The ultrastructure of the spermatid and spermatozoon of Macracanthorhynchus hirudinaceus (Archiacanthocephala) was studied by means of transmission electron microscopy. The flagellum and nucleus in the spermatid gradually expanded simultaneously. The karyoplasm of the spermatid transformed into dense inclusions and a multibarrel structure, which were also found in the spermatozoan body. The multibarrel structure was located close to the flagellum and consisted of many irregular microtubes. The flagellum of the developing spermatozoon was observed in a concavity of the spermatid nucleus. The microtubule arrangement of the flagellum was ″9+2″. No mitochondria or acrosome were observed in spermatozoa.

In the mouse, mature oocytes injected with prespermatozoal cell nuclei remain unactivated. Additional stimulation is needed to trigger oocyte activation leading to embryo development. We compared various electrical stimulations, treatment with cycloheximide alone or in combination with electrical stimulation, and injection of sperm-borne oocyte-activating factor (oscillogen) in terms of their oocyte activation and embryo development rates. Of all the treatments tested, a single electrical pulse (1.0 kV / cm, 128 μs) was the simplest, yet very effective, in allowing the development of the oocytes injected with spermatid nuclei.

Round spermatids of the hamster and mouse were electrofused with homologous mature oocytes to examine the behaviour of their nuclei within the ooplasm. A single spermatid was inserted in the perivitelline space of a mature oocyte and an electric fusion pulse given. In the hamster, the best spermatid-oocyte fusion took place when the oocytes were pretreated with neuraminidase, subjected to 30 s AC (2 MHz, 20 V/cm) followed by a single fusion DC pulse (3000 V-cm, 10 μs) and another 30 s AC current. Inclusion of micromolar Ca2+ and Mg2+ in the fusion medium was essential for oocyte activation. Under these conditions all oocytes were activated and 20–40% fused with spermatids. Of these fused oocytes only 5–10% had fully developed spermatid (male) and oocyte (female) pronuclei. In the rest the spermatid-derived pronuclei remained small throughout the pronuclear stage. However, nucleolus-like structures appeared de novo and DNA synthesis occurred in these small pronuclei. Regardless of the size of male pronuclei, chromosomes from the spermatid and oocyte appeared to mingle and participate in the first cleavage. About 70% of the fused oocytes developed into the 2-cell stage. Electrofusion of mouse oocytes with spermatids was less efficient. Even under the best conditions tested, less than 10% of the oocytes fused with spermatids. Here again, most spermatid nuclei remained small throughout the pronuclear stage.

In the current widely used round spermatid injection (ROSI) protocol for the mouse, the spermatid nucleus is separated from most of the cytoplasm before ROSI by drawing a spermatid in and out of a pipette. This results in the highest rate of normal fertilization. However, this separation method is not always consistent and can be time-consuming. An alternative separation method that cuts away the cytoplasm using the tip of an injection pipette was developed. After removing the cytoplasm, ROSI was performed following both post- and pre-activation protocols and development in vitro and in vivo were examined. The new method consistently removed the bulk of the cytoplasm, as shown by quantifying mitochondria. ROSI without the cytoplasm resulted in significantly higher rates of fertilization than ROSI with the cytoplasm into either post- or pre-activated oocytes. Furthermore, the offspring production rates of ROSI without the cytoplasm were also high (50% and 49% for the post- and pre-activation protocols, respectively). This new method for separating the cytoplasm is an alternative way of producing offspring using ROSI.

Mouse round spermatids labelled with MitoTracker were microinjected into Sr2+-activated mouse oocytes. The labelled mitochondria were tracked up to the morula/blastocyst stage using fluorescence microscopy. The overall incidence of embryos with labelled mitochondria fell from 80% in the 1-cell zygote to 25% in 2-cell, 9% in 4-cell and ~1% in 8-cell or later stages. Thus it appears that almost all round spermatid mitochondria finally disappear from embryos during the 4-cell to 8-cell transition, as happens for mature spermatozoa (Cummins et al.Zygote 1997, 5: 301–8). The spermatid mitochondria remained tightly bound together during this process. In contrast, labelled primary spermatocyte and cumulus mitochondria dispersed rapidly throughout the oocyte cytoplasm within 3 h. We hypothesise that spermatid mitochondria may be bound together by cytoskeletal elements produced in the early haploid spermatid. These elements, together with terminal differentiation of the sperm mitochondria, may be central to the processes by which the embryo ‘recognises’ the sperm mitochondria and inhibits inheritance of paternal mitochondrial DNA. These results suggest that round spermatid injection for infertile men will not pose a significant risk to offspring by transmitting abnormal mitochondrial genomes.