Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T01:14:11.243Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Beakers versus breakers: how fertilisation in the laboratory differs from fertilisation in nature

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Kristina S. Mead  and
David Epel
Kristina S. Mead
Affiliation:
Hopkins Marine Station and Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, California, USA
David Epel*
Affiliation:
Hopkins Marine Station and Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, California, USA
*
David Epel, Hopkins Marine Station and Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, CA 93950, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The fertilisation of free-spawning invertebrates, mainly sea urchins, has been studied extensively during the last hundred years. However, results obtained from in vitro experiments do not always reflect what happens in the real world. Organisms in their natural habitats have a complex set of challenges, cues and behaviours to contend with during fertilisation and early development, factors that are normally not considered in the laboratory setting. This review examines recent work on fertilisation ecology and discusses the relevance of these results to the findings gleaned from laboratory research. Emphasis is placed on stresses associated with fertilisation in situ, and how responses to environmental stresses (such as from turbulence, oxidative stress, ultraviolet radiation and pathogens) might affect the fertilisation process.

Type
Commentary
Information
Zygote , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , May 1995 , pp. 95 - 99
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, R.D. & Hagstrom, B. (1955). Interruption of the cortical reaction by heat. Exp. Cell Res. 9, 157–62.Google Scholar
Babcock, R.C. & Mundy, C.N. (1992). Reproductive biology, spawning, and field fertilisation rates of Acanthaster Planci. Aust. J. Mar. Freshwater Res. 43, 525–43.Google Scholar
Babcock, R.C., Mundy, C.N. & Whitehead, D. (1994). Sperm diffusion models and in situ confirmation of long-distance fertilization in the free-spawning asteroid Acanthaster planci. Biol. Bull. 186, 17–28.Google Scholar
Benzie, J.A.H., Black, K.P.Moran, P.J. & Dixon, P. (1994). Small-scale dispersion of eggs and sperm of the crown-of-thorns starfish (Acanthaster planci) in a shallow coral reef habitat. Biol. Bull. 186, 153–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, M., Silvertown, J. & Tucker, C. (1990). Population ecology of heterostyle and homostyle Primula vulgaris: growth, survival, and reproduction in field populations. J. Ecol. 78, 799–813.Google Scholar
Brawley, S.H. (1992). Fertilization in natural populations of the dioecious brown alga Fucus ceranoides and the importance of the polyspermy block. Mar. Biol. 113. 147–57.Google Scholar
Brazeau, D.A. & Lasker, H.R. (1989). The reproductive cycle and spawning in a Caribbean gorgonian. Biol. Bull. 176, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brazeau, D.A. & Lasker, H.R. (1990). Sexual reproduction and external brooding by the Caribbean gorgonian Briareum asbestinum. Biol. Bull. 104, 465–74.Google Scholar
Cooper, W.J., Zika, R.G., Petasne, G. & Plane, J.M.C. (1988). The photochemical formation of hydrogen peroxide in natural waters. Environ. Sci. Technol. 22, 1156–60.Google Scholar
Denny, M.W. (1988). Biology and the Mechanics of the Waveswept Environment. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Denny, M.W. & Shibata, M. (1989). Consequences of surfzone turbulence for settlement and external fertilization. Am. Nat. 134, 859–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinnel, P.A., Stober, Q.J., Crumley, S.C. & Nakatani, R.E. (1982). Development of a sperm cell toxicity test for marine waters. In Aquatic Toxicology and Hazard Assessment: Fifth Conference, ASTM STP 766, ed. Pearson, J.G., Foster, R.B. & Bishop, W.E., 82–98. American society for Testing and Materials.Google Scholar
Dinnel, P.A., Link, J.M. & Stober, Q.J. (1987). Improved methodology for a sea urchin sperm cell bioasasy for marine waters. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 16, 23–32.Google Scholar
Eckelbarger, K.J., Young, C.M. & Cameron, J.I. (1989). Modified sperm ultrastructure in four species of soft-bodied echinoids from the bathyal zone of the deep sea. Biol. Bull. 177, 230–6.Google Scholar
Epel, D. (1990). The initiation of development at fertilization. Cell Differ. Dev. 29, 1–13.Google Scholar
Foltz, K.R. & Shilling, F. (1993). How does a spermatozoon activate on oocyte?: receptor-mediated signal transduction and egg activation. Zygote 1, 276–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galione, A., Mcdougall, A., Busa, W.B., Willmott, N., Gillot, I. & Whitaker, M. (1993). Redundant mechanisms of calcium-induced calcium release underlying calcium waves during fertilization of sea urchin eggs. Science 261, 348–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Galione, A., Swann, K., Georgiou, P. & Whitaker, M. (1994). Regenerative and non-regenerative calcium transients in hamster eggs triggered by inositol 1,4,5–trisphosphate. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 480, 465–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garbers, D.L. (1989). Molecular basis of fertilization. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 58: 719–42.Google Scholar
Giese, A.C. &Kanatani, H. (1987). Maturation and Spawning. In Reproduction of Marine Invertebrates, 9, ed. Giese, A.C., Pearse, J.S. & Pearse, V.B.. 251–326. Palo Alto/Pacific Grove, CA: Scientific/Boxwood Press.Google Scholar
Giese, A.C. & Pearse, J.S. (1974). Introduction: general principles. In Reproduction of Marine Invertebrates, 1, Acoelomate and Pseudocoelomate Metazoans, 1–49. New York & London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gil-Turnes, M.S., Hay, M.E. & Fenical, W. (1989). Symbiotic marine bacteria chemically defend crustacean embryos from a pathogenic fungus. Science 246, 116–18.Google Scholar
Giudice, G. (198). Heat shock proteins in sea urchin embryos. Dev. Growth Differ. 31, 103–6.Google Scholar
Grosberg, R.K. (1991). Sperm-mediated gene flow and the genetic structure of population of the colonial ascidian Botryllus schlosseri. Evolution 45, 130–42.Google Scholar
Harris, P., Clason, E.L. & Prier, K.R. (1989). Tubulin polymerization in unfertilized sea-urchin eggs induced by elevated temperature. J. Cell Sci. 93, 9–18.Google Scholar
Hoffman, M.T. (1988). The pollination ecology of Aloe ferox Mill. S. Afr. J. Bot. 54, 345–50.Google Scholar
Jaffe, L.F. (1985). The role of calcium explosions, waves and pulses in activating eggs. In Biology of Fertilization, ed. Metz, C.B. & Monroy, A., 3, 128–67. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, C.H. & Epel, D. (1983). Heavy metal chelators prolong motility and viability of sea urchin sperm by inhibiting spontaneous acrosome reactions. J. Exp. Zool. 226, 431–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jokiel, P.L. & York, R.H. Jr, (1982). Solar ultraviolet photobiology of the reef coral Pocillopora damicornis and symbiotic zooxanthellae. Bull. Mar. Sci. 32, 301–15.Google Scholar
Karentz, D., McEuen, F.S., Land, M.C. & Dunlap, W.C. (1991). Survey of mycosporine-like amino acid compounds in Antarctic marine organisms: potential protection from ultraviolet exposure. Mar. Biol. 108, 157–66.Google Scholar
Lee, H., Aarhus, R. & Walseth, T.F. (1993). Calcium mobilization by dual receptors during fertilization of sea urchin eggs. Science 261, 352–5.Google Scholar
Levitan, D.R. (1991). Influence of body size and population density on fertilization success and reproductive output in a free-spawning invertebrate. Biol. Bull. 181, 261–8.Google Scholar
Levitan, D.R., Sewell, M.A. & Chia, F.-S. (1991). Kinetics of fertilization in the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus franciscanus; interaction of gamete dilution, age, and contact time. Biol. Bull. 181, 371–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levitan, D.R., Sewell, M.A. & Chia, F.-S. (1992). How distribution and abundance influence fertilization success in the sea urchin strongylocentrotus franciscanus. Ecology 73, 248–54.Google Scholar
Lindquist, N., Hay, M.E. & Fenical, W. (1992). Defense of ascidians and their conspicuous larvae: adult vs. larval chemical defenses. Ecol. Monogr. 62, 547–68.Google Scholar
Marcellos, H. & Perryman, T. (1990). Controls over pollination and ovule fertilization in vicia faba. Euphytica 49, 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McEuen, F.S. (1988). Spawning behaviors of northwest pacific sea cucumbers(Holothuroidea; Echinodermata). Mar. Biol 98, 565–85.Google Scholar
Mead, K.S. & Denny, M.W. (1995). The effects of hydrodynamic shear stress on fertilization and early development of the purple sea urchin Strongylocentrotus franciscanus. Biol. Bull. 188, 46–56.Google Scholar
Mire, I.(1994). Gamete surface and attachment during fertilization of Palmaria sp (Palmariales, Rhodophyta). J. Phycol. 42, 291–9.Google Scholar
Moore, S. (1989). Determination of major controlling factors of dissolved oxygen concentrations in tidepools. Unpublished manuscript on file in library at Hopkins Marine Station.Google Scholar
Nuccitelli, R., Yim, D.L. & Smart, T.A. (1993). The sperminduced calcium wave following fertilization of the Xenopus egg requires the production of inositol trisphosphate. Dev.Biol. 158,200–12.Google Scholar
Oliver, J. & Babcock, R. (1992). Aspects of the fertilization ecology of broadcast spawning corals: sperm dilution effects and in situ measurements of fertilization. Biol. Bull. 183, 409–17.Google Scholar
Pennington, J.T. (1985). The ecology of fertilization of echinoid eggs: the consequences of sperm dilution, adultaggregation, and synchronous spawning. Biol. Bull. 169, 417–30.Google Scholar
Petersen, C.W. (1991). Variation in fertilization rate in the tropical reef fish, Halichoeres bivattatus: correlates and implications. Biol. Bull. 181, 232–7.Google Scholar
Petersen, C.W., Warner, R.R., Cohen, S., Hess, H.C. & Sewell, A.T. (1992). Variable pelagic mating success: implications for mate choice and spatial patterns of mating. Ecology 73, 391–401.Google Scholar
Picken, G.B. & Alan, D. (1983). Unique spawning behavior by the antarctic limpet Nacella (Patiningera) concinna (Strebel,1908). J. Exp. Mar. Biol. 71, 283–7.Google Scholar
Quinn, J.F., Wing, S.R. & Botsford, L.W. (1993). Harvest refugia in marine invertebrate fisheries: models and applications to the red sea urchin, Strongylocentrotus franciscanus. Am. Zool. 33, 537–50.Google Scholar
Runnstrom, J. & Hagstrom, B. (1955). Studies on the action of the ‘Fucus fertilization inhibitor’ on sea urchin eggs and sperm. Exp. Cell Res. 10, 354–5.Google Scholar
Schuel, H. (1984). The prevention of polyspermic fertilization ion sea urchins. Biol. Bull. 167, 271–309.Google Scholar
Sewell, M.A. & Levitan, D.R. (1992). Fertilization success during a natural spawining of the dendrochirote sea cucumber Cucumaria miniata. Bull. Mar. Sci. 51, 161–6.Google Scholar
Shapiro, B.M. (1991). The control of oxidant stress at fertilization. Science. 252, 533–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shick, M., Dunlap, W.C., Chalker, B.E., Banaczak, A.T. & Rosenzweig, T.R. (1992). Survey of ultraviolet radiation– absorbing mycosporine-like amino acids in organs of coral reef holothuroids. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 90, 139–48.Google Scholar
Siebeck, O. (1988). Experimental investigation of UV tolerance in hermatypic corals (Scleractinia). Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 43, 95–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stafford, C.J., Callow, J.A. & Green, J.R. (1993). Inhibition of fertilization in fucus (Phaeophyceae) by a monoclonal antibody that binds to domains on the egg cell surface. J. Phycol. 29, 325–30.Google Scholar
Stith, B.J., Espinoza, R., Roberts, D. & Smart, T. (1994). Sperm increase inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate mass in Xenopus laevis eggs preinjected with calcium buffers or heparin. Dev. Biol. 165, 206–15.Google Scholar
Stochaj, W.R., Dunlap, W.C. & Shick, J.M. (1994). Two new UV-absorbing mycosporine-like amino acids from the sea anenome Anthopleura elegantissima and the effects of zooxanthellae and spectral irradiance on chemical composition and content. Mar. Biol. 118, 149–56.Google Scholar
Strathmann, R.R. (1993). Peculiar constraints on life histories imposed by protective or nutritive devices for embryos. Am. Zool. 33, 101A.Google Scholar
Thomas, F.I.M. (1994b). Transport and mixing of gametes in three free-spawning polychaete annelids: Phragmatopoma californica (Fewkes), Sabellaria cementarium (Moore), and Schizobranchia insignis (Bush). J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 179, 11–27.Google Scholar
Thomas, F.I.M. (1994b). Physical properties of gametes in three sea urchin species. J. Exp. Biol. 194, 263–84.Google Scholar
Vacquier, V.D. & Lee, Y.-H. (1993). Abalone sperm lysin: unusual mode of evolution of gamete recognition protein. Zygote. 1, 181–96.Google Scholar
Vogel, H., Chizak, G., Chang, P. & Wolf, P. (1982). Fertilization kinetics of sea urchin eggs. Math. Biosci. 58, 189–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiener, M.T. & Feldman, M.W. (1991). The evolution of dispersal in a model of mixed selfing and random mating. Evolution. 45, 1717–26.Google Scholar