Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-25T06:17:22.166Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of body condition and season on yield and quality of in vitro produced bovine embryos

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 November 2014

Peter Chrenek ,
Elena Kubovičová ,
Lucia Olexíková ,
Alexander V. Makarevich ,
Silvia Toporcerová  and
Alexander Ostró
Peter Chrenek
Affiliation:
Research Institute of Animal Production, NAFC, Nitra, Slovak Republic. Faculty of Biotechnology and Food Science, Slovak University of Agriculture, Nitra, Slovak Republic.
Elena Kubovičová*
Affiliation:
Research Institute of Animal Production, NAFC, Hlohovecká 2, 95141 Lužianky, Slovak Republic
Lucia Olexíková
Affiliation:
Research Institute of Animal Production, NAFC, Nitra, Slovak Republic.
Alexander V. Makarevich
Affiliation:
Research Institute of Animal Production, NAFC, Nitra, Slovak Republic.
Silvia Toporcerová
Affiliation:
Pavol Jozef Šafárik University in Košice, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Košice, Slovak Republic.
Alexander Ostró
Affiliation:
Pavol Jozef Šafárik University in Košice, Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Košice, Slovak Republic.
*
All correspondence to: Elena Kubovičová, Research Institute of Animal Production, NAFC, Hlohovecká 2, 95141 Lužianky, Slovak Republic. e-mail: kubovicova@vuzv.sk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The aim of our study was to examine the effects of cow's body condition score (BCS; scale 1–5) and season on the quality of bovine in vitro produced embryos. The proportion of good quality oocytes (Q1 and Q2) was higher (P < 0.05) in the BCS 2 (57.60%) and BCS 3 (60.90%) groups compared with the BCS 1 (43.60%) group. There were no statistical differences in embryo cleavage and blastocyst rate among the BCS groups. The highest total cell number (TCN, DAPI stain) of blastocysts (P < 0.05), recorded in BCS 1 (122.27 ± 6.90) in comparison with BCS 2 (101.8 ± 3.60) or BCS 3 (105.44 ± 3.70) groups, was related to higher dead cell (DCI, TUNEL) index in this group (7.07%) when compared with BCS 2 (6.54%) or BCS 3 (6.06%), respectively. The yield of good quality oocytes during spring was lower (P < 0.05) compared with the summer season. There were significant differences (P < 0.05) in maturation and cleavage rates between autumn and summer (73.42%, 76.2% vs. 85.0%, 41.8%, respectively). The highest (P < 0.01) blastocyst rate was noted during spring and summer months. Significant difference (P < 0.05) in the TCN among spring (99.38 ± 3.90), autumn (110.1 ± 4.58) or summer (108.96 ± 3.52) was observed. The highest proportion of embryos with the best (grade I) actin cytoskeleton (phalloidin–TRITC) quality was noted during the summer months. Our results indicate that body condition affects the initial quality of oocytes, but does not affect embryo cleavage, blastocyst rate and actin quality. This finding may suggest that development in vitro can mask the influence of BCS. The season affects yield and quality of blastocysts in the way that the autumn period is more favorable for embryo development.

Keywords

Body conditionCowEmbryo qualityIVPOocytes
Type
Research Article
Information
Zygote , Volume 23 , Issue 6 , December 2015 , pp. 893 - 899
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

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

Adamiak, S.J., Mackie, K., Watt, R.C., Webb, R. & Sinclair, K.D. (2005). Impact of nutrition on oocyte quality: cumulative effects of body condition and diet to hyperinsulinemia in cattle. Biol. Reprod. 73, 918–26.Google ScholarPubMed
Adamiak, S.J., Powell, K., Webb, R & Sinclair, K.D. (2006). Body composition, dietary carbohydrates and fatty acids determine post-fertilisation development of bovine oocytes in vitro . Reproduction 131, 247–58.Google Scholar
Badinga, L., Collier, R.J., Thatcher, W.W. & Wilcox, C.J. (1985). Effects of climatic and management factors on conception rate of dairy cattle in subtropical environment. J. Dairy Sci. 68, 78–85.Google Scholar
Barnett, D.K., Clayton, M.K., Kimura, J. & Bavister, B.D. (1997). Glucose and phosphate toxicity in hamster preimplantation embryos involves distribution of cellular organization, including distribution of active mitochondria. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 48, 227–37.Google Scholar
Bassell, G.J., Taneja, K.T., Kislaukis, E.H., Sandelt, C.T., Pouters, C.M. & Singer, R.H. (1994). Actin filaments and spatial positioning of mRNAs. In Actin: Biophysics, Biochemistry and Cell Biology (eds Estes, J.E. & Higgins, P.J.), pp. 183–89. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Berry, D.P., Buckley, F., Dillon, P., Evans, R.D., Rath, M. & Veerkamp, F. (2003). Genetic relationships among body condition score, body weight, milk yield, and fertility in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 86, 2193–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berry, D.P., Buckley, F. & Dillon, P. (2007). Body condition score and live-weight effects on milk production in Irish Holstein-Friesian dairy cows. Animal 1 (9), 1351–59.Google Scholar
Boldogh, I., Vojtov, N., Karmon, S. & Pon, L.A. (1998). Interaction between mitochondria and the actin cytoskeleton in budding yeast requires two integral membrane proteins, Mmm1p and Mdm10p. J. Cell Biol. 141, 1371–81.Google Scholar
Buckley, F., O’Sullivan, K., Mee, J.F., Evans, R.D. & Dillon, P. (2003). Relationships among milk yield, body condition, cow weight and reproduction in spring-calved Holstein-Friesians. J. Dairy Sci. 86, 2308–19.Google Scholar
De Rensis, F. & Scaramuzzi, R.J. (2003). Heat stress and seasonal effects on reproduction in the dairy cow: A review. Theriogenology 60, 657–65.Google Scholar
Dominguez, M.M. (1995). Effect of body condition, reproductive status and breed on follicular population and oocyte quality in cows. Theriogenology 43, 1405–18.Google Scholar
Drion, P.V., Beckers, J.F., Ectors, F.J., Hanzen, C., Hontain, J.Y. & Lonergen, P. (1996). Regulation de la croissance folliculare et luteale. 2. Ovulation, corpus jaune et luteolyse. Point Vétérinare. Numéro spécial: Reproduction des ruminants 28, 49–54.Google Scholar
Edmonson, A., Lean, I., Weaver, L., Farver, T. & Webster, G. (1989). A body condition scoring chart for Holstein dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 72, 68–78.Google Scholar
Fihri, F., Klakhdissi, A., Derqaoui, H., Hajji, K.H., Naciri, M. & Goumari, A. (2005). Genetic and nongenetic effects on the number of ovarian follicles and oocyte yield and quality in the bovine local (Oulmes Zaer), exotic breeds and their crosses in Morocco. Af. J. Biotechnol. 4, 9–13.Google Scholar
Gordon, I. (1994). Laboratory Production of Cattle Embryos. Wallingford, Oxon, UK: CAB International, 640 pp.Google Scholar
Hansen, P.J. (2007). Exploitation of genetic and physiological determinants of embryonic resistance to elevated temperature to improve embryonic survival in dairy cattle during heat stress. Theriogenology 68 (Suppl. 1), S242–9.Google Scholar
Hardy, K. (1999). Apoptosis in the human embryo. Rev. Reprod. 4, 125–34.Google Scholar
Jaškowski, J.M. (2001). Ovum pick up in cows. Medycyna Wet. 57, 792–5.Google Scholar
Kidson, A., Schoevers, E.J., Tharasanit, T., Hazeleger, W., Duero-Steverink, D.W.B., Colenbrander, B. & Dieleman, S.J. (2004). Morphology-related cytoskeleton dynamics in porcine blastocysts produced in vitro or in vivo, and its consequences on embryo viability. In In Vitro Embryo Development in Pigs: Impact of Oocyte Maturation Milieu on Blastocyst Morphology and Viability. (ed. Kidson, A.), pp. 99–117. Dissertation Utrecht University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine.Google Scholar
Kruip, T.A.M., Wensing, T. & Vos, P.L.A.M. (2001). Characteristics of abnormal puerperium in dairy cattle and the rationale for common treatments. Anim. Sci. Occasional Publication 26, 63–79.Google Scholar
Kubovičova, E., Makarevič, A.V., Hegedušová, Z., Slezáková, M. & Bezdíček, J. (2012). Effect of body condition score on oocyte yield and in vitro embryo development. Cattle Res. 1, 17–22.Google Scholar
Lozano, J.M.P., Lonergan, M.P., Boland, M.P. & O’Callaghan, D. (2003). Influence of nutrition on the effectiveness of superovulation programs in ewes: effect on oocyte quality and post-fertilization development. Reproduction 125, 543–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Makarevich, A.V., Kubovičová, E., Hegedušová, Z., Pivko, J. & Louda, F. (2011). Post-thaw culture in presence of insulin-like growth factor I improves the quality of cattle cryopreserved embryos. Zygote 20, 97–102.Google Scholar
Matsumoto, K., Asano, T. & Endo, T. (1997). Novel small GTPase m-Ras participates in reorganization of actin cytoskeleton. Oncogenesis 15, 2409–17.Google Scholar
Matsumoto, H., Shoji, N., Umezu, M. & Sato, E. (1998). Microtubule and microfilament dynamics in rat embryos during the two-cell block in vitro . J. Exp. Zool. 281, 149–53.Google Scholar
McEvoy, T.G., Robinson, J.J., Aitken, R.P., Findlay, A., Palmer, R.M. & Robertson, I.S. (1995). Dietary-induced suppression of pre-ovulatory progesterone concentrations in superovulated ewes impairs the subsequent in vivo and in vitro development of their ova. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 39, 89–107.Google Scholar
McEvoy, T.G., Robinson, J.J., Aitken, R.P., Findley, P.A. & Robertson, I.S. (1997). Dietary excesses of urea influence the viability and metabolism of preimplantation sheep embryos and may affect fetal growth among survivors. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 47, 71–90.Google Scholar
Meier, P., Finch, A. & Evan, G. (2000). Apoptosis in development. Nature 407, 796–801.Google Scholar
Monty, D.E. Jr & Racowski, C. (1987). In vitro evaluation of early embryo viability and development in summer heat-stressed, superovulated dairy cows. Theriogenology 28, 451–65.Google Scholar
Moreira, F., Risco, C., Pires, M.F.A., Ambrose, J.D., Drost, M., De Lorenzo, M. & Thatcher, W.W. (2000). Effect of body condition on reproductive efficiency of lactating dairy cows receiving a timed insemination. Theriogenology 53, 1305–19.Google Scholar
Morita, Y. & Tilly, J.L. (1999). Oocyte apoptosis: like sand through an hourglass. Dev. Biol. 213, 1–17.Google Scholar
Nowak, T. A., Kowski, J.M., Olechnowicz, J. & Bukowska, D. (2009). Effect of cows body condition during the periparturient period and early lactation on fertility and culling rate. Medycyna Wet. 65, 606–611.Google Scholar
Nowak, T.A., Jaškowski, J.M., Szczepankiewicz, D. & Olechnowicz, J. (2011). Quality and number of cumulus–oocyte complexes (COC) and concentrations of leptin and ghrelin in blood and follicular fluid depending on the body condition of cows. Medycyna Wet. 67, 115–9.Google Scholar
O’Callaghan, D.H., Yaakub, P., Hyttel, L., Spicer, J. & Boland, M.P. (2000). Effect of nutrition and superovulation on oocyte morphology, follicular fluid composition and systemic hormone concentrations in ewes. J. Reprod. Fertil. 18, 303–13.Google Scholar
Negrao, S., Nibart, M. & Humblot, P. (1997). Negative effects of over-feeding on superovulatory response and embryo production in dairy heifers. Proceedings 13th AETE Meeting, 86 pp. France: Lyon.Google Scholar
Rocha, A., Randel, R.D., Broussard, J.R., Lim, J.M., Blair, R.M., Roussel, J.D., Godke, R.A. & Hansel, W. (1998). High environmental temperature and humidity decrease oocyte quality in Bos taurus but not in Bos indicus cows. Theriogenology 49, 657–65.Google Scholar
Roche, J.R., Friggens, N.C., Kay, J.K., Fisher, M.W., Stafford, K.J. & Berr, D.P. (2009). Invited review: Body condition score and its association with dairy cow productivity, health, and welfare. J. Dairy Sci. 92, 5769–801.Google ScholarPubMed
Rutledge, J.J., Monson, R.L., Northey, D.L. & Leibfried-Rutledge, M.L. (1999). Seasonality of cattle embryo production in temperate region. Theriogenology 50, 330 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Santos, J.E.P., Thatcher, W.W., Pool, L. & Overton, M.W. (2001). Effect of human chorionic gonadotropin on luteal function and reproductive performance of high producing lactating Holstein dairy cows. J. Anim. Sci. 79, 2881–94.Google Scholar
Snijders, S.E., Dillon, P., O’Callaghan, D. & Boland, M.P. (2000). Effect of genetic merit, milk yield, body condition and lactation number on in vitro oocyte development in dairy cows. Theriogenology 53, 981–9.Google Scholar
Snijders, S.E.M., Dillon, P.G., O’Farrell, K.J., Diskin, M., Wylie, A.R.G., O’Callaghan, D., Rath, M. & Boland, M.P. (2001). Genetic merit for milk production and reproductive success in dairy cows. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 65, 17–31.Google Scholar
Stringfellow, D.A. & Seidel, S.M. (1998). International Embryo Transfer Manual. A Procedural Guide and General Information for the Use of Embryo Transfer Technology Emphasizing Sanitary Procedures. 3rd edn. Savoy, USA: IETS, 172 pp.Google Scholar
Sun, Q.Y. & Schatten, H. (2006). Multiples roles of NuMA in vertebrate cells: review of an intriguing multifunctional protein. Front Biosci. 11, 1137–46.Google Scholar
Takuma, T., Sakai, S., Ezoe, D., Ichimaru, H., Jinnouchi, T., Kaedei, Y., Nagai, T. & Otoi, T. (2010). Effect of season and reproductive phase on the quality, quantity and developmental competence of oocytes aspirated from Japanese Black cows. J. Reprod. Dev. 56, 55–9.Google Scholar
Tilly, J.L. (2001). Commuting the death sentence: how oocytes strive to survive. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2, 838–48.Google Scholar
Tremoleda, J.L., Schoevers, E.J., Stout, T.A.E., Colenbrander, B. & Bevers, M.M. (2001). Organisation of the cytoskeleton during in vitro maturation of horse oocytes Mol . Reprod. Dev. 60, 260–9.Google Scholar
Tremoleda, J.L., Stour, T.A.E., Lagutina, I., Lazzari, G., Bevers, M.M., Colenbrander, B. & Galli, C. (2002a). Effects of in vitro production on horse embryos morphology, cytoskeletal characteristics and capsule formation. In Features of Horse IVP Embryos. Doctoral thesis Utrecht University, 200 pp., ADDIX, Wijk bij Duurstede. Chapter 6, pp. 119–52.Google Scholar
Tremoleda, J.L., Colenbrander, B., Stout, T.A.E. & Bevers, M.M. (2002b). Reorganization of the cytoskeleton and chromatin in horse oocytes following intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Theriogenology 58, 697–700.Google Scholar
Tremoleda, J.L., Stout, T.A., Lagutina, I., Lazzari, G., Bevers, M.M., Colenbrander, B. & Galli, C. (2003). Effects of in vitro production on horse embryo morphology, cytoskeletal characteristics, and blastocyst capsule formation. Biol. Reprod. 69, 1895–906.Google Scholar
Volderrama, F., Babia, T., Ayala, I., Kok, J.W., Renaupiqueras, J. & Egea, G. (1998). Actin microfilaments are essential for the cytological position and morphology of the Golgi complex. Eur. J. Cell Biol. 76, 9–17.Google Scholar
Wang, W.H., Abeydeera, L.R., Han, Y. M., Prather, R.S. & Day, B.N. (1999). Morphologic evaluation and actin filament distribution in porcine embryos produced in vitro and in vivo. Biol. Reprod. 60, 1020–8.Google Scholar
Zeitoun, M.M., Rodriquez, H.F. & Randel, R.D. (1996). Effect of season on ovarian follicular dynamics in Brahman cows. Theriogenology 45, 1577–81.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Chrenek Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material

Download Chrenek Supplementary Material(File)
File 25.6 KB