A decision tree for genetics or sperm-sexing entities considering sales of
sexed sperm is discussed in terms of: (a) how best to avoid harm; (b) how b
est to do good; (c) needed synergy with other assisted reproductive technol
ogies; (d) constraints on biotechnology; and (e) costs with current and lik
ely technologies versus potential benefits to producers. The sexed-sperm in
dustry might wish to take a pro-active stance on societal issues potentiall
y affecting use of sexed sperm. For most sales in animal agriculture, cost
of added value must be <50% of benefit. Cost is less important for emotiona
lly-driven uses with horses and human beings. Current procedures for flow-s
orting allow most sperm to retain their fertilizing potential. Added cost t
o produce and package 2 x 10(6) sperm is estimated at US $30 to US $46 with
flow sorted sperm. Estimating cost of any alternative technology is premat
ure. For IVF/embryo transfer (ET), cost and numbers of flow-sorted sexed sp
erm are appropriate for commercial use. For use in low-dose AI, however, ad
ded cost to supply one insemination dose must be near US $12. Flow-sorting
instruments with higher throughput and lower purchase and operating costs a
re obligatory for economic application in most AI situations. Developers of
antibody-based separations also will face issues of retention of fertilizi
ng potential while minimizing cell loss, separation of living from dead spe
rm concurrent with sperm sexing, output, and cost. To benefit producers and
consumers in a changing world, genetics and sperm-sexing companies will ha
ve to collaborate and interface to provide funding for needed research and
development and to recover these costs, using mechanisms not yet obvious. (
C) 1999 by Elsevier Science Inc.