4.6 Article

Effects of oviductal and cumulus cells on in vitro fertilization and embryo development of porcine oocytes fertilized with epididymal spermatozoa

Journal

THERIOGENOLOGY
Volume 59, Issue 3-4, Pages 975-986

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0093-691X(02)01138-X

Keywords

oviductal cells; cumulus cells; oocyte; spermatozoa; IVF; pig

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study was designed to evaluate the effects of adding porcine oviductal epithelial cell (POEC) monolayers before or during the fertilization of denuded or cumulus-enclosed oocytes, in terms of fertilization results and subsequent embryo development. The variables determined were: penetration rate, mean number of spermatozoa per oocyte, male pronucleus formation rate, monospermy rate, cleavage rate after 48 h of fertilization, blastocyst rate, and mean number of nuclei per blastocyst. We used cumulus-free and cumulus-enclosed oocytes preincubated or fertilized in the presence of POEC, once the purity in epithelial cells of these cultures had been assessed. All the experiments involved the use of frozen-thawed epididymal spermatozoa to avoid replicate variability. The POEC cultures prepared showed a high proportion of epithelial cells (over 95%). Preincubation of oocytes with POEC before fertilization showed no effects on the fertilization variables determined. In contrast, during IVF under our experimental conditions, these cells attached to the cumulus cells and their interaction had a significant effect on some of the fertilization variables analyzed. The presence of POEC and cumulus cells during IVF increased oocyte penetrability. Moreover, in the absence of POEC, cumulus cells resulted in a reduced monospermy rate. On subsequent embryo culture, a lower cleavage and blastocyst formation rate were recorded when the oocytes had been preincubated with POEC before IVF. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available