2002
DOI: 10.1016/s0093-691x(02)00641-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Zebu (Bos indicus) ovarian preantral follicles: morphological characterization and development of an efficient isolation method

Abstract: Zebu (Bos indicus) ovarian preantral follicles: morphological characterization and development of an efficient isolation methodCarolina Madeira Lucci Rodolfo Rumpf José Ricardo Figueiredo Sonia Nair Béo AbstractPreantral follicles are a major source of oocytes, and their utilization as an important tool to store large number of female gametes for future use in reproductive programs has been investigated. The increasing importance of studies in this subject, together with the important role of Zebu cattle in th… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

10
27
1
1

Year Published

2004
2004
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
10
27
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…It is important to note that we used zebu (Bos indicus) ovaries, while Paynter et al [10] probably used ovaries from European bovines (Bos taurus); that may be the explanation for these differences. Similarly high percentages of morphologically normal preantral follicles were previously reported in fresh ovaries of zebu cattle (96% [23]) and other species such as goats (95% [24]), sheep (98-99% [25] and [26]), mice (91-99% [4]), and humans (73% [11]). Using 3 M DMSO or either concentration of PROH, ultrastructural evaluation revealed loss of cytoplasm content in some granulosa cells of cryopreserved follicles, but the oocytes per se displayed normal ultrastructure.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…It is important to note that we used zebu (Bos indicus) ovaries, while Paynter et al [10] probably used ovaries from European bovines (Bos taurus); that may be the explanation for these differences. Similarly high percentages of morphologically normal preantral follicles were previously reported in fresh ovaries of zebu cattle (96% [23]) and other species such as goats (95% [24]), sheep (98-99% [25] and [26]), mice (91-99% [4]), and humans (73% [11]). Using 3 M DMSO or either concentration of PROH, ultrastructural evaluation revealed loss of cytoplasm content in some granulosa cells of cryopreserved follicles, but the oocytes per se displayed normal ultrastructure.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…4 °C for up to 18 h and 20 °C for up to 6 h), displayed changes in the oocyte that were the first degenerative signs observed (degeneration Type 1). Similar results were also observed in sheep [3] and goat [1] and [2] preantral follicles stored at 4 °C, and in fresh ovine [14], caprine [15], and bovine [16] ovaries, suggesting that this type of degeneration is commonly observed in ruminant preantral follicles. In contrast, when zebu ovaries were stored at 20 °C for 12 or 18 h, degeneration of granulosa cells (Type 2) was frequently observed, suggesting that this kind of degeneration was caused by storage.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…In a morphological and functional study of mouse preantral follicles, Cortvrindt et al [21] stated that follicles with a complete disconnection between oocyte and granulosa cells suffered irreversible damage. Morphological assessment of follicular integrity has been largely used to evaluate the effectiveness of the various treatments to which ovarian follicles were subjected [1], [2], [3], [15], [16] and [21]. Although it does not replace functional tests (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Preantral follicles were morphologically classified as normal or degenerated. The following aspects were considered as degeneration signs: disruption of the basement membrane, shrinking of the cytoplasm, cytoplasmic vacuoles, pyknotic nucleus and displacement of granulosa cells (LUCCI et al, 2002). analysis, with 5% of significance.…”
Section: Histological Processingmentioning
confidence: 99%