GSTM3, but not IZUMO1, is a cryotolerance marker of boar sperm.
Boar
Cryopreservation
GSTM3
IZUMO1
ROS
Sperm
Journal
Journal of animal science and biotechnology
ISSN: 1674-9782
Titre abrégé: J Anim Sci Biotechnol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101581293
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
01
03
2019
accepted:
05
06
2019
entrez:
9
8
2019
pubmed:
9
8
2019
medline:
9
8
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Cryopreservation is currently the most efficient method for long-term preservation of mammalian gametes and is extensively used in swine artificial insemination (AI) centres. However, it is well-known that cryopreservation procedures induce changes in the water phase in both intra and extracellular compartments, which alter the content and localisation of several proteins and ends up curtailing the structural integrity of functional sperm (i.e., cryoinjuries). Alterations and deficiencies of sperm-oocyte binding proteins during gamete recognition are one of the causes of reproductive failure both Cryopreservation was found to induce changes in the localisation of IZUMO1 and GSTM3 in boar sperm. However, the relative content of both proteins was not altered after thawing. Furthermore, whereas IZUMO1 content was found not to be related to the cryotolerance of boar sperm, GSTM3 content was observed to be higher in poor (PFE) than in good (GFE) freezability ejaculates in both pre-frozen (1.00 INT·mm The difference in GSTM3 content between GFE and PFE, together with this protein having been found to be related to poor sperm quality post-thaw, suggests that it could be used as a cryotolerance marker of boar spermatozoa. Furthermore, both IZUMO1 and GSTM3 relocate during cryopreservation, which could contribute to the reduced fertilising capacity of frozen-thawed boar sperm.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Cryopreservation is currently the most efficient method for long-term preservation of mammalian gametes and is extensively used in swine artificial insemination (AI) centres. However, it is well-known that cryopreservation procedures induce changes in the water phase in both intra and extracellular compartments, which alter the content and localisation of several proteins and ends up curtailing the structural integrity of functional sperm (i.e., cryoinjuries). Alterations and deficiencies of sperm-oocyte binding proteins during gamete recognition are one of the causes of reproductive failure both
RESULTS
RESULTS
Cryopreservation was found to induce changes in the localisation of IZUMO1 and GSTM3 in boar sperm. However, the relative content of both proteins was not altered after thawing. Furthermore, whereas IZUMO1 content was found not to be related to the cryotolerance of boar sperm, GSTM3 content was observed to be higher in poor (PFE) than in good (GFE) freezability ejaculates in both pre-frozen (1.00 INT·mm
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The difference in GSTM3 content between GFE and PFE, together with this protein having been found to be related to poor sperm quality post-thaw, suggests that it could be used as a cryotolerance marker of boar spermatozoa. Furthermore, both IZUMO1 and GSTM3 relocate during cryopreservation, which could contribute to the reduced fertilising capacity of frozen-thawed boar sperm.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31391940
doi: 10.1186/s40104-019-0370-5
pii: 370
pmc: PMC6681495
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
61Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Références
J Anim Sci. 1975 Jan;40(1):99-102
pubmed: 1110222
ILAR J. 2000;41(4):187-96
pubmed: 11123179
Biol Reprod. 2001 Aug;65(2):462-70
pubmed: 11466214
J Cell Sci. 2002 May 15;115(Pt 10):2053-65
pubmed: 11973347
Hum Reprod Update. 2002 Jul-Aug;8(4):297-311
pubmed: 12206465
FEBS Lett. 2003 Mar 13;538(1-3):14-8
pubmed: 12633845
Nature. 2005 Mar 10;434(7030):234-8
pubmed: 15759005
Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2005;45:51-88
pubmed: 15822171
Reproduction. 2006 May;131(5):887-94
pubmed: 16672353
Arch Androl. 2006 Jul-Aug;52(4):269-74
pubmed: 16728342
J Anim Sci. 2006 Aug;84(8):2089-100
pubmed: 16864869
J Androl. 2008 Mar-Apr;29(2):213-21
pubmed: 17978341
Theriogenology. 2009 Oct 15;72(7):930-48
pubmed: 19651432
Reprod Domest Anim. 2013 Feb;48(1):90-7
pubmed: 22594348
J Cell Sci. 2012 Nov 1;125(Pt 21):4985-90
pubmed: 22946049
Hum Reprod. 2013 Apr;28(4):852-65
pubmed: 23355646
Theriogenology. 2014 Mar 1;81(4):587-98
pubmed: 24388131
PLoS Genet. 2014 Jan;10(1):e1004044
pubmed: 24391514
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 06;9(3):e90887
pubmed: 24603527
Nature. 2014 Apr 24;508(7497):483-7
pubmed: 24739963
Asian J Androl. 2015 Sep-Oct;17(5):708-10
pubmed: 25994654
Reprod Domest Anim. 2015 Jul;50 Suppl 2:90-7
pubmed: 26174925
Sci Rep. 2015 Sep 08;5:13821
pubmed: 26348888
Theriogenology. 2016 Jan 1;85(1):47-64
pubmed: 26506124
Theriogenology. 2016 Dec;86(9):2179-2188.e3
pubmed: 27527404
Andrology. 2017 Nov;5(6):1153-1164
pubmed: 28941027
Biol Reprod. 1995 Aug;53(2):276-84
pubmed: 7492679
J Androl. 1996 Mar-Apr;17(2):151-7
pubmed: 8723439
Biol Reprod. 1996 Jul;55(1):80-6
pubmed: 8793062
Biochem J. 1998 Jan 15;329 ( Pt 2):231-41
pubmed: 9425104
J Biol Chem. 1998 Apr 17;273(16):9593-601
pubmed: 9545290