See the published version of this preprint at Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Research
Pilar Coy
Universidad de Murcia - Campus de Espinardo
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3943-1890
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: In vitro embryo production (IVP) and embryo transfer (ET) are two very common assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in human and cattle. However, in pig, the combination of either procedures, or even their use separately, is still considered suboptimal due to the low efficiency of IVP plus the difficulty of performing ET in the long and contorted uterus of the sow. In addition, the potential impact of these two ART on the health of the offspring is unknown. We investigated here if the use of a modified IVP system, with natural reproductive fluids (RF) as supplements to the culture media, combined with a minimally invasive surgery to perform ET, affects the output of the own IVP system as well as the reproductive performance of the mother and placental molecular traits.
Results: The blastocyst rates obtained by both in vitro systems, conventional (C-IVP) and modified (RF-IVP), were similar. Pregnancy and farrowing rates were also similar. However, when compared to in vivo control (artificial insemination, AI), litter sizes of both IVP groups were lower, while placental efficiency was higher in AI than in RF-IVP. Gene expression studies revealed aberrant expression levels for PEG3 and LUM in placental tissue for C-IVP group when compared to AI, but not for RF-IVP group.
Conclusions: The use of reproductive fluids as additives for the culture media in pig IVP does not improve reproductive performance of recipient mothers but could mitigate the impact of artificial procedures in the offspring.
Keywords
Assisted reproductive technologies, Embryo transfer, In vitro embryo production, Placenta, Reproductive fluids
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology.
Version 2
Posted 13 Oct, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 27 Dec, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 07 Oct, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 07 Oct, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 05 Oct, 2020
Editor assigned
On 01 Oct, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 30 Sep, 2020
Editor invited
On 30 Sep, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 17 Aug, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 03 Aug, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 28 Jul, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 28 Jul, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 19 Jul, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 18 Jul, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 16 Jul, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 15 Jul, 2020
Editor assigned
On 13 Jul, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 12 Jul, 2020
Editor invited
On 12 Jul, 2020
First submitted
On 10 Jul, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
See the published version of this preprint at Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research
Pilar Coy
Universidad de Murcia - Campus de Espinardo
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3943-1890
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology.
Version 2
Posted 13 Oct, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 27 Dec, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 07 Oct, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 07 Oct, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 05 Oct, 2020
Editor assigned
On 01 Oct, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 30 Sep, 2020
Editor invited
On 30 Sep, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 17 Aug, 2020
Review #3 received
Received 03 Aug, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 28 Jul, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 28 Jul, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 19 Jul, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 18 Jul, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 16 Jul, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 15 Jul, 2020
Editor assigned
On 13 Jul, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 12 Jul, 2020
Editor invited
On 12 Jul, 2020
First submitted
On 10 Jul, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology.
Background: In vitro embryo production (IVP) and embryo transfer (ET) are two very common assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in human and cattle. However, in pig, the combination of either procedures, or even their use separately, is still considered suboptimal due to the low efficiency of IVP plus the difficulty of performing ET in the long and contorted uterus of the sow. In addition, the potential impact of these two ART on the health of the offspring is unknown. We investigated here if the use of a modified IVP system, with natural reproductive fluids (RF) as supplements to the culture media, combined with a minimally invasive surgery to perform ET, affects the output of the own IVP system as well as the reproductive performance of the mother and placental molecular traits.
Results: The blastocyst rates obtained by both in vitro systems, conventional (C-IVP) and modified (RF-IVP), were similar. Pregnancy and farrowing rates were also similar. However, when compared to in vivo control (artificial insemination, AI), litter sizes of both IVP groups were lower, while placental efficiency was higher in AI than in RF-IVP. Gene expression studies revealed aberrant expression levels for PEG3 and LUM in placental tissue for C-IVP group when compared to AI, but not for RF-IVP group.
Conclusions: The use of reproductive fluids as additives for the culture media in pig IVP does not improve reproductive performance of recipient mothers but could mitigate the impact of artificial procedures in the offspring.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...