Skip to main content

Comparative study of fertilization rates of C57BL/6NKorl and C57BL/6N mice obtained from two other sources

Abstract

C57BL/6N is the most widely used inbred mouse strain applied in a wide variety of research areas including cancer, cardiovascular biology, developmental biology, diabetes and obesity, genetics, immunology, neurobiology, and sensorineural research. To compare the fertilization rates of C57BL/6NKorl mice with two commercial C57BL/6N stocks, differences in reproductive organ structures, sperm and egg numbers, fertilization rates, and embryo development rates among C57BL/6NKorl (Korea FDA source), C57BL/6NA (USA source), and C57BL/6NB (Japan source) mice were determined. Among the stocks, no significant differences were detected in organ weight and histological structure of male and female reproductive organs, although body weight was higher in C57BL/6NKorl mice than that in the other groups. The concentration and morphology of sperm and eggs in C57BL/6NKorl mice were similar to those of C57BL/6NA and C57BL/6NB mice. Furthermore, the three stocks had similar in vitro fertilization and embryo development rates, although these rates tended to be higher in C57BL/6NB mice. Pup body weight was higher in C57BL/6NKorl and C57BL/6NB mice than that in C57BL/6NA mice. The results of the present study suggest that C57BL/6NKorl, C57BL/6NA, and C57BL/6NB mice obtained from three different sources have similar fertilization and embryo development rates, although there were slight differences in the magnitude of their responses rates.

References

  1. 1.

    Hazzard KC, Watkins-Chow DE, Garrett LJ. Method of euthanasia influences the oocyte fertilization rate with fresh mouse sperm. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci 2014; 53(6): 641–646.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Marschall S, Huffstadt U, Balling R, Hrab de Angelis M. Reliable recovery of inbred mouse lines using cryopreserved spermatozoa. Mamm Genome 1999; 10(8): 773–776.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Sohn C, Chang YS. Study on in vitro fertilization of mouse. Seoul J Med 1985; 26(4): 361–368.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Laufer N, Pratt BM, DeCherney AH, Naftolin F, Merino M, Markert CL. The in vivo and in vitro effects of clomiphene citrate on ovulation, fertilization, and development of cultured mouse oocytes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1983; 147(6): 633–639.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Iwamatsu T, Chang MC. Factors involved in the fertilization of mouse eggs in vitro. J Reprod Fertil 1971; 26(2): 197–208.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Hunter RH, Petersen HH, Greve T. Ovarian follicular fluid, progesterone and Ca2+ ion influences on sperm release from the fallopian tube reservoir. Mol Reprod Dev 1999; 54(3): 283–291.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Hansen GM, Markesich DC, Burnett MB, Zhu Q, Dionne KM, Richter LJ, Finnell RH, Sands AT, Zambrowicz BP, Abuin A. Large-scale gene trapping in C57BL/6N mouse embryonic stem cells. Genome Res 2008; 18(10): 1670–1679.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Bryant CD, Zhang NN, Sokoloff G, Fanselow MS, Ennes HS, Palmer AA, McRoberts JA. Behavioral differences among C57BL/6 substrains: implications for transgenic and knockout studies. J Neurogenet 2008; 22(4): 315–331.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Rogner UC, Avner P. Congenic mice: cutting tools for complex immune disorders. Nat Rev Immunol 2003; 3(3): 243–252.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Atochina EN, Beers MF, Tomer Y, Scanlon ST, Russo SJ, Panettieri RA Jr, Haczku A. Attenuated allergic airway hyperresponsiveness in C57BL/6 mice is associated with enhanced surfactant protein (SP)-D production following allergic sensitization. Respir Res 2003; 4: 15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Zurita E, Chagoyen M, Cantero M, Alonso R, González-Neira A, López-Jiménez A, López-Moreno JA, Landel CP, Benítez J, Pazos F, Montoliu L. Genetic polymorphisms among C57BL/6 mouse inbred strains. Transgenic Res 2011; 20(3): 481–489.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Willott JF. Audition. In: Behavioral Genetics of the Mouse: Genetics of Behavioral Phenotypes (Crusio WE, Sluyter F, Gerlai RT, Pietropaolo S, ed), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013; pp 36–44.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Mogil JS, Wilson SG, Bon K, Lee SE, Chung K, Raber P, Pieper JO, Hain HS, Belknap JK, Hubert L, Elmer GI, Chung JM, Devor M. Heritability of nociception I: responses of 11 inbred mouse strains on 12 measures of nociception. Pain 1999; 80(1-2): 67–82.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    World Health Organization. WHO laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen, 5th ed, World Health Organization, Geneva, 2010; pp 32–44.

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Golshan Iranpour F, Rezazadeh Valojerdi M. The epididymal sperm viability, motility and DNA integrity in dead mice maintained at 4-6oC. Iran J Reprod Med 2013; 11(3): 195–200.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Park YS, Lee HJ, Seo JT, Lee YS, Hong JY, Lee HT, Chung KS. Effect of staining method on spermatozoa morphology. J Kor Androl Soc 1994; 12(2): 93–99.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Liu L, Nutter LM, Law N, McKerlie C. Sperm freezing and in vitro fertilization in three substrains of C57BL/6 mice. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci 2009; 48(1): 39–43.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Takahashi H, Liu C. Archiving and distributing mouse lines by sperm cryopreservation, IVF, and embryo transfer. Methods Enzymol 2010; 476: 53–69.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Germond M, Nocera D, Senn A, Rink K, Delacretaz G, Pedrazzini T, Hornung JP. Improved fertilization and implantation rates after non-touch zona pellucida microdrilling of mouse oocytes with a 1.48 microm diode laser beam. Hum Reprod 1996; 11(5): 1043–1048.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Kent GC. Comparative Anatomy of the Vertebrates, 9th Ed, McGraw Hill Higher Education, Boston, 2001; pp 1–544.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Giwercman A, Giwercman YL. Environmental factors and testicular function. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab 2011; 25(2): 391–402.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Taberlet P, Coissac E, Pansu J, Pompanon F. Conservation genetics of cattle, sheep, and goats. C R Biol 2011; 334(3): 247–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Burns BM, Fordyce G, Holroyd R G. A review of factors that impact on the capacity of beef cattle females to conceive, maintain a pregnancy and wean a calf-Implications for reproductive efficiency in northern Australia. Anim Reprod Sci 2010; 122(1-2): 1–22.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Yildiz C, Ottaviani P, Law N, Ayearst R, Liu L, McKerlie C. Effects of cryopreservation on sperm quality, nuclear DNA integrity, in vitro fertilization, and in vitro embryo development in the mouse. Reproduction 2007; 133(3): 585–595.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Vergara GJ, Irwin MH, Moffatt RJ, Pinkert CA. In vitro fertilization in mice: Strain differences in response to superovulation protocols and effect of cumulus cell removal. Theriogenology 1997; 47(6): 1245–1252.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Vasudevan K, Raber J, Sztein J. Fertility comparison between wild type and transgenic mice by in vitro fertilization. Transgenic Res 2010; 19(4): 587–594.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Jin Hyang Hwang, the animal technician, for directing the animal care at the Laboratory Animal Resources Center. This project was supported by a 2015 grant from BIOREIN (Laboratory Animal Bio Resources Initiative) of the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dae Youn Hwang.

Rights and permissions

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yun, W.B., Kim, H.R., Kim, J.E. et al. Comparative study of fertilization rates of C57BL/6NKorl and C57BL/6N mice obtained from two other sources. Lab Anim Res 33, 179–186 (2017). https://doi.org/10.5625/lar.2017.33.2.179

Download citation

Keywords

  • C57BL/6NKorl
  • reproductive ability
  • sperm
  • egg
  • in vitro fertilization
  • embryo development rate