Sci Total Environ 2022 Aug 12;833:155252. Epub 2022 Apr 12.
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Anhui Medical University, 81 Meishan Road, Hefei, Anhui, China; The Key Laboratory of Major Autoimmune Diseases, 81 Meishan Road, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China. Electronic address:
Emerging evidence indicates that ambient particulate matter (PM) is harmful to male fertility, but the associations between ambient PM exposure and semen quality were inconsistent. This study aimed to quantitatively evaluate the association between ambient PM exposure and semen quality based on a large prospective cohort. Using data from the prospective assisted reproduction cohort in Anhui province, China, we included 15,112 males with 28,267 semen tests, whose partner has undergone assisted reproductive technology from September 1, 2015 to September, 22 2020. Individual ambient PM, gaseous air pollutants, and temperature exposures of the participants during 0-90, 0-9, 10-14, and 70-90 days before semen quality tests were evaluated using inverse distance weighting interpolation. Linear mixed-effects models were conducted to evaluate the relationship between PM and PM exposures and standardized semen quality parameters. Models were adjusted for age, body mass index, smoking, drinking, education attainment, occupation type, sampling month, temperature and the principal component of gaseous air pollutants. PM and PM were inversely associated with sperm concentration, total sperm count, total motility, progressive motility, total motile sperm count, and progressively motile sperm count during 0-90, 0-9, and 70-90 days period (all p < 0.05), but not 10-14 days period. The regression coefficients of PM exposure on semen quality parameters during 0-90 days period were larger than 0-9 and 70-90 days periods, and the effects of PM on semen quality parameters were stronger than PM. Our results showed that ambient PM and PM exposures were associated with semen quality, during 70-90 days and 0-9 days before sampling, and the entire spermatogenesis process. The effects of PM on semen quality parameters were stronger than PM, and the long-term effects of PM and PM, throughout spermatogenesis, were stronger than the short-term effects.