| Literature DB >> 32384788 |
Ximo Garcia-Dominguez1, José Salvador Vicente1, Francisco Marco-Jiménez1.
Abstract
In this study, we evaluated the effect of embryo vitrification using two different devices on adulthood phenotype in rabbits. In vitro development, prenatal embryo survival, body weight, growth performance, haematological and biochemical peripheral blood analysis, reproductive performance, and lactation performance traits were compared between the experimental groups. They derived from naturally-conceived embryos (NC), fresh-transferred embryos (FT), vitrified-transferred embryos using mini-straw (VTs), or vitrified-transferred embryos using Cryotop (VTc). Straw-vitrified embryos exhibited lower in vitro developmental rates and in vivo survival rates following embryo transfer compared to its Cryotop-vitrified counterparts. Moreover, the VTs group exhibited higher foetal losses than VTc, FT, and NC groups. Independently of the vitrification device, vitrified-transferred (VT) offspring showed a skewed sex ratio in favour of males, and an increased birth bodyweight. In contrast, postnatal daily growth was diminished in all ART (i.e., FT and VT) animals. In adulthood, significant differences in body weight between all groups was founded-all ART progenies weighed less than NC animals and, within ART, VT animals weighed less than FT. For VT groups, weight at adulthood was higher for the VTs group compared with the VTc group. Peripheral blood parameters ranged between common values. Moreover, no differences were found in the fertility rates between experimental groups. Furthermore, similar pregnancy rates, litter sizes, and the number of liveborns were observed, regardless of the experimental group. However, decreased milk yield occurred for VTc and FT animals compared to VTs and NC animals. A similar trend was observed for the milk composition of dry matter and fat. Concordantly, reduced body weight was found for suckling kits in the VTc and FT groups compared to VTs and NC animals. Our findings reveal that developmental changes after the embryo vitrification procedure could be associated with an exhibition of the embryonic developmental plasticity. Moreover, to our best knowledge, this study reports the first evidence demonstrating that the vitrification device used is not a trivial decision, providing valuable information about how the cooling-warming rates during vitrification can be partly responsible of the postnatal phenotypic variations.Entities:
Keywords: assisted reproduction technology; embryo transfer; embryo vitrification; perinatal outcomes; postnatal outcomes
Year: 2020 PMID: 32384788 PMCID: PMC7278459 DOI: 10.3390/ani10050804
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 2.752
Figure 1Schematic diagram of the experiment carried out to evaluate the developmental plasticity in response to embryo cryopreservation.
Implantation rate, foetal loss rate, offspring rate, and sex ratio in offspring born after natural conception, fresh embryo transfer, vitrified embryo transfer using ministraw, and vitrified embryo transfer using Cryotop.
| Traits | Naturally Conceived | Fresh-Transferred | Vitrified-Transferred | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ministraw | Cryotop | |||
| Embryos ( | 85 + | 96 | 87 | 101 |
| Foster mothers ( | 6 | 6 | 6 | 7 |
| Implantation rate | 0.95 ± 0.021 a | 0.88 ± 0.034 b | 0.67 ± 0.051 c | 0.78 ± 0.041 bc |
| Foetal loss rate | 0.10 ± 0.033 b | 0.15 ± 0.039 b | 0.31 ± 0.061 a | 0.17 ± 0.042 b |
| Offspring rate | 0.86 ± 0.038 a | 0.74 ± 0.045 b | 0.52 ± 0.054 c | 0.65 ± 0.048 bc |
| Litter size | 12.2 ± 0.83 a | 11.8 ± 0.83 a | 7.5 ± 0.83 b | 9.3 ± 0.77 b |
| Sex ratio | 0.75:1 b | 1.08:1 ab | 1.33:1 a | 1.5:1 a |
| Total born ( | 73 | 71 | 45 | 65 |
n: Number; + Estimated from the ovulation rate. Data are expressed as mean ± standard error of means. ab Values within a row with different superscripts differ (p < 0.05).
Figure 2Bodyweight development: comparing differences between animals naturally conceived (NC) and those born after fresh embryo transfer (FT), vitrified embryo transfer using a ministraw (VTs), and vitrified embryo transfer using Cryotop (VTc). a,b: Bars with different superscripts differ (p < 0.05).
Figure 3Growth curves: comparing differences between animals naturally conceived (NC) and those born after fresh embryo transfer (FT), vitrified embryo transfer using a ministraw (VTs), and vitrified embryo transfer using Cryotop (VTc).
Figure 4Peripheral blood analysis (haematological and biochemical): comparing differences between animals naturally conceived (NC) and those born after fresh embryo transfer (FT), vitrified embryo transfer using a ministraw (VTs), and vitrified embryo transfer using Cryotop (VTc).
Male reproductive performance: comparing differences between naturally conceived males and those born after fresh embryo transfer, vitrified embryo transfer using ministraw, and vitrified embryo transfer using Cryotop.
| Traits | Naturally Conceived | Fresh-Transferred | Vitrified-Transferred | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ministraw | Cryotop | |||
| Semen parameters | ||||
| Pools ( | 13 | 15 | 12 | 10 |
| CON (106 spz/ml) | 253.8 ± 31.71 ab | 317.8 ± 28.58 a | 217.3 ± 34.47 b | 248.5 ± 34.47 ab |
| MOT (%) | 88.6 ± 2.46 | 87.4 ± 2.37 | 90.3 ± 2.56 | 83.8 ± 2.95 |
| PRO (%) | 50.4 ± 2.87 ab | 43.1 ± 2.77 b | 53.1 ± 2.98 a | 42.1 ± 3.45 b |
| VIA (%) | 90.5 ± 1.60 a | 87.4 ± 1.55 ab | 84.8 ± 1.87 b | 89.6 ± 1.87 ab |
| NAR (%) | 95.1 ± 0.86 | 94.7 ± 0.80 | 93.1 ± 0.94 | 95.3 ± 1.04 |
| ABN (%) | 19.6 ± 2.01 | 19.1 ± 1.88 | 17.9 ± 2.19 | 17.1 ± 2.01 |
| Motion parameters | ||||
| VCL (μm s−1) | 98.5 ± 3.38 | 103.9 ± 3.11 | 100.3 ± 3.23 | 106.9 ± 3.96 |
| VSL (μm s−1) | 48.8 ± 2.18 a | 42.5 ± 2.09 b | 49.1 ± 2.18 a | 43.4 ± 2.67 ab |
| VAP (μm s−1) | 69.9 ± 2.25 | 66.1 ± 2.17 | 70.2 ± 2.25 | 67.9 ± 2.76 |
| LIN (%) | 48.5 ± 2.19 a | 41.2 ± 2.11 b | 49.1 ± 2.19 a | 40.6 ± 2.68 b |
| STR (%) | 69.1 ± 2.22 | 63.8 ± 2.04 | 68.1 ± 2.12 | 64.9 ± 2.59 |
| WOB (%) | 68.8 ± 1.67 ab | 64.1 ± 1.54 c | 69.8 ± 1.60 a | 64.4 ± 1.96 cb |
| ALH (μm) | 2.3 ± 0.12 ab | 2.3 ± 0.12 ab | 2.0 ± 0.12 b | 2.5 ± 0.15 a |
| BCF (Hz) | 9.8 ± 0.49 | 9.8 ± 0.47 | 9.9 ± 0.49 | 9.7 ± 0.69 |
| Fertility rate | 0.97 ± 0.019 | 0.94 ± 0.028 | 0.93 ± 0.030 | 0.92 ± 0.031 |
| Litter size | 12.1 ± 0.38 | 11.7 ± 0.40 | 11.9 ± 0.43 | 12.3 ± 0.41 |
n: number; CON: spermatic concentration; TSE: total sperm per ejaculate; spz: spermatozoa; MOT: percentage of sperm motility; PRO: percentage of progressive motility; VIA: percentage of viable sperm; NAR: percentage of normal apical ridge; ABN: percentage of abnormal forms; VCL: curvilinear velocity; VSL: straight-line velocity; VAP: average path velocity; LIN: linearity coefficient (VSL/VCL × 100); STR: straightness coefficient; WOB: wobble coefficient (VSL/VAP × 100); ALH: amplitude of lateral head displacement; BCF: beat cross-frequency. Data are expressed as least square means ± standard error of means. a,b Values within a row with different superscripts differ (p < 0.05).
Female reproductive and lactation performance: comparing differences between naturally conceived females and those born after fresh embryo transfer, vitrified embryo transfer using ministraw, and vitrified embryo transfer using Cryotop.
| Traits | Naturally Conceived | Fresh-Transferred | Vitrified-Transferred | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ministraw | Cryotop | |||
| Inseminated females | 16 | 12 | 20 | 18 |
| Reproductive performance | ||||
| Pregnant females | 16 | 11 | 20 | 17 |
| Litter size | 10.5 ± 0.65 | 9.1 ± 0.69 | 10.2 ± 0.62 | 9.1 ± 0.65 |
| Liveborn | 8.5 ± 0.68 | 8.9 ± 0.85 | 8.6 ± 0.60 | 8.5 ± 0.66 |
| Lactation performance | ||||
| Milk yield (g/day) | 261.9 ± 12.21a | 206.5 ± 13.44 b | 255.2 ± 10.98 a | 219.6 ± 11.26 b |
| Dry matter (%) | 36.3 ± 0.56 a | 33.5 ± 0.59 b | 36.0 ± 0.54 a | 33.94 ± 0.56 b |
| Fat (%) | 21.6 ± 0.51a | 18.5 ± 0.53 b | 20.5 ± 0.48 a | 18.3 ± 0.51b |
| Protein (%) | 10.9 ± 0.17 b | 11.0 ± 0.18 ab | 11.5 ± 0.17 a | 11.2 ± 0.18 ab |
| Lactose (%) | 2.5 ± 0.08 b | 2.4 ± 0.08 b | 2.5 ± 0.08 b | 2.8 ± 0.08 a |
| Somatic cells (103/mL) | 371.9 ± 101.09 b | 557.3 ± 113.92 ab | 408.1 ± 98.77 b | 725.3 ± 101.09 a |
Data are expressed as least square means ± standard error of means. ab Values within a row with different superscripts differ (p < 0.05).