CSIRO Publishing Books Journals About Us Shopping Cart You are here: Journals > Reproduction, Fertility and Development   
Reproduction, Fertility and Development
  Vertebrate Reproductive Science & Technology
 
Search
 
 
  Advanced Search
   

Journal Home
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Contacts
Content
Online Early
Current Issue
Just Accepted
All Issues
Special Issues
Research Fronts
Sample Issue
For Authors
General Information
Instructions to Authors
Submit Article
Open Access
For Referees
General Information
Review Article
For Subscribers
Subscription Prices
Customer Service
Print Publication Dates

 e-Alerts
Subscribe to our email Early Alert or RSS feeds for the latest journal papers.

 Connect with us
facebook   youtube

 

Article << Previous     |     Next >>   Contents Vol 20(1)

69 REMOVAL OF CUMULUS CELLS AND PRE-INCUBATION IN CYTOCHALASIN B IMPROVE SURVIVAL OF IMMATURE CAT OOCYTES DURING VITRIFICATION

P. Comizzoli, D. E. Wildt and B. S. Pukazhenthi

Reproduction, Fertility and Development 20(1) 115 - 116

Abstract

Vitrification might be the best option to cryopreserve the immature cat oocyte because our recent studies have demonstrated that COCs are (1) highly sensitive to cryoprotectant (CPA) and require short-term exposure to prevent toxicity, and yet (2) resistant to extreme hyperosmotic conditions when pre-incubated in the cytoskeleton stabilizer cytochalasin B (CB). However, surrounding cumulus cells may inhibit the necessary rapid transport of water and CPA across the oocyte membrane during short-term exposure to vitrification solutions (VS) containing high CPA concentrations. The objective was to examine the influence of cumulus cells on oocyte survival during vitrification with or without pre-incubation in CB. Our metric of focus was the chromatin status after warming and IVM. Grade I immature oocytes (n = 420, 4 replicates) were equally allocated to one of four treatments: T1 (removal of cumulus cells in 0.2% hyaluronidase); T2 (pre-incubation in 7.5 µg mL–1 CB for 20 min); T3 (removal of cumulus cells and pre-incubation in CB (as above)); and T4 (control, no removal of cumulus cells and no pre-incubation in CB). After each treatment, half of the oocytes was washed and immediately cultured for IVM (28 h; denuded oocytes being co-cultured with an equal number of fresh COCs to circumvent the absence of cumulus cells). The other half was exposed to 10% (v/v) ethylene glycol (EG) + 10% (v/v) DMSO for 30 s, followed by exposure to VS (20% EG + 20% DMSO + 0.5 m sucrose) for 20 s at room temperature. Oocytes then were vitrified in <1 µL of VS at the tip of a plastic gutter (2 oocytes/gutter) by direct plunge into liquid nitrogen. After 1 day of storage, vitrified oocytes were warmed in 0.25 m sucrose, extensively washed, and cultured for IVM as described above. All oocytes were then fixed and Hoechst-stained to assess their chromatin status. Oocytes subjected to T1, T2, T3, and T4 without vitrification exhibited no degenerated chromatin (clumped or dispersed) after IVM. After vitrification, the incidence of degenerated chromatin was different (P < 0.05; ANOVA) among treatments, with a lower percentage (P < 0.05) when oocytes were subjected to T3 (15.5 ± 3.9%; mean ± SD) compared to T1 (26.6 ± 3.1%), T2 (48.9 ± 3.8%), or T4 (71.1 ± 3.8%). The percentage of vitrified oocytes reaching the metaphase II stage (MII) also was different (P < 0.05) among treatments with a higher incidence (P < 0.05) in the T3 group (57.8 ± 3.9%) compared to T1 (44.6 ± 3.7%), T2 (31.1 ± 7.7%), or T4 (15.5 ± 3.9%) counterparts. Percentages of non-vitrified oocytes reaching the MII were not different (P > 0.05) among treatments (range, 84.7 to 89.0%) but were higher (P < 0.05) compared to vitrified oocytes. The combination of removal of cumulus cells and pre-incubation in CB prior to vitrification had a cumulative, beneficial influence on cat oocyte survival. Interestingly, removal of cumulus cells imparted a greater benefit on oocyte survival than CB pre-incubation alone.



Full text doi:10.1071/RDv20n1Ab69

© CSIRO 2008

 
 Export Citation
 Print
  
  
    


 
Top  Email this page
 
Legal & Privacy | Contact Us | Help

CSIRO

© CSIRO 1996-2012