Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T13:34:28.008Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Early oocyte penetration can predict the efficiency of bovine embryo production in vitro

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2008

M. Machatkova*
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics and Reproduction, Veterinary Research Institute, Hudcova 70, 621 00 Brno, Czech Republic. Department of Genetics and Reproduction, Veterinary Research Institute, Hudcova 70, 621 00 Brno, Czech Republic.
J. Horakova
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics and Reproduction, Veterinary Research Institute, Hudcova 70, 621 00 Brno, Czech Republic.
P. Hulinska
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics and Reproduction, Veterinary Research Institute, Hudcova 70, 621 00 Brno, Czech Republic.
Z. Reckova
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics and Reproduction, Veterinary Research Institute, Hudcova 70, 621 00 Brno, Czech Republic.
K. Hanzalova
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics and Reproduction, Veterinary Research Institute, Hudcova 70, 621 00 Brno, Czech Republic.
*
All correspondence to: M. Machatkova. Department of Genetics and Reproduction, Veterinary Research Institute, Hudcova 70, 621 00 Brno, Czech Republic. Tel: +420 533 331418. Fax: +420 541 211229. e-mail: machatkova@vri.cz

Summary

The aim of this work was to characterize oocyte fertilization and embryo cleavage in nine AI bulls to find parameters suitable for prediction of in vitro fertility. According to the d8 blastocysts rate, they were categorized as high, medium and low productive (HP, MP and LP, mean: 25.4, 21.0 and 13.6% respectively) bulls. For these categories, oocyte penetration and fertilization efficiency were assessed at 6 and 18 hours post insemination (hpi), respectively. Some presumptive zygotes were cultured and cleaved and fast-cleaved embryo rates were checked at 44 hpi. The penetration rate was significantly higher for HP bulls than for MP and LP bulls (67.9 versus 50.3 and 33.1%; p < 0.01). The syngamy rate was significantly higher for HP bulls than for MP and LP bulls (21.4 versus 10.2 and 5.7%; p < 0.05). Conversely, no significant differences in fertilization rates were found among HP, MP and LP bulls. The cleavage rate was significantly higher for HP than LP bulls (82.4 versus 74.4%; p < 0.01). The fast cleavage rate was significantly higher for both HP and MP bulls, as compared with LP bulls (82.1 and 84.7 versus 73.5%; p < 0.01). A strong correlation was found between blastocyst production and penetration (r = 0.803), syngamy (r = 0.826), cleavage (r = 0.635) and fast cleavage (r = 0.709). In conclusion, all the evaluated parameters showed a predictive value, the most significant being early penetration and syngamy.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

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

Alomar, M., Mahieu, J., Verhaeghe, B., Defoin, L. & Donnay, I. (2006). Assessment of sperm quality of six bulls showing different abilities to promote embryo development in vitro. Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 18, 395402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Comizzoli, P., Marquant-Le Guienne, B., Heyman, Y. & Renard, J.P. (2000). Onset of the first S-phase is determined by paternal effect during the G1-phase in bovine zygotes. Biol. Reprod. 62, 1677–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Comizzoli, P., Urner, F., Sakkas, D. & Renard, J.P. (2003). Up-regulation of glucose metabolism during male pronucleus formation determines the early onset of the S-phase in bovine zygotes. Biol. Reprod. 68, 1934–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eid, L.N., Lorton, S.P. & Parrish, J.J. (1994). Paternal influence on S-phase in the first cell cycle of the bovine embryos. Biol. Reprod. 51, 1232–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eid, L.N. & Parrish, J.J. (1995). Duration of G2-phase and onset of M-phase during the first cell cycle of the bovine embryo is dependent on bull in vivo fertility. Theriogenology 43, 205. Abstract.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gadea, J., Matas, C. & Lucas, X. (1998). Prediction of porcine semen fertility by homologous in vitro penetration (hIVP) assay. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 54, 95108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giritharan, G., Ramakrishnappa, N., Balendran, A., Cheng, K. & Rajamahendran, R. (2005). Development of in vitro tests to predict fertility of bulls. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 85, 4752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henault, M. & Killian, G. (1995). Effect of sperm preparation and bull fertility on in vitro penetration of zona-free bovine oocytes. Theriogenology 43, 739–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hillery, F., Parrish, J. & First, N. (1990). Bull specific effect on fertilization and embryo development in vitro. Theriogenology 33, 249. Abstract.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyttel, P., Greve, T. & Callesen, H. (1989). Ultrastructural aspects of oocyte maturation and fertilization in cattle. J. Reprod. Fertil. Suppl. 38, 3547.Google ScholarPubMed
Katska, L. & Smorag, Z. (1996). Bull effect on in vitro embryo production in cattle. J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 47, Suppl. 1, 71–8.Google Scholar
Kurtu, M., Ambrose, D. & Rajamahendran, R. (1996). Cleavage rate of bovine oocytes in vitro is affected by bulls but not sperm concentration. Theriogenology 45, 257. Abstract.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsson, B. & Rodriguez-Martinez, H. (2000). Can we use in vitro fertilization tests to predict semen fertility? Anim. Reprod. Sci. 60–61, 327–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laurincik, J., Hyttel, P., Baran, V., Eckert, J., Lucas-Hahn, A., Pivko, J., Niemann, H., Brem, G. & Schellander, K. (1998). A detailed analysis of pronucleus development in bovine zygotes in vitro: cell-cycle chronology and ultrastructure. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 50, 192–9.3.0.CO;2-9>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lu, K. & Seidel, G. (2004). Effect of heparin and sperm concentration on cleavage and blastocyst development rates of bovine oocytes inseminated with flow cytometrically-sorted sperm. Theriogenology 62, 819–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Machatkova, M., Jokesova, E., Petelikova, J., Horky, F. & Priesnitz, J. (1996). Developmental variability of bovine embryos derived in vitro: effect of the bulls. Proceedings of the 7th French–Czech–Slovak Symp. Fysiol. Reprod., Liblice, Czech Republic, 23–24 May 1996 p. 54.Google Scholar
Machatkova, M., Krausova, K., Jokesova, E. & Tomanek, M. (2004). Developmental competence of bovine oocytes: effects of follicle size and the phase of follicular wave on in vitro embryo production. Theriogenology 61, 329–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marquant-Le Guienne, B., Humblot, P., Thibier, M. & Thibault, C. (1990). Evaluation of bull semen fertility by homologous in vitro fertilization tests. Reprod. Nutr. Dev. 30, 259–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Palma, G. A. & Brem, G. (1994). Are there bulls unsuitable for IVF? Proceedings of the 10th Scientific Meeting of A.E.T.E., Lyon, France, 10–11 September 1994 p. 230.Google Scholar
Palma, G. A., Braun, J., Stolla, R. & Brem, G. (1996). The ability to produce embryos in vitro using semen from bulls with a low non-return rate. Theriogenology 45, 308. Abstract.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palma, G. A. & Sinowatz, F. (2004). Male and female effects on in vitro production of bovine embryos. Anat. Histol. Embryol. 33, 257–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Park, C., Ohgoda, O. & Niwa, K. (1989). Penetration of bovine follicular oocytes by frozen-thawed spermatozoa in the presence of caffeine and heparin. J. Reprod. Fertil. 86, 577–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Puglisi, R., Balduzzi, D. & Galli, A. (2004). In vitro sperm penetration speed and its relationship with in vivo bull fertility. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 39, 424–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saeki, K., Kato, H., Hosoi, Y., Miyake, M., Utsumi, K. & Iritani, A. (1991). Early morphological events of in vitro fertilized bovine oocytes with frozen-thawed spermatozoa. Theriogenology 35, 1051–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schneider, C., Ellington, J. & Wright, R. (1996). Effects of bulls with different field fertility on in vitro embryo cleavage and development using sperm co-culture systems. Theriogenology 45, 262. Abstract.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, C., Ellington, J. & Wright, R. (1999). Relationship between bull field fertility and in vitro embryo production using sperm preparation methods with and without somatic cell co-culture. Theriogenology 51, 1085–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vandaele, L., Mateusen, B., Maes, D., de Kruif, A. & Van Soom, A. (2006). Is apoptosis in bovine in vitro produced embryos related to early developmental kinetics and in vivo bull fertility? Theriogenology 65, 1691–703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Soom, A., Van Vlaenderen, I., Mahmoudzadeh, R., Deluyker, H. & de Kruif, A. (1992). Compaction rate of in vitro fertilized bovine embryos related to the interval from insemination to first cleavage. Theriogenology 38, 905–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, F., Lonergan, P., Rizos, D., Corridan, D. & Boland, M. (2001a). Bull effects on kinetics of fertilization in vitro and the implications for subsequent embryo development. Theriogenology 55, 375. Abstract.Google Scholar
Ward, F., Rizos, D., Corridan, D., Quinn, K., Boland, M. & Lonergan, P. (2001b). Paternal influence on the time of the first embryonic cleavage post insemination and the implications for subsequent bovine embryo development in vitro and fertility in vivo. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 60, 4755.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ward, F., Enright, B., Rizos, D., Boland, M. & Lonergan, P. (2002). Optimization of in vitro bovine embryos production: effect of duration of maturation, length of gamete co-incubation, sperm concentration and sire. Theriogenology 57, 2105–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ward, F., Rizos, D., Boland, M. & Lonergan, P. (2003). Effect of reducing sperm concentration during IVF on the ability to distinguish between bulls of high and low field fertility: work in progress. Theriogenology 59, 1575–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xu, P. & Greve, T. (1988). A detailed analysis of early events during in vitro fertilization of bovine follicular oocytes. J. Reprod. Fertil. 82, 127–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, X., Giles, J., Liu, Z., Jiang, S., Presicce, G., Foote, R. & Wang, C. (1995). In vitro fertilization and embryo development are influenced by IVF technicians and bulls. Theriogenology 43, 360. Abstract.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, B., Larsson, B., Lundeheim, N. & Rodriguez-Martinez, H. (1997). Relationship between embryo development in vitro and 56-day non-return rates of cows inseminated with frozen-thawed semen from dairy bulls. Theriogenology 48, 221–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, B., Larsson, B., Lundeheim, N., Haard, M. & Rodriguez-Martinez, H. (1999). Prediction of bull fertility by combined in vitro assessment of frozen-thawed semen from young dairy bulls entering an AI-programme. Int. J. Androl. 22, 253260.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed