| Title |
Lower blastocyst quality after conventional vs. Piezo ICSI in the horse reflects delayed sperm component remodeling and oocyte activation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10815-018-1174-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
R. M. Salgado, J. G. Brom-de-Luna, H. L. Resende, H. S. Canesin, Katrin Hinrichs |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to evaluate the differential effects of conventional and Piezo-driven ICSI on blastocyst development, and on sperm component remodeling and oocyte activation, in an equine model. In vitro-matured equine oocytes underwent conventional (Conv) or Piezo ICSI, the latter utilizing fluorocarbon ballast. Blastocyst development was compared between treatments to validate the model. Then, oocytes were fixed at 0, 6, or 18 h after injection, and stained for the sperm tail, acrosome, oocyte cortical granules, and chromatin. These parameters were compared between injection techniques and between sham-injected and sperm-injected oocytes among time periods. Blastocyst rates were 39 and 40%. The nucleus number was lower, and the nuclear fragmentation rate was higher, in blastocysts produced by Conv. Cortical granule loss started at 0H after both sperm and sham injection. The acrosome was present at 0H in both ICSI treatments, and persisted to 18H in significantly more Conv than Piezo oocytes (72 vs. 21%). Sperm head area was unchanged at 6H in Conv but significantly increased at this time in Piezo; correspondingly, at 6H significantly more Conv than Piezo oocytes remained at MII (80 vs. 9.5%). Sham injection did not induce significant meiotic resumption. These data show that Piezo ICSI is associated with more rapid sperm component remodeling and oocyte meiotic resumption after sperm injection than is conventional ICSI, and with higher embryo quality at the blastocyst stage. This suggests that there is value in exploring the Piezo technique, utilized with a non-toxic fluorocarbon ballast, for use in clinical human ICSI. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 50% |
| Japan | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 8 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 12 | 28% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 14 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 May 2021.
All research outputs
#6,336,258
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
#340
of 1,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,060
of 332,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
#5
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,697 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,994 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.