would be remnants of a preancestor, not another modern species. The similarity that exists between modern species is because of a shared lineage, but the small but numerous changes that have occurred over eons are precisely why dogs and humans are not the same species today.

And in fact, differences between species today can be greater than the differences with their common Ancestor. Lets say there's a shared ancestor with a Protein AAA and over time that develops in two offshoot species as Proteins AAB and CAA. While they are both individually 66% similar to their ancestor, they are only 33% similar to each other.

But that shared past can sometimes still have effect today. That's what I think is going on with the Horse Sperm Egg fuzzball situation. Similar enough Proteins to stick, but that's all. It cant do more because the difference in the proteins wont allow for the proper interactions between them.

It's like Hawaiian pizza. If we're honest, it's really not pizza, but its close enough that people are willing to accept it as pizza. :ROFLMAO:
 
This might be a suitable place to post this.

I have been conducting an experiment of my own regarding the hypothesis that dog sperm might act as a contraceptive.

Hypothesis.
Hypothesis was that the dog sperm would get to the egg first, have the human egg be depleated of anti bodies and potentially be rendered useless if a canine sperm cell caused a chromosomal mismatch killing the embryo at the first cell division.

Material.
Test subjects have been a human female(A), a canine male(B), and a control test subject a human male(C), all proven to be fertile individuals.
A, 30-35 years of age.
B, 5-10 years of age.
C, 35-40 years of age.

Several different ovulation test kits have been used to keep track on when A were ovulating. No birth control were used during the duration of the test.

Method.
5 days before ovulation A stopped recieving sperm from C and were only recieving sperm from B, until end of the day ovulation happend. After ovulation A stopped recieving sperm from B and only recieved sperm from C until the next fertile period was to start.

Results.
Despite having recieved a lot of canine sperm A were fertilized by a sperm cell from C at the fourth menstrual cycle of the test period.

Conclusion.
Dog sperm does not work as a contraceptive.
No further studies needed.
 
Conclusion.
Dog sperm does not work as a contraceptive.
No further studies needed.
giphy.gif

Doggo was hoping for additional rounds of testing just to be sure. ;)
 
Back
Top