Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T15:22:40.923Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Interference of fixatives and fixation period on the morphologic analysis of ovarian preantral follicles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2021

D.C.C. Brito
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Manipulation of Oocytes and Ovarian Preantral Follicles (LAMOFOPA), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ceará State University, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
L.V.S. Ñaupas
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Manipulation of Oocytes and Ovarian Preantral Follicles (LAMOFOPA), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ceará State University, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
S.S. Souza
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Manipulation of Oocytes and Ovarian Preantral Follicles (LAMOFOPA), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ceará State University, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
G.L.H. Alcântara
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Manipulation of Oocytes and Ovarian Preantral Follicles (LAMOFOPA), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ceará State University, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
J.R. Figueiredo
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Manipulation of Oocytes and Ovarian Preantral Follicles (LAMOFOPA), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ceará State University, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
R.R. Santos*
Affiliation:
Schothorst Feed Research, Lelystad, The Netherlands
A.P.R. Rodrigues
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Manipulation of Oocytes and Ovarian Preantral Follicles (LAMOFOPA), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ceará State University, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
*
Author for correspondence: R.R. Santos. Schothorst Feed Research, Lelystad, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected]

Summary

Ovine ovarian fragments (3 × 3 × 1 mm) were fixed in neutral buffered formalin (NBF), Carnoy’s solution (CAR), Davidson’s solution (DAV), or paraformaldehyde (PFA) for 12 h or 24 h. After this fixation time, each fragment was prepared for histological analysis. Although fixative and fixation period did not affect follicular and stromal cells density, the percentages of morphologically normal primordial and primary follicles was affected by the fixative type and period of fixation. Paraformaldehyde was not indicated as a fixative for ovarian fragments. Formalin was a suitable fixative only when the period of fixation was 12 h, while Carnoy was efficient after a fixation period of 24 h. In conclusion, the most indicated fixative for the morphological evaluation of ovarian preantral follicles was DAV, regardless of the fixation period, that is 12 or 24 h.

Type
Short Communication
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brito, AB, Brito, DCC, Silva, WB, Rodrigues, APR, Figueiredo, JR, Domingues, SFS and Santos, RR (2018). Morphology and morphometry of preantral follicles, and immunolocalization of angiogenic factors in ovarian tissue from the neotropical primate Sapajus apella . Zygote 26, 424–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brito, DCC, Domingues, SFS, Rodrigues, APR, Silva, LM, Alves, KA, Wu, X, Francisco, TS, Barroso Neto, IL, Freire, VN, Figueiredo, JR, Pieczarka, JC and Santos, RR (2020). Betaine-loaded CaCO3 microparticles improve survival of vitrified feline preantral follicles through higher mitochondrial activity and decreased reactive oxygen species. Reprod Fertil Dev 32, 531–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bufalo, I, Gonzalez, SM, Silva, CB, Lindquist, AG, Bergamo, LZ, Costa, CB, Marinho, LSR and Seneda, MM (2016). Effect of fixative type and fixation time on the morphology of equine preantral ovarian follicles. Cienc Agrar 37, 243–50.Google Scholar
Castilho, ACS, Dalanezi, FM, Franchi, FF, Price, CA, Ferreira, JCP, Trevisol, E and Buratini, J (2019). Expression of fibroblast growth factor 22 (FGF22) and its receptor, FGFR1B, during development and regression of bovine corpus luteum. Theriogenology 125, 15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chung, JY, Song, JS, Ylaya, K, Sears, JD, Choi, L, Cho, H, Rosenberg, AZ and Hewitt, SM (2018). Histomorphological and molecular assessments of the fixation times comparing formalin and ethanol-based fixatives. J Histochem Cytochem 66, 121–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Faustino, LR, Santos, RR, Silva, CMG, Pinto, LC, Celestino, JJH, Campello, CC, Figueiredo, JR and Rodrigues, APR (2010). Goat and sheep ovarian tissue cryopreservation: Effects on the morphology and development of primordial follicles and density of stromal cell. Anim Reprod Sci 122, 90–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fransolet, M, Henry, L, Labied, S, Masereel, MC, Blacher, S, Noël, A, Foidart, JM, Nisolle, M and Munaut, C (2015). Influence of mouse strain on ovarian tissue recovery after engraftment with angiogenic factor. J Ovarian Res 8, 14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grazul-Bilska, A, Borowicz, PP, Reynolds, LP and Redmer, DA (2013). Vascular perfusion with fluorescent labeled lectin to study ovarian functions. Acta Histochem 115, 893–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamouzova, P, Cizek, P, Bartoskova, A and Novotny, R (2020). Different fixative solutions in the detection of mast cells in the canine and feline reproductive organs. Folia Morphol 79, 265–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jewgenow, K (1998). Role of media, protein and energy supplements on maintenance of morphology and DNA-synthesis of small preantral domestic cat follicles during short-term culture. Theriogenology 49, 1567–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lima, AKF, Silva, AR, Santos, RR, Sales, DM, Evangelista, AF, Figueiredo, JR and Silva, LDM (2006). Cryopreservation of preantral ovarian follicles in situ from domestic cats (Felis catus) using different cryoprotective agents. Theriogenology 66, 1664–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Longuespée, R, Fiéron, M, Pottier, C, Quesada-Calvo, F, Meuwis, MA, Baiwir, D, Smargiasso, N, Mazzucchelli, G, De Pauw-Gillet, MC, Delvenne, P and De Pauw, E (2014). Tissue proteomics for the next decade? Towards a molecular dimension in histology. OMICS 18, 539–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Melan, MA (1994). Overview of cell fixation and permeabilization. Methods Mol Biol 34, 5566.Google ScholarPubMed
Naumowicz, K, Pajdak, J, Szarek, J, Schulz, P, Terech-Majewska, E and Felsmann, MZ (2018). Influence of different fixatives on quality of staining and morphology of fish ovary. Pathology 158, 140.Google Scholar
Perry, C, Chung, JY, Ylaya, K, Choi, CH, Simpson, A, Matsumoto, KT, Smith, WA and Hewitt, SM (2016). A buffered alcohol-based fixative for histomorphologic and molecular applications. J Histochem Cytochem 64, 425–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richter, KN, Revelo, NH, Seitz, KJ, Helm, MS, Sarkar, D, Saleeb, RS, D’Este, E, Eberle, J, Wagner, E, Vogl, C, Lazaro, DF, Richter, F, Coy-Vergara, J, Coceano, G, Boyden, ES, Duncan, RR, Hell, SW, Lauterbach, MA, Lehnart, SE, Moser, T, Outeiro, TF, Rehling, P, Schwappach, B, Testa, I, Zapiec, B and Rizzol, SO (2018). Glyoxal as an alternative fixative to formaldehyde in immunostaining and super-resolution microscopy. EMBO J 37, 139–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowley, JE, Rubenstein, GE, Manuel, SL, Johnson, NL, Surgnier, J, Kapitsinou, PP, Duncan, FE and Pritchard, MT (2020). Tissue-specific fixation methods are required for optimal in situ visualization of hyaluronan in the ovary, kidney, and liver. J Histochem Cytochem 68, 7591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos, RR, Rodrigues, APR, Costa, SHF, Silva, JRV, Matos, MHT, Lucci, CM, Bao, SN, van den Hurk, R and Figueiredo, JR (2006). Histological and ultrastructural analysis of cryopreserved sheep preantral follicles. Anim Reprod Sci 91, 249–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, TES, Brito, DCC, Sa, NAR, Silva, RF, Ferreira, ACC, Silva, JYG, Guedes, MIF, Rodrigues, APR, Santos, RR and Figueiredo, JR (2019). Equol: a microbiota metabolite able to alleviate the negative effects of zearalenone during in vitro culture of ovine preantral follicles. Toxins 11, 652.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed