4.7 Article

A single medium supports development of bovine embryos throughout maturation, fertilization and culture

期刊

HUMAN REPRODUCTION
卷 15, 期 2, 页码 395-401

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/15.2.395

关键词

bovine; culture medium; embryo culture; in-vitro fertilization; oocyte maturation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Oocytes and embryos are typically exposed sequentially to varying culture media in standard in-vitro protocols. Expenditures of energy may be required following each medium change to adjust to the changing environment. Therefore, a single base medium was evaluated for its ability to support in-vitro maturation, fertilization and preimplantation development (IVM/F/C) of bovine oocytes and embryos. Four treatments were examined: a standard maturation [tissue culture medium (TCM) 199 with bovine calf serum (BCS)], fertilization (modified Tyrode's medium with albumin, lactate and pyruvate) and culture (hamster embryo culture medium/TCM with BCS) system (control) and three synthetic oviductal fluid (SOF) treatments; maturation in SOF with bovine serum albumin (SOFBSA), SOF with bovine calf serum (SOFBCS) or the control maturation medium (TCM199 with BCS; SOF199), followed by fertilization and culture in SOF medium. The percentage of total inseminated oocytes successfully developing to the morula and blastocyst stage did not differ (P > 0.05) between treatments (control, 30.5 +/- 3.5; SOFBSA, 24.6 +/- 3.2; SOFBCS, 22.4 +/- 4.7; SOF199, 27.3 +/- 3.2), Embryos cultured in SOFBCS (92.1 +/- 6.4) had significantly higher cell numbers (P < 0.05) than those cultured in control (74.8 +/- 4.8) and SOFBSA (71.6 +/- 6.6) but not SOF199 (81.2 +/- 6.8), In conclusion, a single medium can be used successfully throughout maturation, fertilization and pre-implantation embryo development, Moreover, inclusion of serum during maturation in the single medium system resulted in significantly greater cell numbers, possibly reflecting increased quality of the embryos produced.

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

4.7
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