Viability analysis of oocyte–follicle complexes and gonadal fragments of zebrafish as baseline for toxicity testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To achieve more information about growth and development of oocytes in teleost fish or concerning toxicity testing, it is necessary to develop adequate in vitro oocyte culture conditions. Herein, initial stages of zebrafish oocytes (I, primary; II, cortical; III, vitellogenic) were analyzed under serum-free medium conditions as gonadal fragments or as separated oocyte-follicle complexes. Two vital dye staining methods (MTT, trypan blue) were applied to assess mitochondrial activity and membrane integrity of the oocytes during 4 days, and compared to morphological alterations studied by transmission electron microscopy. Vital dye staining indicated reduced viability at day 4 for all stages in both in vitro culture methods. Additionally, the viability decreased significantly in gonadal fragments at day 2 for stages III (MTT, TB) and II (TB only). Signs of degradation at the ultrastructural level (vacuoles, disintegration of endoplasmic reticulum and detachment of follicular cell layers) appeared in gonadal fragments at day 4 for stages II and III, and in separated oocyte-follicle complexes both at day 4 for stages I-III, and at day 2 for stage III. In conclusion, zebrafish oocytes at stages I and II seemed viable for 2 days as separated oocyte-follicle complexes considering their mitochondrial activity, membrane integrity and ultrastructural morphology. Cultured as gonadal fragments, the majority of analyses indicated similar results for stages I and II oocytes. In contrast, stage III oocytes seemed viable for not longer than 24 h. Results should be taken into consideration for the experimental design of in vitro assays using teleost fish oocytes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".