Slow freezing versus vitrifcation for the cryopreservation of zebrafsh (Danio rerio) ovarian tissue
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2019 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10183/225559 |
Resumo: | The aim of the present study was to compare the efficiency of vitrification and slow freezing techniques for the cryopreservation of zebrafish ovarian tissue containing immature follicles. In Experiment 1, assessment of cell membrane integrity by trypan blue exclusion staining was used to select the best cryoprotectant solution for each cryopreservation method. Primary growth (PG) oocytes showed the best percentage of membrane integrity (63.5 ± 2.99%) when SF4 solution (2 M methanol + 0.1 M trehalose + 10% egg yolk solution) was employed. The vitrification solution, which presented the highest membrane integrity (V2; 1.5 M methanol + 5.5 M Me2SO + 0.5 M sucrose + 10% egg yolk solution) was selected for Experiment 2. Experiment 2 aimed to compare the vitrification and slow freezing techniques in the following parameters: morphology, oxidative stress, mitochondrial activity, and DNA damage. Frozen ovarian tissue showed higher ROS levels and lower mitochondrial activity than vitrified ovarian tissue. Ultrastructural observations of frozen PG oocytes showed rupture of the plasma membrane, loss of intracellular contents and a large number of damaged mitochondria, while vitrified PG oocytes had intact mitochondria and cell plasma membranes. We conclude that vitrification may be more effective than slow freezing for the cryopreservation of zebrafish ovarian tissue. |
id |
UFRGS-2_3f10c89bf3052f48cdc44bc2a6acecaf |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/225559 |
network_acronym_str |
UFRGS-2 |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Marques, Lis SantosFossati, Ana Amélia NunesRodrigues, Rômulo BatistaRosa, Helen T. daIzaguirry, Aryele PintoRamalho, Juliana B.Moreira, Jose Claudio FonsecaSantos, Francielli WeberZhang, TiantianStreit Júnior, Danilo Pedro2021-08-11T04:48:43Z20192045-2322http://hdl.handle.net/10183/225559001107565The aim of the present study was to compare the efficiency of vitrification and slow freezing techniques for the cryopreservation of zebrafish ovarian tissue containing immature follicles. In Experiment 1, assessment of cell membrane integrity by trypan blue exclusion staining was used to select the best cryoprotectant solution for each cryopreservation method. Primary growth (PG) oocytes showed the best percentage of membrane integrity (63.5 ± 2.99%) when SF4 solution (2 M methanol + 0.1 M trehalose + 10% egg yolk solution) was employed. The vitrification solution, which presented the highest membrane integrity (V2; 1.5 M methanol + 5.5 M Me2SO + 0.5 M sucrose + 10% egg yolk solution) was selected for Experiment 2. Experiment 2 aimed to compare the vitrification and slow freezing techniques in the following parameters: morphology, oxidative stress, mitochondrial activity, and DNA damage. Frozen ovarian tissue showed higher ROS levels and lower mitochondrial activity than vitrified ovarian tissue. Ultrastructural observations of frozen PG oocytes showed rupture of the plasma membrane, loss of intracellular contents and a large number of damaged mitochondria, while vitrified PG oocytes had intact mitochondria and cell plasma membranes. We conclude that vitrification may be more effective than slow freezing for the cryopreservation of zebrafish ovarian tissue.application/pdfengScientific reports. London. Vol. 9 (Oct. 2019), 15353, 11 p.CriopreservaçãoDanio rerioTecido animalSlow freezing versus vitrifcation for the cryopreservation of zebrafsh (Danio rerio) ovarian tissueEstrangeiroinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGSinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)instacron:UFRGSTEXT001107565.pdf.txt001107565.pdf.txtExtracted Texttext/plain45286http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/225559/2/001107565.pdf.txt202b3a299d645d30231c831587d50910MD52ORIGINAL001107565.pdfTexto completo (inglês)application/pdf2584067http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/225559/1/001107565.pdfbeed4fd0cabe194ae78a7c99bf8fc754MD5110183/2255592024-05-01 06:52:22.493825oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/225559Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttps://lume.ufrgs.br/oai/requestlume@ufrgs.bropendoar:2024-05-01T09:52:22Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)false |
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Slow freezing versus vitrifcation for the cryopreservation of zebrafsh (Danio rerio) ovarian tissue |
title |
Slow freezing versus vitrifcation for the cryopreservation of zebrafsh (Danio rerio) ovarian tissue |
spellingShingle |
Slow freezing versus vitrifcation for the cryopreservation of zebrafsh (Danio rerio) ovarian tissue Marques, Lis Santos Criopreservação Danio rerio Tecido animal |
title_short |
Slow freezing versus vitrifcation for the cryopreservation of zebrafsh (Danio rerio) ovarian tissue |
title_full |
Slow freezing versus vitrifcation for the cryopreservation of zebrafsh (Danio rerio) ovarian tissue |
title_fullStr |
Slow freezing versus vitrifcation for the cryopreservation of zebrafsh (Danio rerio) ovarian tissue |
title_full_unstemmed |
Slow freezing versus vitrifcation for the cryopreservation of zebrafsh (Danio rerio) ovarian tissue |
title_sort |
Slow freezing versus vitrifcation for the cryopreservation of zebrafsh (Danio rerio) ovarian tissue |
author |
Marques, Lis Santos |
author_facet |
Marques, Lis Santos Fossati, Ana Amélia Nunes Rodrigues, Rômulo Batista Rosa, Helen T. da Izaguirry, Aryele Pinto Ramalho, Juliana B. Moreira, Jose Claudio Fonseca Santos, Francielli Weber Zhang, Tiantian Streit Júnior, Danilo Pedro |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Fossati, Ana Amélia Nunes Rodrigues, Rômulo Batista Rosa, Helen T. da Izaguirry, Aryele Pinto Ramalho, Juliana B. Moreira, Jose Claudio Fonseca Santos, Francielli Weber Zhang, Tiantian Streit Júnior, Danilo Pedro |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Marques, Lis Santos Fossati, Ana Amélia Nunes Rodrigues, Rômulo Batista Rosa, Helen T. da Izaguirry, Aryele Pinto Ramalho, Juliana B. Moreira, Jose Claudio Fonseca Santos, Francielli Weber Zhang, Tiantian Streit Júnior, Danilo Pedro |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Criopreservação Danio rerio Tecido animal |
topic |
Criopreservação Danio rerio Tecido animal |
description |
The aim of the present study was to compare the efficiency of vitrification and slow freezing techniques for the cryopreservation of zebrafish ovarian tissue containing immature follicles. In Experiment 1, assessment of cell membrane integrity by trypan blue exclusion staining was used to select the best cryoprotectant solution for each cryopreservation method. Primary growth (PG) oocytes showed the best percentage of membrane integrity (63.5 ± 2.99%) when SF4 solution (2 M methanol + 0.1 M trehalose + 10% egg yolk solution) was employed. The vitrification solution, which presented the highest membrane integrity (V2; 1.5 M methanol + 5.5 M Me2SO + 0.5 M sucrose + 10% egg yolk solution) was selected for Experiment 2. Experiment 2 aimed to compare the vitrification and slow freezing techniques in the following parameters: morphology, oxidative stress, mitochondrial activity, and DNA damage. Frozen ovarian tissue showed higher ROS levels and lower mitochondrial activity than vitrified ovarian tissue. Ultrastructural observations of frozen PG oocytes showed rupture of the plasma membrane, loss of intracellular contents and a large number of damaged mitochondria, while vitrified PG oocytes had intact mitochondria and cell plasma membranes. We conclude that vitrification may be more effective than slow freezing for the cryopreservation of zebrafish ovarian tissue. |
publishDate |
2019 |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2019 |
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2021-08-11T04:48:43Z |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
Estrangeiro info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10183/225559 |
dc.identifier.issn.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
2045-2322 |
dc.identifier.nrb.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
001107565 |
identifier_str_mv |
2045-2322 001107565 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10183/225559 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.ispartof.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Scientific reports. London. Vol. 9 (Oct. 2019), 15353, 11 p. |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGS instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) instacron:UFRGS |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
instacron_str |
UFRGS |
institution |
UFRGS |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/225559/2/001107565.pdf.txt http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/225559/1/001107565.pdf |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
202b3a299d645d30231c831587d50910 beed4fd0cabe194ae78a7c99bf8fc754 |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
lume@ufrgs.br |
_version_ |
1817725110832857088 |