Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:08:23.439Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Determination of the Number of Cells in Preimplantation Embryos by Using Noninvasive Optical Quadrature Microscopy in Conjunction with Differential Interference Contrast Microscopy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2007

Judith A. Newmark ,
William C. Warger II ,
ChihChing Chang ,
Gustavo E. Herrera ,
Dana H. Brooks ,
Charles A. DiMarzio  and
Carol M. Warner
Judith A. Newmark
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA Center for Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems (CenSSIS), Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
William C. Warger II
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA Center for Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems (CenSSIS), Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
ChihChing Chang
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA Center for Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems (CenSSIS), Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
Gustavo E. Herrera
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA Center for Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems (CenSSIS), Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
Dana H. Brooks
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA Center for Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems (CenSSIS), Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
Charles A. DiMarzio
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA Center for Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems (CenSSIS), Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
Carol M. Warner
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA Center for Subsurface Sensing and Imaging Systems (CenSSIS), Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
Get access

Abstract

The number of cells in a preimplantation embryo is directly correlated to the health and viability of the embryo. There are currently no methods to count the number of cells in late-stage preimplantation embryos noninvasively. We assessed the ability of optical quadrature microscopy (OQM) to count the number of cells in mouse preimplantation embryos noninvasively. First, to test for possible light toxicity, we exposed two-cell mouse embryos to OQM and differential interference contrast (DIC) microscopy and assessed their ability to develop to the blastocyst stage. We found no inhibition of development from either mode of microscopy for up to 2 h of light exposure. We also imaged eight-cell to morula stage mouse preimplantation embryos by OQM nd developed two methods for counting the number of cells. The contour signature method (CSM) used OQM images alone and the phase subtraction method (PSM) used both OQM and DIC images. We compared both methods to standard cell counting techniques and found that the PSM was superior to all other noninvasive cell counting methods. Our work on mouse embryos should be applicable to human embryos. The ability to correctly count the number of cells in human preimplantation embryos could lead to the transfer of fewer embryos in in vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics and consequently a lower rate of high-risk multiple-infant births.

Keywords

cell countingDICembryo viabilityIVFKeck 3DFMlight toxicityOQMquadratureQTM
Type
BIOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , April 2007 , pp. 118 - 127
Copyright
© 2007 Microscopy Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2003). Multiple pregnancy and birth: Twins, triplets, and higher order multiples. Birmingham, AL: American Society for Reproductive Medicine.
Baczkowski, T., Kurzawa, R. & Glabowski, W. (2004). Methods of embryo scoring in in vitro fertilization. Reprod Biol 4, 5–22.Google Scholar
Barlow, P., Puissant, F., Van Der Zwalmen, P., Vandromme, J., Trigaux, P. & Leroy, F. (1992). In vitro fertilization, development, and implantation after exposure of mature mouse oocytes to visible light. Mol Reprod Dev 33, 297–302.Google Scholar
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2002). Assisted reproductive technology success rates. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Cozad, K.M., Verbanac, K.M., Goldbard, S.B. & Warner, C.M. (1981). An automated procedure to measure DNA synthesis in preimplantation mouse embryos. Gam Res 4, 121–131.Google Scholar
Daniel, J.C. (1964). Cleavage of mammalian ova inhibited by visible light. Nature 201, 316–317.Google Scholar
DiMarzio, C.A., Corporon, J., Warner, C.M. & Newmark, J.A. (2001). Advances in the development of a quadrature tomographic microscope. In Optical Society of America, Digest of the Spring 2001 Topical Meeting on Biomedical Optics, pp. 1–3.
Eells, J.T., Henry, M.M., Summerfelt, P., Wong-Riley, M.T., Buchmann, E.V., Kane, M., Whelan, N.T. & Whelan, H.T. (2003). Therapeutic photobiomodulation for methanol-induced retinal toxicity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100, 3439–3444.Google Scholar
Fischer, B., Schumacher, A., Hegele-Hartung, C. & Beier, H.M. (1988). Potential risk of light and room temperature exposure to preimplantation embryos. Fertil Steril 50, 938–944.Google Scholar
Glina, Y., Tsihrintzis, G.A., Warner, C.M., Hogenboom, D.O. & Dimarzio, C.A. (1999). On the use of the optical quadrature method in tomographic microscopy. SPIE Proc 3605, 101–106.Google Scholar
Gurgan, T. & Demirol, A. (2004). Why and how should multiple pregnancies be prevented in assisted reproduction treatment programmes? Reprod Biomed Online 9, 237–244.Google Scholar
Handyside, A.H. & Hunter, S. (1984). A rapid procedure for visualising the inner cell mass and trophectoderm nuclei of mouse blastocysts in situ using polynucleotide-specific fluorochromes. J Exp Zool 231, 429–434.Google Scholar
Hegele-Hartung, C., Schumacher, A. & Fischer, B. (1988). Ultrastructure of preimplantation rabbit embryos exposed to visible light and room temperature. Anat Embryol (Berl) 178, 229–241.Google Scholar
Hegele-Hartung, C., Schumacher, A. & Fischer, B. (1991). Effects of visible light and room temperature on the ultrastructure of preimplantation rabbit embryos: A time course study. Anat Embryol 183, 559–571.Google Scholar
Hirao, Y. & Yanagimachi, R. (1978). Detrimental effect of visible light on meiosis of mammalian eggs in vitro. J Exp Zool 206, 365–369.Google Scholar
Hogenboom, D.O., Dimarzio, C.A., Gaudette, T.J., Devaney, A.J. & Lindberg, S.C. (1998). Three-dimensional images generated by quadrature interferometry. Optics Lett 23, 783–785.Google Scholar
Kruger, T.F. & Stander, F.S. (1985). The effect of fluorescent light on the cleavage of two-cell mouse embryos. S Afr Med J 68, 744–745.Google Scholar
Nagy, N., Gertsenstein, M., Vintersten, K. & Behringer, R. (Eds.). (2003). Manipulating the mouse embryo. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
Nakayama, T., Noda, Y., Goto, Y. & Mori, T. (1994). Effects of visible light and other environmental factors on the production of oxygen radicals by hamster embryos. Theriogen 41, 499–510.Google Scholar
Rienzi, L., Ubaldi, F., Iacobelli, M., Romano, S., Minasi, M.G., Ferrero, S., Sapienza, F., Baroni, E. & Greco, E. (2005). Significance of morphological attributes of the early embryo. Reprod Biomed Online 10, 669–681.Google Scholar
Rijnders, P.M. & Jansen, C.A. (1998). The predictive value of day 3 embryo morphology regarding blastocyst formation, pregnancy and implantation rate after day 5 transfer following in-vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 13, 2869–2873.Google Scholar
Sauer, M.V., Francis, M., Macaso, T. & Paulson, R.J. (1991). The effect of chemiluminescent light exposure on the in vitro development of mouse embryos. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf 8, 290–292.Google Scholar
Schumacher, A. & Fischer, B. (1988). Influence of visible light and room temperature on cell proliferation in preimplantation rabbit embryos. J Reprod Fertil 84, 197–204.Google Scholar
Squirrell, J.M., Wokosin, D.L., White, J.G. & Bavister, B.D. (1999). Long-term two-photon fluorescence imaging of mammalian embryos without compromising viability. Nat Biotechnol 17, 763–767.Google Scholar
Stott, J.J., Bennett, R.E., Warner, C.M. & Dimarzio, C.A. (2001). Three-dimensional imaging with a quadrature tomographic microscope. SPIE Proc 4261, 24–32.Google Scholar
Tao, J., Tamis, R., Fink, K., Williams, B., Nelson-White, T. & Craig, R. (2002). The neglected morula/compact stage embryo transfer. Hum Reprod 17, 1513–1518.Google Scholar
Tarkowski, A.K. (1966). An air drying method for chromosome preparations of mouse eggs. Cytogen 3, 393–400.Google Scholar
Townsend, D.J., Dimarzio, C.A., Laevsky, G. & Rajadhyaksha, M. (2005). Multimodal optical microscope for imaging biological systems. SPIE Proc 5701, 136–145.Google Scholar
Townsend, D.J., Quarles, K.D., Thomas, A.L., Rockward, W.S., Warner, C.M., Newmark, J.A. & Dimarzio, C.A. (2003). Quantitative phase measurements using a quadrature tomographic microscope. SPIE Proc 4964, 59–65.Google Scholar
Warger, W.C., II, Newmark, J.A., Chang, C., Brooks, D.H., Warner, C.M. & Dimarzio, C.A. (2005). Combining optical quadrature and differential interference contrast to facilitate embryonic cell counting with fluorescent imaging for confirmation. SPIE Proc 5699, 334–351.Google Scholar