| Literature DB >> 30123869 |
Mona Ghasemi1, Abbas Farshad1, Hadi Hajarian2, Omid Banafshi3, Vahideh Asadollahi3, Fardin Fathi3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sericin, because of its ability to remove free radicals and its antioxidant properties, has been used to successfully cryopreserve various mammalian cell types. However, the effects of sericin on cryopreservation of mouse sperm has not been reported.Entities:
Keywords: Cryopreservation; In vitro fertilization; Mouse; Sericin; Sperm
Year: 2018 PMID: 30123869 PMCID: PMC6079315
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Reprod Biomed ISSN: 2476-3772
Effects of different concentration of sericin (0%, 0.25%, 0.5%, and 0.75%) and post-thaw storage times on sperm survivability and motility
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive control | ||||
| –– | –– | 93.93 ± 1.26 | 86.80 ± 0.39 | |
| 0 | 0 | 51.25 ± 2.74 | 42.65 ± 2.02 | |
| 0 | 24 | 27.47 ± 1.43 | 20.41 ± 1.51 | |
| 0.25 | 0 | 54.88 ± 2.35 | 48.67 ± 2.17 | |
| 0.25 | 24 | 34.01 ± 1.85 | 26.26 ± 1.66 | |
| 0.5 | 0 | 60.24 ± 0.82 | 52.56 ± 0.74 | |
| 0.5 | 24 | 40.44 ± 0.58 | 33.91 ± 0.74 | |
| 0.75 | 0 | 49.20 ± 1.54 | 42.40 ± 0.74 | |
| 0.75 | 24 | 31.89 ± 0.82 | 24.26 ± 0.73 | |
| Main effects | ||||
| 0 | 39.36 ± 12.70 | 31.53 ± 11.84 | ||
| 0.25 | 44.45 ± 11.18 | 37.46 ± 11.95 | ||
| 0.5 | 50.34 ± 10.45 | 43.24 ± 9.85 | ||
| 0.75 | 40.55 ± 9.19 | 33.33 ± 9.58 | ||
| Time (hr) | ||||
| 0 | 53.89 ± 4.67 | 46.57 ± 4.61 | ||
| 24 | 33.45 ± 4.93 | 26.21 ± 5.17 | ||
| Pooled SEM | 0.0448 | 1.946 | ||
| Significance | ||||
| Positive control vs. factorial | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | ||
| Sericin | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | ||
| Time | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | ||
| Sericin × time | 0.002 | 0.002 | ||
Least squares explain that a column contain different superscripts differ significantly (p<0.05).
p<0.05: Difference due to positive control by Dunnett’s test. 1 SEM= Standard error of the mean
Effects of sericin concentrations and post-thaw storage time on sperm fertilizing ability and development of 2-cell and blastocysts embryos
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive control | |||||
| –– | –– | 85.73 ± 4.05 | 74.19 ± 1.71 | 67.87 ± 3.65 | |
| 0 | 0 | 56.02 ± 3.50 | 48.55 ± 3.53 | 42.67 ± 3.55 | |
| 0 | 24 | 36.10 ± 3.04 | 34.22 ± 3.57 | 30.25 ± 1.94 | |
| 0.25 | 0 | 64.15 ± 3.37 | 53.51 ± 3.67 | 48.99 ± 4.66 | |
| 0.25 | 24 | 44.67 ± 4.52 | 41.65 ± 1.97 | 35.71 ± 2.78 | |
| 0.5 | 0 | 69.07 ± 3.58 | 63.91 ± 2.88 | 59.13 ± 3.82 | |
| 0.5 | 24 | 47.96 ± 6.28 | 44.60 ± 4.51 | 41.90 ± 4.64 | |
| 0.75 | 0 | 59.07 ± 1.45 | 51.63 ± 1.77 | 44.39 ± 5.16 | |
| 0.75 | 24 | 37.74 ± 2.81 | 34.84 ± 0.41 | 31.23 ± 4.53 | |
| Main effects | |||||
| 0 | 46.06 ± 11.64 | 41.39 ± 8.80 | 36.46 ± 7.12 | ||
| 0.25 | 54.41 ± 10.93 | 47.58 ± 6.83 | 42.35 ± 7.88 | ||
| 0.5 | 58.52 ± 12.12 | 54.26 ± 10.78 | 50.52 ± 9.92 | ||
| 0.75 | 48.41 ± 11.44 | 43.24 ± 8.93 | 37.81 ± 8.31 | ||
| Time (hr) | |||||
| 0 | 62.08 ± 5.48 | 54.40 ± 6.30 | 48.79 ± 7.66 | ||
| 24 | 41.62 ± 6.42 | 38.83 ± 5.33 | 34.77 ± 5.79 | ||
| Pooled (SEM) | 2.289 | 1.939 | 1.634 | ||
| Significance | |||||
| Positive control vs. factorial | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | ||
| Sericin | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | ||
| Time | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | ||
| Sericin × time | 0.93 | 0.06 | 0.56 | ||
1 Fertilizing ability= (no. of fertilized oocytes/total no. of oocytes examined) × 100;
22-cell embryo= (no. of 2-cell stage embryos/total no. of oocytes examined) × 100;
3Blastocysts embryos= (no. of blastocysts embryos/total no. of oocytes examined) × 100; SEM= Standard error of the mean.
Least squares explain that a column contain different superscripts differ significantly (p<0.05).
p<0.05: Difference due to positive control by Dunnett’s test.