Nicotine-induced Disturbances of Meiotic Maturation in Cultured Mouse Oocytes: Alterations of Spindle Integrity and Chromosome Alignment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated whether nicotine exposure in vitro of mouse oocytes affects spindle and chromosome function during meiotic maturation (M-I and M-II). Oocytes in germinal vesicle (GV) stage were cultured in nicotine for 8 h or for 16 h, to assess effects in M-I and in metaphase II (M-II). The latter culture setting used the three protocols: 8 h nicotine then 8 h medium (8N + 8M); 16 h nicotine (16N); 8 h medium then 8 h nicotine (8M + 8N). Non-toxic concentrations of nicotine at 1.0, 2.5, 5.0 and 10.0 mmol/L were used. Spindle-chromosome configurations were analyzed with wide-field optical sectioning microscopy. In 8 h cultures, nicotine exposure resulted in dose-related increased proportions of M-I oocytes with defective spindle-chromosome configurations. A dose-related delayed entry into anaphase I was also detected. In 16 h cultures, nicotine exposure for the first 8 h (8N + 8M), or for 16 h (16N), resulted in dose- and time-related increased proportions of oocytes arrested in M-I (10 mmol/L; 8 h: 53.2%, controls 9.6%; 16 h: 87.6%, controls 8.5%). Defects in M-I spindles and chromosomes caused M-I arrest leading to dose-related decreased proportions of oocytes that reached metaphase-II (10 mmol/L 8 h: 46.8%, controls 90.4%;16 h: 12.4%, controls 91.5%). A delayed anaphase-I affected the normal timing of M-II, leading to abnormal oocytes with dispersed chromosomes, or with double spindles and no polar body. Nicotine exposure during the second 8 h (8M + 8N) resulted in dose-related, increased proportions of M-II oocytes with defective spindles and chromosomes (10 mmol/L: 42.9%, controls 2.0%). Nicotine has no adverse effects on GV break down, but induces spindle and chromosome defects compromising oocyte meiotic maturation and development.
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) | 0.000 | 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".