| Literature DB >> 25306508 |
Nicola A Martino1, Maria E Dell'Aquila, Manuel Filioli Uranio, Lucia Rutigliano, Michele Nicassio, Giovanni M Lacalandra, Katrin Hinrichs.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evaluation of mitochondrial function offers an alternative to evaluate embryo development for assessment of oocyte viability, but little information is available on the relationship between mitochondrial and chromatin status in equine oocytes. We evaluated these parameters in immature equine oocytes either fixed immediately (IMM) or held overnight in an Earle's/Hank's' M199-based medium in the absence of meiotic inhibitors (EH treatment), and in mature oocytes. We hypothesized that EH holding may affect mitochondrial function and that holding temperature may affect the efficiency of meiotic suppression.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25306508 PMCID: PMC4209075 DOI: 10.1186/1477-7827-12-99
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Reprod Biol Endocrinol ISSN: 1477-7827 Impact factor: 5.211
Figure 1Effects of holding in EH medium on initial chromatin configuration and meiotic competence of equine oocytes. Legend for meiotic stages: FN = Homogenous/heterogeneously fluorescent nucleus; F/I = Fibrillar/Intermediate; MI = Metaphase I; MII = Metaphase II, Deg = degenerated chromatin. Legend for treatments: EH = EH treatment (non-cultured); IMM = Immediate fixing (non cultured); EH-IVM = EH treatment and subsequent in vitro maturation; IMM-IVM = Immediate in vitro maturation. Chi Square test with the Yates correction: within each group (Non cultured or cultured for IVM) and for each meiotic stage, EH vs IMM: *P <0.05, **P <0.01 , ***P <0.001; EH-IVM vs IMM-IVM: **P <0.01 , ***P <0.001.
Effects of holding in EH medium on mitochondrial distribution pattern of equine oocytes examined before or after IVM
| Treatment | Nuclear chromatin configuration | n. of analyzed oocytes | Small mitochondrial aggregates (SA) n. (%) | Perinuclear/pericortical (P/P) n. (%) | Abnormal n. (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| FN | 4 | 4 (100) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| F/I | 2 | 2 (100) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
| CC | 24 | 9 (38) | 11 (46) | 4 (17) | |
| PI/MI | 11 | 7 (64) | 4 (36) | 0 (0) | |
|
| FN | 16 | 6 (38) | 3 (19) | 7 (44) |
| I | 13 | 11 (84) | 2 (15) | 0 (0) | |
| CC | 14 | 7 (50) | 5 (36) | 2 (14) | |
| PI/MI | 0 | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
|
| MII | 34 | 9 (26)a | 23 (68)a | 2 (6) |
|
| MII | 46 | 25 (55)b | 18 (39)b | 3 (6) |
Legend: Homogenous/heterogeneously fluorescent nucleus (FN); Fibrillar/Intermediate (F/I); Condensed chromatin (CC); Prometaphase I/Metaphase I (PI/MI); Metaphase II (MII).
Chi square test with the Yates correction: between treatments and chromatin configurations: a vs. b (P <0.05).
Effects of holding in EH medium on energy/redox parameters of equine oocytes examined before or after IVM
| Treatment | Nuclear chromatin configuration | n. of analyzed oocytes | Mitochondrial activity | Intracellular ROS levels | Mitochondria/ROS colocalization |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EH | FN | 4 | 387.42 ± 347.10a | 661.20 ± 404.12 | 0.40 ± 0.13a |
| IMM | 9 | 1248.63 ± 657.93b,* | 1330.73 ± 651.51 | 0.64 ± 0.18b | |
| EH | F/I | 2 | § | § | § |
| IMM | 13 | 273.23 ± 142.95 | 709.72 ± 423.16 | 0.56 ± 0.23 | |
| EH | CC | 20 | 545.15 ± 283.98 | 829.89 ± 336.91 | 0.63 ± 0.16 |
| IMM | 12 | 509.19 ± 242.27** | 882.61 ± 486.82 | 0.67 ± 0.14 | |
| EH | PI/MI | 11 | 653.80 ± 191.53 | 946.64 ± 561.87 | 0.71 ± 0.11 |
| IMM | 0 | § | § | § | |
| EH -IVM | POST-IVM MII | 32 | 1112.45 ± 494.10 | 1434.54 ± 686.00 | 0.76 ± 0.14 |
| IMM-IVM | 43 | 1372.64 ± 481.34 | 1982.04 ± 762.74 | 0.84 ± 0.13 |
Legend: Homogenous/heterogeneously fluorescent nucleus (FN); Fibrillar/Intermediate (F/I); Condensed chromatin (CC); Prometaphase I/Metaphase I (PI/MI); Metaphase II (MII). Mitochondrial activity and intracellular ROS levels are presented as MitoTracker and DCF fluorescence intensities expressed in Arbitrary Densitometric Units (ADU). Mitochondria/ROS colocalization is expressed as Pearson’s correlation coefficient. One-way ANOVA followed by Multiple Comparison Dunn’s method: a,b P <0.05; *, **P =0.004; § values for categories with fewer than 3 oocytes are not shown.
Figure 2Effects of holding temperature on initial chromatin configuration of immature non-cultured equine oocytes. Legend for meiotic stages as in Figure 1. Chi Square test with the Yates correction, for each meiotic stage: i) IMM vs EH at 25°C: not significant; IMM vs EH at 30°C: **P <0.01; IMM vs EH at 38°C: *P <0.05, **P <0.01; ii) 25°C vs 30°C :#P <0.01; ##P <0.001; 25°C vs 38°C: #P <0.01; iii) EH at 30°C vs EH at 38°C: not significant.
Figure 3Effects of holding in EH medium at controlled room temperature (25°C) on initial chromatin configuration of equine oocytes. Legend for meiotic stages as in Figures 1 and 2. Chi Square test with the Yates correction: for each meiotic stage, EH vs IMM: not significant.
Effects of holding in EH medium at controlled room temperature (25°C) on mitochondrial distribution pattern of equine oocytes examined before or after IVM
| Treatment | Nuclear chromatin configuration | n. of analyzed oocytes | Small mitochondrial aggregates (SA) n. (%) | Perinuclear/pericortical (P/P) n. (%) | Abnormal n. (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| FN | 3 | 3 (100) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| F/I | 4 | 4 (100) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
| CC | 22 | 12 (55) | 8 (36) | 2 (9) | |
| PI/MI | 0 | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
| MII | 0 | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
|
| FN | 2 | 2 (100) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| F/I | 9 | 4 (44) | 5 (56) | 0 (0) | |
| CC | 20 | 6 (30) | 14 (70) | 0 (0) | |
| PI/MI | 3 | 0 (0) | 3 (100) | 0 (0) | |
| MII | 2 | 0 (0) | 2 (100) | 0 (0) |
Legend: Homogenous/heterogeneously fluorescent nucleus (FN); Fibrillar/Intermediate (F/I); Condensed chromatin (CC); Prometaphase I/Metaphase I (PI/MI); Metaphase II (MII).
Chi square test with the Yates correction: between treatments and chromatin configurations: NS.
Effects of holding in EH medium at controlled room temperature (25°C) on confocal energy/redox parameters of equine oocytes
| Treatment | Nuclear chromatin configuration | n. of analyzed oocytes | Mitochondrial activity | Intracellular ROS levels | Mitochondria/ROS colocalization |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EH | FN | 3 | 162.89 ± 101.19 | 172.93 ± 46.40 | § |
| IMM | 2 | § | § | § | |
| EH | F/I | 4 | 437.35 ± 298.64 | 377.13 ± 181.20 | 0.40 ± 0.32 |
| IMM | 9 | 623.01 ± 376.96a | 421.44 ± 164.87 | 0.38 ± 0.08 | |
| EH | CC | 20 | 547.82 ± 499.54 | 278.53 ± 179.28 | 0.50 ± 0.10 |
| IMM | 19 | 722.93 ± 390.31a | 377.92 ± 184.92 | 0.49 ± 0.19 | |
| EH | PI/MI | 0 | § | § | § |
| IMM | 3 | 1292 ± 192.36b | 643.67 ± 312.69 | 0.60 ± 0.10 | |
| EH | MII | 0 | § | § | § |
| IMM | 2 | § | § | § |
Legend: Homogenous/heterogeneously fluorescent nucleus (FN); Fibrillar/Intermediate (F/I); Condensed chromatin (CC); Prometaphase I/Metaphase I (PI/MI); Metaphase II (MII). Mitochondrial activity and intracellular ROS levels are presented as MitoTracker and DCF fluorescence intensities expressed in Arbitrary Densitometric Units (ADU). Mitochondria/ROS colocalization is expressed as Pearson’s correlation coefficient. One-way ANOVA followed by Multiple Comparison Holm-Sidak method: a,b P <0.05; §: values for categories with fewer than 3 oocytes are not shown.
Figure 4Photomicrographs of equine oocytes fixed after recovery (IMM) or held overnight in EH medium at 25°C (EH), assessed for nuclear chromatin and energy/redox potential. Bright field, epifluorescence and confocal images indicating morphology (A1-F1), chromatin configuration (A2-F2), mitochondrial (mt) distribution pattern (A3-F3), intracellular ROS localization (A4-F4), mt/ROS merged (A5-F5) and the mt/ROS colocalization scatter plot graph (A6-F6; Y axis: mt fluorescence intensity; X axis: ROS fluorescence intensity). A, EH-treated oocyte showing FN chromatin (A2), homogeneous distribution of small mt aggregates (SA; A3), ubiquitous ROS localization (A4), poor mt/ROS colocalization (A5), and low fluorescence intensity with wide red/green scatter, supporting lack of colocalization of ROS and mt signals (A6); B, EH-treated oocyte showing intermediate chromatin (B2), SA mt distribution (B3), but with higher mt intensity and greater mt/ROS colocalization compared to A (longer and narrower scatter plot); C, EH-treated oocyte showing condensed chromatin (C2; the nuclear outline in the mt image confirms this as a GV configuration), heterogenous perinuclear and pericortical mt pattern (P/P, C3), localized ROS distribution in areas with and without mt labeling (C4, C5), and the mt/ROS scatter plot (C6) showing greater fluorescence intensity than in A and B, with predominance of mt fluorescence (Y axis); D, IMM oocyte showing intermediate chromatin (D2), P/P mt pattern (D3), ROS localization in areas with and without mt labeling (D4, D5), and less precise mt/ROS colocalization, as shown by the broader scatter plot (D6); E, IMM oocyte showing condensed chromatin with nuclear outline and heterogeneous mt/ROS distribution, similar to D; F, IMM-MII oocyte, likely from an atretic follicle, showing MII chromatin at 7:00 (F2; cumulus cell nucleus at 12:00); P/P mt pattern (F3), ROS localization in areas with and without mt labeling (F4, F5), and a broad scatter plot, suggesting poor mt/ROS colocalization (F6). The scale bar represents 60 μm.