Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T00:44:01.820Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Modulators of Bufo arenarum ovulation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2008

Inés Ramos*
Affiliation:
Instituto Superior de Investigaciones Biológicas (INSIBIO), Departamento de Biología del Desarrollo, Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, Argentina, Chacabuco 461, 4.000 – Tucumán, Argentina.
Susana B. Cisint
Affiliation:
Instituto Superior de Investigaciones Biológicas (INSIBIO), Departamento de Biología del Desarrollo, Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, Argentina, Chacabuco 461, 4.000 – Tucumán, Argentina.
Claudia A. Crespo
Affiliation:
Instituto Superior de Investigaciones Biológicas (INSIBIO), Departamento de Biología del Desarrollo, Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, Argentina, Chacabuco 461, 4.000 – Tucumán, Argentina.
Marcela F. Medina
Affiliation:
Instituto Superior de Investigaciones Biológicas (INSIBIO), Departamento de Biología del Desarrollo, Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, Argentina, Chacabuco 461, 4.000 – Tucumán, Argentina.
Silvia N. Fernández
Affiliation:
Instituto Superior de Investigaciones Biológicas (INSIBIO), Departamento de Biología del Desarrollo, Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, Argentina, Chacabuco 461, 4.000 – Tucumán, Argentina.
*
1 All correspondence to: Inés Ramos. Instituto Superior de Investigaciones Biológicas (INSIBIO), Departamento de Biología del Desarrollo, Universidad Nacional de Tucumán, Argentina, Chacabuco 461, 4000 – S. M. de Tucumán, Argentina. Fax: +54 381 4247752 560. e-mail: inramos@fbqf.unt.edu.ar
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

In this study we investigated ovulation in vitro using ovary samples from Bufo arenarum with respect to their response to stimulation with homologous pituitary homogenate (HPH) or with progesterone and prostaglandins (PGF2α and PGE1) as intermediates of pituitary action. Ovary samples were obtained from animals captured during the breeding period. Our results demonstrate that the ovulatory response to all different inducers was dose dependent, the highest percentage of ovulated oocytes being obtained with HPH treatment. An important increase in the ovulatory response was obtained by the association of PGF2α with either HPH or progesterone at suboptimal doses, indicating that this prostaglandin induced a synergistic potentiating effect. Incubation with cyclooxygenase inhibitors (indomethacin or diclofenac sodium) produced a significant decrease in the ovulation induced by HPH, demonstrating that prostaglandins are involved in the action of the pituitary gland in this process. According to our results, PGE1 not only had no participation in the ovulatory process, but also produced an inhibitory effect on ovulation induced by HPH treatment.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008
Figure 0

Figure 1 Effect of homologous pituitary homogenate (HPH) on in vitro ovulation in Bufo arenarum. Ovary pieces obtained from animals captured during the breeding period were incubated with different doses of HPH. Data obtained from experiments using different animals (n = 7) represent the percentage mean ± SEM of ovulated oocytes after 12 and 24 h of treatment.

Figure 1

Figure 2 Ovulatory response in Bufo arenarum under progesterone treatment. Ovary pieces obtained during the breeding period were incubated with progesterone at different doses for 12 and 24 h. Data obtained by experiments performed with different animals (n = 6) represent the percentage mean ± SEM of ovulated oocytes.

Figure 2

Figure 3 Effect of PGF2α on in vitro ovulation in Bufo arenarum. Ovary pieces were incubated with different doses of PGF2α. Results obtained from experiments using different animals (n = 6) are presented as the percentage mean ± SEM of ovulated oocytes after 12 and 24 h of treatment.

Figure 3

Figure 4 Effect of PGF2 α on in vitro ovulation in Bufo arenarum throughout the sexual cycle. Ovary pieces obtained from animals captured monthly during 2 consecutive years were induced to ovulate with PGF2α 1.5 μg/ml. Each bar represents the percentage mean ± SEM of ovulated oocytes after 12 h of treatment (n = 4–7).

Figure 4

Figure 5 Effect of PGF2α on in vitro ovulation induced by HPH or progesterone in Bufo arenarum. Ovary pieces were incubated in a medium containing different doses of PGF2α associated with subliminal doses of HPH (0.01 gland/ml) or progesterone (2 μg/ml). Each point in the figure represents the percentage mean ± SEM of ovulated oocytes after 12 h of treatment. (n = 6).

Figure 5

Figure 6 Inhibitory effect of PGE1 on in vitro HPH-induced ovulation in Bufo arenarum. Ovary pieces from individual animals (n = 4) were incubated in the presence of HPH (0.03 gland/ml), PGE1 (1.5 μg/ml) or HPH + PGE1. Data represent the percentage mean ± SEM of ovulated oocytes after 12 h of treatment.

Figure 6

Table 1 Effect of cyclooxygenase inhibitors on HPH-induced ovulation