| Literature DB >> 28824024 |
Ayumi Hasegawa1, Keiji Mochida1, Narumi Ogonuki1, Michiko Hirose1, Toshiko Tomishima1, Kimiko Inoue1,2, Atsuo Ogura1,2,3.
Abstract
In embryo transfer experiments in mice, pseudopregnant females as recipients are prepared by sterile mating with vasectomized males. Because only females at the proestrus stage accept males, such females are selected from a stock of animals based on the appearance of their external genital tract. Therefore, the efficiency of preparing pseudopregnant females largely depends on the size of female colonies and the skill of the operators who select females for sterile mating. In this study, we examined whether the efficiency of preparing pseudopregnant females could be improved by applying an estrous cycle synchronization method by progesterone (P4) pretreatment, which significantly enhances the superovulation outcome in mice. We confirmed that after two daily injections of P4 (designated Days 1 and 2) in randomly selected females, the estrous cycles of most females (about 85%) were synchronized at metestrus on Day 3. When P4-treated females were paired with vasectomized males for 4 days (Days 4-8), a vaginal plug was found in 63% (20/32) of the females on Day 7. After the transfer of vitrified-warmed embryos into their oviducts, 52% (73/140) of the embryos successfully developed into offspring, the rate being comparable to that of the conventional embryo transfer procedure. Similarly, 77% (24/31) of females became pregnant by fertile mating with intact males for 3 days, which allowed the scheduled preparation of foster mothers. Thus, our estrous cycle synchronization method may omit the conventional experience-based process of visually observing the vagina to choose females for embryo transfer. Furthermore, it is expected that the size of female stocks for recipients can be reduced to less than 20%, which could be a great advantage for facilities/laboratories undertaking mouse-assisted reproductive technology.Entities:
Keywords: Embryo transfer; Estrous cycle; Mouse; Pseudopregnant; Recipient
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28824024 PMCID: PMC5735264 DOI: 10.1262/jrd.2017-068
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Reprod Dev ISSN: 0916-8818 Impact factor: 2.214
Estrous stages 4 days after the injection of progesterone (P4) on Days 1 and 2 in the ICR strain
| Estrous stage | No. (%) of females | |||
| Day 3 | Day 4 | Day 5 | Day 6 | |
| Proestrus | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (4) | 8 (30) |
| Estrus | 3 (11) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 3 (11) |
| Metestrus | 23 (85) | 20 (74) | 4 (15) | 2 (7) |
| Diestrus | 1 (4) | 7 (26) | 22 (81) | 14 (52) |
Effects of endocrinological treatment on the production of pseudopregnant females and embryonic development after embryo transfer
| Injection schedule (Day) | No. (%) of females | No. of embryos | No. (%) of embryos | Body weight of offspring (g) | |||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | With plug | Pregnant | Implanted | Developed to offspring | ||
| Standard (control) | 1829/2925 (63) | 6/6 (100) | 79 | 71 (90) | 48 (61) | 1.45 ± 0.02 | |||||
| P4 | P4 | 10/24 (42) | 8/10 (80) | 110 | 88 (80) | 44 (40) * | 1.42 ± 0.02 | ||||
| P4 | P4 | hCG | 5/11 (45) | 2/5 (40) | 28 | 12 (43) * | 5 (18) * | 0.99 ± 0.11 * | |||
| P4 | P4 | GnRH agonist | 8/23 (35) * | 7/8 (88) | 92 | 76 (83) | 52 (57) | 1.31 ± 0.02 * | |||
| eCG | 7/15 (47) | 5/7 (71) | 70 | 49 (70) * | 17 (24) * | 1.25 ± 0.04 * | |||||
| P4 | P4 | eCG | 10/12 (83) | 7/7 (100) | 98 | 67 (68) * | 35 (36) * | 1.33 ± 0.03 * | |||
| AIS | 5/12 (42) | 5/5 (100) | 70 | 57 (81) | 40 (57) | 1.19 ± 0.02 * | |||||
| P4 | P4 | AIS | 12/20 (60) | 12/12 (100) | 163 | 101 (62) * | 66 (40) * | 1.28 ± 0.02 * | |||
Data for the experimental groups, except body weight, were compared with those for the standard (control) method using Fisher’s exact probability test. Body weight is presented as mean ± SEM, and was analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test. * P < 0.01 vs. the corresponding value of the control. P4, progesterone; hCG, human chorionic gonadotropin; eCG, equine chorionic gonadotropin; AIS, anti-inhibin serum; GnRH, gonadotropin-releasing hormone.
Effects of pairing method and progesterone (P4) on the production of pseudopregnant females and embryonic development after embryo transfer
| Pairing method | P4 injections | No. (%) of females | No. of embryos | No. (%) of embryos | Body weight of offspring (g) | ||
| With plug | Pregnant | Implanted | Developed to offspring | ||||
| Standard (control) | – | 1829/2925 (63) | 6/6 (100) | 79 | 71 (90) | 48 (61) | 1.45 ± 0.02 |
| Discontinuous | – | 6/18 (33) * | 3/3 (100) | 41 | 38 (93) | 26 (63) | 1.36 ± 0.03 * |
| + | 11/23 (48) | 10/10 (100) | 138 | 120 (87) | 82 (59) | 1.37 ± 0.02 * | |
| Continuous | – | 4/16 (25) * | n.t. | n.t. | n.t. | n.t. | n.t. |
| + | 20/32 (63) | 10/11 (91) | 140 | 112 (80) | 73 (52) | 1.40 ± 0.02 | |
Data for the standard method (control) group were the same as those in Table 2. Data for the experimental groups, except body weight, were compared with those for the standard method (control) using Fisher’s exact probability test. Body weight is presented as mean ± SEM, and was analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test. * P < 0.01 vs. the corresponding value of the control. n.t., not tested.
Fig. 1.Distribution of mating rates by discontinuous (A and B) and continuous (C and D) pairing with vasectomized males. Females were treated without (A and C) or with (B and D) progesterone (P4) injections. Values within the bars are the numbers of females that had a vaginal plug out of the total number of paired females.
Fig. 2.Distribution of mating rates by continuous pairing with intact males. Females were treated without (A) or with (B) progesterone (P4) injections. Values within the bars are the numbers of females that had a vaginal plug out of the total number of paired females.
Results of mating test and litter size by continuous pairing with or without progesterone (P4) injections
| P4 injections | No. of females | Litter size | |
| Plug (%) | Pregnancy (%) | ||
| – | 7/16 (44) | 7/7 (100) | 14 ± 1 |
| + | 18/31 (58) | 18/18 (100) | 15 ± 1 |
Litter size is presented as mean ± SEM.
Fig. 3.Schematic representation of the size of a female colony required for the production of pseudopregnant females. Values on the right side of the columns indicate the relative number of females with a vaginal plug (= 1).