4.6 Article

Non-frozen preservation protocols for mature mouse oocytes dramatically extend their developmental competence by reducing oxidative stress

Journal

MOLECULAR HUMAN REPRODUCTION
Volume 20, Issue 4, Pages 318-329

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/molehr/gat088

Keywords

aging; antioxidant; low temperature; oocyte preservation; oxidative stress

Funding

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2012CB944403, 2014CB138503]
  2. China National Natural Science Foundation [31272444, 30972096]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this study was to test whether aging induces oxidative stress (OS) during oocyte preservation at different temperatures and whether the oocyte competence can be extended by antioxidant supplementation. The increase in activation susceptibility was efficiently prevented when oocytes were preserved at 37C for 9 h in HCZB medium with 10.27 mM pyruvate and 10 M -tocopherol, at 25C for 30 h with 20.27 mM pyruvate, and at 15C for 96 h and at 5C for 48 h with 10.27 mM pyruvate. Satisfactory blastocyst development was achieved after oocyte preservation at 37C for 9 h, at 25C for 30 h, at 15C for 48 h and at 5C for 24 h using the above protocols but with cysteamine/cystine supplementation. Transfer of blastocysts obtained from the above protocols showed no difference in pregnancy outcome between newly ovulated and preserved oocytes. Because oocytes preserved at 15C for 48 h were fertilized after a 6-h recovery culture, aging of ovulated mouse oocytes has been successfully prevented for 54 h. Assays for ROS and glutathione indicated that in vitro preservation caused marked OS in oocytes. In conclusion, marked OS was observed following in vitro preservation of mature oocytes at different temperatures. Whereas any protocol that reduced OS could inhibit activation susceptibility, only those protocols that decreased OS while increasing glutathione synthesis could sustain oocyte competence.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available