3.9 Article

Modifications of surface carbohydrates on bovine spermatozoa mediated by oviductal fluid: a flow cytometric study using lectins

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ANDROLOGY
卷 30, 期 2, 页码 108-114

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2605.2006.00717.x

关键词

carbohydrate residues; FITC lectins; oviductal fluid; sperm capacitation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of the present study was to characterize and quantify changes in exposed saccharide residues of bovine sperm during capacitation in oviductal fluid (ODF) using flow cytometry (FC). Bovine sperm were incubated with 0% or 50% non-luteal ODF for 30 min or 3.5 h. After incubation, sperm were labelled with 11 fluorescein isothiocyanate-labelled lectins and evaluated for lectin binding with FC. Furthermore, inhibiting sugars were used to determine specificity of lectin binding to oligosaccharides on the sperm surface. After 30 min incubation, there was a 91% decrease in fluorescence intensity of labelled sperm incubated in WGA, a 76% decline for Con A, 75% decline for BS-I and a 36% decline for DBA. These differences remained approximately the same over the 3.5-h incubation. Interestingly, although there was no reduction in UEA-I binding at 30 min, a significant reduction (23%) was observed at 3.5 h. Con A fluorescence was mostly inhibited with either alpha-D-glucose or alpha-D-mannose (86% and 90% respectively). BS-I fluorescence was reduced after prior incubation of the control samples with N-acetyl-galactosamine and galactose by 74% and 80% respectively. After prior incubation with N-acetyl-galactosamine DBA fluorescence reduced by 18% in the control samples. With UEA-I no fluorescence reduction was observed after prior incubation with L-fucose. We have demonstrated that capacitation of bovine sperm in ODF is accompanied by a quantitative reduction in individual lectin binding sites. These modifications may be crucial to the subsequent signalling events involved with sperm-zona binding, zona penetration or interaction with the oolema.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据