L Johnson1, C Staub, W B Neaves, R Yanagimachi. 1. Department of Veterinary Anatomy and Public Health, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843, USA. ljohnson1@tamu.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Various types of live, dispersed, human testicular cells in vitro were previously compared with the morphologic characteristics of human spermatogenic germ cells in situ within seminiferous tubules. The current study extends those observations by placing live human germ cells in the context of their developmental steps and stages of the spermatogenic cycle. METHODS: Live human testicular tissue was obtained from an organ-donating, brain-dead person. A cell suspension was obtained by enzymatic digestion, and dispersed cells were observed live with Nomarski optics. Testes from 10 men were obtained at autopsy within ten hours of death, fixed in glutaraldehyde, further fixed in osmium, embedded in Epon, sectioned at 20 microm, and observed unstained by Nomarski optics. RESULTS: In both live and fixed preparations, Sertoli cells have oval to pear-shaped nuclei with indented nuclear envelopes and large nucleoli, which makes their appearance distinctly different from germ cells. For germ cells, size, shape, and chromatic pattern of nuclei, the presence of meiotic metaphase figures, acrosomic vesicles/structures, tails, and/or mitochondria in the middle piece are characteristically seen in live dispersed cells and those in the fixed seminiferous tubules. These lead to identification of live germ cells in man and placement of each in the context of their developmental steps of spermatogenesis at corresponding stages of the spermatogenic cycle. CONCLUSIONS: This comparative approach allows verification of the identity of individual germ cells seen in vitro and provides a checklist of distinguishing characteristics of live human germ cells to be used in clinical procedures or by scientists interested in studying live cells at known steps in spermatogenic development characteristic of germ cells in specific stages of the spermatogenic cycle.
BACKGROUND: Various types of live, dispersed, human testicular cells in vitro were previously compared with the morphologic characteristics of human spermatogenic germ cells in situ within seminiferous tubules. The current study extends those observations by placing live human germ cells in the context of their developmental steps and stages of the spermatogenic cycle. METHODS: Live human testicular tissue was obtained from an organ-donating, brain-dead person. A cell suspension was obtained by enzymatic digestion, and dispersed cells were observed live with Nomarski optics. Testes from 10 men were obtained at autopsy within ten hours of death, fixed in glutaraldehyde, further fixed in osmium, embedded in Epon, sectioned at 20 microm, and observed unstained by Nomarski optics. RESULTS: In both live and fixed preparations, Sertoli cells have oval to pear-shaped nuclei with indented nuclear envelopes and large nucleoli, which makes their appearance distinctly different from germ cells. For germ cells, size, shape, and chromatic pattern of nuclei, the presence of meiotic metaphase figures, acrosomic vesicles/structures, tails, and/or mitochondria in the middle piece are characteristically seen in live dispersed cells and those in the fixed seminiferous tubules. These lead to identification of live germ cells in man and placement of each in the context of their developmental steps of spermatogenesis at corresponding stages of the spermatogenic cycle. CONCLUSIONS: This comparative approach allows verification of the identity of individual germ cells seen in vitro and provides a checklist of distinguishing characteristics of live human germ cells to be used in clinical procedures or by scientists interested in studying live cells at known steps in spermatogenic development characteristic of germ cells in specific stages of the spermatogenic cycle.
Authors: Leon M McClusky; Sean Patrick; Irene E J Barnhoorn; Jacobus C van Dyk; Christiaan de Jager; Maria S Bornman Journal: J Mol Histol Date: 2009-11-19 Impact factor: 2.611
Authors: Ryuzo Yanagimachi; Teruhiko Wakayama; Hidefumi Kishikawa; Gian Maria Fimia; Lucia Monaco; Paolo Sassone-Corsi Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2004-02-02 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Matthew S Wosnitzer; Anna Mielnik; Ali Dabaja; Brian Robinson; Peter N Schlegel; Darius A Paduch Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-06-12 Impact factor: 3.240