Vitrification of calf oocytes:: Effects of maturation stage and prematuration treatment on the nuclear and cytoskeletal components of oocytes and their subsequent development

被引:46
作者
Albarracín, JL
Morató, R
Izquierdo, D
Mogas, T [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Autonoma Barcelona, Fac Vet, Dept Med & Cirug Anim, Bellaterra 08193, Spain
[2] Univ Autonoma Barcelona, Fac Vet, Dept Ciencia Anim & Aliments, Bellaterra, Spain
关键词
GVBD; metaphase II; roscovitine; meiotic spindle; microtubule; microfilament;
D O I
10.1002/mrd.20326
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学]; Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号
071010 [生物化学与分子生物学]; 081704 [应用化学];
摘要
This study was designed to establish the effects of the meiotic stage of bovine oocytes and of a prematuration treatment with roscovitine (ROS) on their resistance to cryopreservation. Oocytes from prepubertal calves at the stages of germinal vesicle breakdown (GVBD) or at metaphase II (MII) were vitrified by the open pulled straw (OPS) method. In another experiment, oocytes were kept under meiotic arrest with 50 mu M ROS for 24 hr and vitrified at the GVBD stage. After warming, some oocyte samples were fixed, stained using specific fluorescent probes and examined under a confocal microscope. The remaining oocytes were fertilized, and cleavage and blastocyst rates recorded. Significantly lower cleavage rates were obtained for the vitrified GVBD and MII oocytes (9.9% and 12.6%, respectively) compared to control oocytes (73.9%). Significantly worse results in terms of cleavage rates were obtained when GVBD calf oocytes were exposed to cryoprotectants (CPAs: ethylene glycol plus dimethyl sulfoxide, DMSO) (13.1%) or vitrified (1.6%) after a prematuration treatment with ROS, when compared to untreated control oocytes (68.7%) or ROS-control oocytes (56.6%). None of the vitrification procedures yielded blastocysts, irrespective of the initial meiotic stage or previous prematuration treatment. Compared to the control oocytes, significantly fewer oocytes exhibited normal spindle configuration after being exposed to CPAs or after vitrification of either GVBD or MII calf oocytes. These results indicate that the vitrification protocol has a deleterious effect on the meiotic spindle organization of calf oocytes cryopreserved at both the GVBD and MII stage, which impairs the capacity for further development of the embryos derived from these vitrified oocytes. Prematuration treatment with ROS has no beneficial effect on the outcome of vitrification by the OPS method.
引用
收藏
页码:239 / 249
页数:11
相关论文
共 103 条
[1]
ALBARRACIN J, 2005, IN PRESS THERIOGENOL
[2]
Effects of vitrification in open pulled straws on the cytology of in vitro matured prepubertal and adult bovine oocytes [J].
Albarracín, JL ;
Morató, R ;
Rojas, C ;
Mogas, T .
THERIOGENOLOGY, 2005, 63 (03) :890-901
[3]
MEIOTIC MATURATION IN CULTURED BOVINE OOCYTES IS ACCOMPANIED BY REMODELING OF THE CUMULUS CELL CYTOSKELETON [J].
ALLWORTH, AE ;
ALBERTINI, DF .
DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY, 1993, 158 (01) :101-112
[4]
The effect of temperature fluctuations on the cytoskeletal organisation and chromosomal constitution of the human oocyte [J].
Almeida, PA ;
Bolton, VN .
ZYGOTE, 1995, 3 (04) :357-365
[5]
EFFECTS OF COOLING AND REWARMING ON THE MEIOTIC SPINDLE AND CHROMOSOMES OF IN VITRO-MATURED BOVINE OOCYTES [J].
AMAN, RR ;
PARKS, JE .
BIOLOGY OF REPRODUCTION, 1994, 50 (01) :103-110
[6]
Phase transition temperature and chilling sensitivity of bovine oocytes [J].
Arav, A ;
Zeron, Y ;
Leslie, SB ;
Behboodi, E ;
Anderson, GB ;
Crowe, JH .
CRYOBIOLOGY, 1996, 33 (06) :589-599
[7]
Atabay EC, 2003, JPN J VET RES, V50, P185
[8]
Barnes F. L., 1997, Theriogenology, V47, P183, DOI 10.1016/S0093-691X(97)82310-2
[9]
A confocal microscopy analysis of the spindle and chromosome configurations of human oocytes cryopreserved at the germinal vesicle and metaphase II stage [J].
Boiso, I ;
Martí, M ;
Santaló, J ;
Ponsá, M ;
Barri, PN ;
Veiga, A .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2002, 17 (07) :1885-1891
[10]
THE INCIDENCE OF CHROMOSOMAL-ABNORMALITIES IN FROZEN THAWED MOUSE OOCYTES AFTER INVITRO FERTILIZATION [J].
BOUQUET, M ;
SELVA, J ;
AUROUX, M .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 1992, 7 (01) :76-80