Need for harmonized terminology in cryopreservation to support reproducibility, regulation, and translation

As cryopreservation technologies continue to develop, the need for harmonized terminology across the multitude of disciplines where cryopreservation is applied is becoming increasingly acute. Terminology in cryopreservation remains inconsistent, leading to confusion and barriers to progress. Applications of cryopreservation in medicine, food, agriculture, and conservation remain limited by this lack of consensus. Inconsistent terminology contributes to ethical, legal, and societal issues in translating and integrating new cryopreservation technologies. Here we identify the problem with examples of cryopreservation terminology that demand harmonization. We describe the need for terminological consistency by providing examples of effective terminology harmonization projects in related fields. We propose next steps, highlighting the important role that professional societies should play to reach consensus on terminology among cryopreservation stakeholders and the broader cryobiology community.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cryobiology
Published
2026-02-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cryobiol.2026.105584
Primary Topic
Reproductive Health and Technologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Need for harmonized terminology in cryopreservation to support reproducibility, regulation, and translation

Matthew J. Powell‐Palm, Timothy L. Pruett, Joseph Sushil Rao, John C. Bischof et al.
Cryobiology
Reproductive Health and Technologies
article

Need for harmonized terminology in cryopreservation to support reproducibility, regulation, and translation

Matthew J. Powell‐Palm, Timothy L. Pruett, Joseph Sushil Rao, John C. Bischof, Lakshya Gangwar, Joseph Kangas, Nikolas Zuchowicz, Korkut Uygun, Srivasupradha Ramesh, Lowell Wolfe, Susan M. Wolf, Bat-Erdene Namsrai, Irina Filz von Reiterdank
article en

Abstract

As cryopreservation technologies continue to develop, the need for harmonized terminology across the multitude of disciplines where cryopreservation is applied is becoming increasingly acute. Terminology in cryopreservation remains inconsistent, leading to confusion and barriers to progress. Applications of cryopreservation in medicine, food, agriculture, and conservation remain limited by this lack of consensus. Inconsistent terminology contributes to ethical, legal, and societal issues in translating and integrating new cryopreservation technologies. Here we identify the problem with examples of cryopreservation terminology that demand harmonization. We describe the need for terminological consistency by providing examples of effective terminology harmonization projects in related fields. We propose next steps, highlighting the important role that professional societies should play to reach consensus on terminology among cryopreservation stakeholders and the broader cryobiology community.

CryobiologyVol. 122
University of Minnesota (US), Harvard University (US), University of Minnesota System (US), Massachusetts General Hospital (US), University of Minnesota Medical Center (US), Center for Systems Biology (US), Texas A&M University (US)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Reproductive Health and Technologies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.