4.5 Article

High hydrostatic pressure: a new way to improve in vitro developmental competence of porcine matured oocytes after vitrification

期刊

REPRODUCTION
卷 135, 期 1, 页码 13-17

出版社

BIOSCIENTIFICA LTD
DOI: 10.1530/REP-07-0362

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of the present study was to improve cryotolerance using high hydrostatic pressure (HHP) pretreatment of porcine in vitro matured (IVM) oocytes, to facilitate their further developmental competence after parthenogenetic activation. A total of 1668 porcine IVM oocytes were used in our present study. The pressure tolerance and optimal duration of recovery after HHP treatment were determined. Oocytes were treated with either 20 or 40 MPa (200 and 400 times greater than atmospheric pressure) for 60 min, with an interval of 10, 70, and 130 min between pressure treatment and subsequent vitrification under each pressure parameter. Oocytes from all vitrification groups had much lower developmental competence than fresh oocytes (P<0.01) measured as cleavage and blastocyst rates. However, significantly higher blastocyst rates (P<0.01) were obtained in the groups of 20 MPa pressure, with either 70 (11.4 +/- 2.4%) or 130 (13.1 +/- 3.2%) min recovery, when compared with the vitrification control group without H HP treatment where no blastocysts were obtained. The influence of temperature at H H P treatment on further embryo development was also investigated. Treatments of 20 MPa with 70 min recovery were performed at 37 degrees C or 25 degrees C. Oocytes pressurized at 37 degrees C had a significantly higher blastocyst (14.1 +/- 1.4%) rate than those treated at 25 C (5.3 +/- 1.1%; P<0.01). Our results demonstrate that HHP pretreatment could considerably improve the developmental competence of vitrified pig in vitro matured (IVM) oocytes. The HHP pretreatment will be tested as a means to improve survival and developmental competence at different developmental stages in different species including humans.

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

4.5
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