Translator Disclaimer
1 August 2004 Effect of 1,2-Propanediol Versus 1,2-Ethanediol on Subsequent Oocyte Maturation, Spindle Integrity, Fertilization, and Embryo Development In Vitro in the Domestic Cat
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

This study assessed the impact of various cryoprotectant (CPA) exposures on nuclear and cytoplasmic maturation in the immature cat oocyte as a prerequisite to formulating a successful cryopreservation protocol. In experiment 1, immature oocytes were exposed to 0, 0.75, 1.5, or 3.0 M of 1,2-propanediol (PrOH) or 1,2-ethanediol (EG) at room temperature (25°C) or 0°C for 30 min. After CPA removal and in vitro maturation, percentage of oocytes reaching metaphase II (MII) was reduced after exposure to 3.0 M PrOH at 0°C or 3.0 M EG at both temperatures. All CPA exposures increased MII spindle abnormalities compared to control, except 1.5 M PrOH at 25°C. In experiments 2 and 3, immature oocytes were exposed to CPA conditions yielding optimal nuclear maturation that either had caused spindle damage (0.75 M PrOH, 1.5 M EG, and 3.0 M PrOH at 25°C) or not (1.5 M PrOH at 25°C). After maturation and insemination in vitro, oocytes were cultured for 7 days to assess treatment influence on developmental competence. CPA exposure did not affect fertilization, but the high incidence of MII spindle abnormalities resulted in a low percentage of cleaved embryos. Blastocyst formation and quality were influenced by both CPA types (EG was more detrimental than PrOH) and concentration (3.0 M was more detrimental than 1.5 M). Overall, cat oocytes appear to be highly sensitive to CPA except after exposure to 1.5 M PrOH at 25°C, a treatment that still allowed ∼60% of the oocytes to reach MII and ∼20% to form blastocysts.

Pierre Comizzoli, David E. Wildt, and Budhan S. Pukazhenthi "Effect of 1,2-Propanediol Versus 1,2-Ethanediol on Subsequent Oocyte Maturation, Spindle Integrity, Fertilization, and Embryo Development In Vitro in the Domestic Cat," Biology of Reproduction 71(2), (1 August 2004). https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.104.027920
Received: 28 January 2004; Accepted: 1 April 2004; Published: 1 August 2004
JOURNAL ARTICLE
7 PAGES

This article is only available to subscribers.
It is not available for individual sale.
+ SAVE TO MY LIBRARY

SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission
Back to Top