Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T05:25:45.598Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Combined use of proacrosion immunocytochemistry and autosomal DNA in situ hybridisation for evaluvation of human ejaculated germ cells

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Carmen Mendoza
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Granada Faculty of Sciences, Campus Universitario Funtenueva, Granada, Spain.
Moncef Benkhalifa
Affiliation:
Department of Cytogenetics and Assisted Reproductive Biology, Laboratoire Marcel Mérieux, Lyon, France.
Paul Cohen-Bacrie
Affiliation:
Laboratoire d&Eylau, Paris, France.
André Hazout
Affiliation:
Laboratoire d&Eylau, Paris, France.
Yves Ménézo
Affiliation:
Department of Cytogenetics and Assisted Reproductive Biology, Laboratoire Marcel Mérieux, Lyon, France.
Jan Tesarik*
Affiliation:
Laboratoire d&Eylau, Paris, France.
*
Dr Jan Tesarik, Laboratoire d'Eylau, 55 Rue Saint-Didier, 75116 paris, France. Fax: (+33) 1 4099 0782.

Summary

The recently reported human pregnancies and births after fertilising oocytes with round spermatids recovered from the ejaculate of men with non-obstructive azoospermia have underscored the need for a more accurate evaluation of the nuclear and cytoplasmic maturation status of ejaculated germ cells. In this study we describe our first experience with a method combining the immunocytochemical visualisation of proacrosin with autosomal DNA fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) to assess ejaculated germ cells from patients with a spermiogenesis defect. The proacrosin immunoreactivity, analysed with the use of the monoclonal antibody 4D4, has been detected in cells of round spermatid size presenting a haploid FISH figure as well as in larger cells whose ploidy corresponds to primary and secondary spermatocytes. These observations are in agreement with previously published results obtained, with the use of the same antibody, by immunocytochemical analysis of histological sections of testicular tissue. All the cells of round spermatid size possessing proacrosin immunoreactivity were found to be haploid by FISH. On the other hand, some of the haploid cells of round spermatid size did not possess proacrosin immunoreactivity. The structural pattern of proacrosin immunoreactivity was highly variable both in spermatids and in younger spermatogenic cells. These data show that cell size is the main criterion to be used for the identification of ejaculated round spermatids, whereas the presence of the developing acrosome represents only an auxiliary criterion. The scoring of acrosomal development in ejaculated spermatids may be useful as part of pre-treatment diagnosis before the inclusion of infertile couples in a spermatid conception programme.

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

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

Benkhalifa, M., Malet, P., Qumsieh, M., Boucher, D., Bellec, V. & Ménézo, Y.. 1994. Chromosome aberrations in normal and translocated human sperm: role in reproductive pathology. Ref. Gynecol. Obstet. 2, 288–96.Google Scholar
Bermüdez, D., Escalier, D., Gallo, J.M., Viellefond, A., Ríus, F., Perez de Vargas, I. & Schrével, J. (1994). Proacrosin as a marker of meiotic and post-meiotic germ cell differentiation: quantitative assessment of human spermatogenesis with a monoclonal antibody. J. Reprod. Fertil. 100, 567–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burgos, M.H. & Fawcett, D.W. (1955). Studies on the fine structure of the mammalian testis. I. Differentiation of the spermatids of the cat (Felix domestica). J. Biophys. Biochem. Cytol. 1, 237316.Google Scholar
Burgos, M.H. & Gutierrez, L.S.. (1986). The Golgi complex of the early spermatid in guinea pig. Anat. Rec. 216. 139–45.Google Scholar
Dooher, G.B. & Bennett, D. (1973). Fine structural observations on the development of the sperm head in the mouse. Am. J. Anat. 136, 339–61.Google Scholar
Escalier, D., Gallo, J.-M., Albert, M., Meduri, G., Bermudez, D., David, G. & Schrevel, J.. (1991). Human acrosome biogenesis: immunodetection of proacrosin in primary spermatocytes and of its partitioning pattern during meiosis. Development 113, 779–88.Google Scholar
Escalier, D., Bermüdez, D., Gallo, J.-M., Viellefond, A. & Schrével, J. (1992). Cytoplasmic events in human meiotic arrest as revealed by immunolabelling of permatocyte proacrosin. Differentiation 51, 233–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flörke-Gerloff, S., Tæpfer-Petersen, E., Muller-Petersen, W., Schill, W.-B. & Engel, W.. 1983. Acrosin and the acrosome in human spermatogenesis. Hum. Genet.. 65, 61–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallo, J.M., Escalier, D., Grellier, P., Precigout, E., Albert, M., David, G.. Schrével, J.. 1991. Characterization of a monoclonal antibody to proacrosin and its use in acrosomal status evaluation. J. Histochem. Cytochem. 39, 273–82.Google Scholar
Hermo, L., Rambourg, A. & Clermont, Y.. 1980. Three-dimensional architecture of the cortical region of the Golgi apparatus in the rat spermatids. Am. J. Anat. 157, 357–73.Google Scholar
Kallajoki, M. & Suominen, J.. (1984). An acrosomal antigen of human spermatozoa and spermatogenic cells characterized with a monoclonal antibody. Int. J. Androl. 7, 283–96.Google Scholar
Mendoza, C. & Tesarik, J.. (1996). The occurrence and identification of round spermatids in the ejaculate of men with nonobstructive azoospermia. Fertil. Steril. 66, 826–9.Google Scholar
Sandoz, D.. (1970). Evolution des ultrastructures au cours de la formation de l'acrosome du spermatozoïde chez la souris. J. Microsc. 9, 535–58.Google Scholar
Susi, F.R., Leblond, C.P & Clermont, Y.. (1971). Changes in the Golgi apparatus during spermiogenesis in the rat. Am. J. Anat. 130, 251–78.Google Scholar
Tesarik, J. & Mendoza, C.. (1996). Spermatid injection into human oocytes. I. Laboratory techniques and special features of zygote development. Hum. Reprod. 11, 772–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tesarik, J., Mendoza, C. & Testart, J.. (1995). Viable embryos from injection of round spermatids into oocytes. N. EngI. J. Med. 333, 525.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tesarik, J., Rolet, F., Brami, C., Sedbon, E., Thorel, J., Tibi, C.. Thébault, A.. (1996). Spermatid injection into human oocytes. II. Clinical application in the treatment of infertility due to non-obstructive azoospermia. Hum. Reprod. 11, 780–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed