4.6 Article

Birth of piglets by in vitro fertilization of zona-free porcine oocytes

期刊

THERIOGENOLOGY
卷 62, 期 8, 页码 1544-1556

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.02.016

关键词

oocytes; in vitro fertilization; porcine; embryos; development

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present experiments were conducted to optimize in vitro fertilization conditions for zona pellucida-free (ZP-free) oocytes and their subsequent development. The results demonstrated that: (1) maximal fertilization efficiency was achieved at 200 spermatozoa, per ZP-free oocyte. At this sperm dose, there were no significant differences in penetration rates and polyspermy rates from controls (zona-intact oocytes with 1000 spermatozoa/oocyte), indicating that ZPs of in vitro matured pig oocytes failed to block polyspermy during in vitro fertilization. (2) In vitro development of zygotes from ZP-free oocytes showed that there was no difference in cleavage rates. The blastocyst rate was slightly lower in the ZP-free group than the control. However, there was no difference in cell number per blastocyst between the control and the ZP-free group. (3) Examination of acrosome status by a specific fluorescein isothiocyanate-conjugated peanut agglutinin (FITC-PNA) staining procedure revealed that frozen-thawed pig spermatozoa could undergo acrosome reaction and penetrate oocytes without induction by ZP. These data suggested that there are alternative mechanistic pathways for acrosome reaction induction during the fertilization process than the widely accepted sperm-zona receptor models. Finally, the viability of ZP-free derived embryos was demonstrated by full-term development and the delivery of healthy piglets following embryo transfer. In conclusion, the present experiments showed for the first time in farm animals, that normal embryos could be produced by in vitro fertilization of ZP-free oocytes in optimized conditions and that they could develop normally to full-term. (c) 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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