Here, we introduce a method for performing round spermatid injection (ROSI) in mice, a technique with promising clinical applications and utility for investigating the mechanisms underlying embryonic development.
Round spermatids, characterized by their haploid genetic content, represent the precursor cells to mature spermatozoa. Through the innovative technique of round spermatid injection (ROSI), oocytes can be successfully fertilized and developed into viable fetuses. In a groundbreaking milestone achieved in 1995, the first mouse fetus was born through ROSI technology. ROSI has since emerged as a pivotal tool for unraveling the intricate mechanisms governing embryonic development and holds significant potential in various applications, including the acceleration of mouse generation and the production of genetically modified mice. In 1996, a milestone was reached when the first human fetus was born through ROSI technology. However, the clinical applications of this method have shown a fluctuating pattern of success and failure. To date, ROSI technology has not found widespread application in clinical practice, primarily due to its low birth efficiency and insufficient validation of fetal safety. This article provides a comprehensive account of the precise methods of performing ROSI in mice, aiming to shed new light on basic research and its potential clinical applications.
The final stage of spermatogenesis involves the transformation of a round spermatid into a fully developed spermatozoon, characterized by distinct head, neck, and elongated tail structures1. This transformation encompasses significant changes in cell morphology, such as the condensation of chromatin in the nucleus, replacement of histones by protamine, acrosome formation, mitochondrial sheath development, centriole migration and loss, tail structure formation, and the removal of cellular residues2.
In 1992, the first human fetus was successfully born through intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) technology3. Since then, researchers have been exploring the potential of utilizing round spermatids, which share the same haploid genetic composition as mature spermatozoa, to fertilize oocytes and sustain viable pregnancies2,4. Subsequently, in 1996, the first human fetus conceived via round spermatid injection (ROSI) technology was delivered5,6. It is worth noting that studies involving ICSI and ROSI in mice lagged behind those in humans due to the susceptibility of the mouse oocyte membrane to damage during the injection process. This issue was successfully resolved with the introduction of the Piezo membrane-breaking device. Consequently, in 1995, the first mouse conceived through ROSI technology was born. Additionally, research on ROSI in various other animals is also underway7,8.
Currently, research on ROSI primarily centers around the following aspects: clinical application, mechanism elucidation, and strategies to enhance developmental efficiency, along with broader applications of ROSI technology. In the context of clinical applications, despite the birth of the first ROSI human fetus through ROSI in 1996, progress has been marked by a series of successes and failures9,10,11,12. To date, ROSI technology has not achieved widespread clinical implementation, largely due to its low efficiency and the need for further validation regarding the safety of fetuses conceived through ROSI technology. Incomplete statistics indicate that globally, fewer than 200 human ROSI-conceived fetuses have been delivered. A turning point in understanding the potential of ROSI technology occurred in 2015 when Tanaka and colleagues reported on the successful birth of 14 fetuses through ROSI technology, instilling renewed confidence in its clinical application and feasibility13,14. ROSI technology holds substantial promise for addressing reproductive biology challenges, particularly in non-obstructive azoospermia patients. In addition to its clinical applications, ROSI serves as a valuable tool for studying the intricate mechanisms of embryonic development15,16,17.
Numerous animal studies have been conducted to investigate the underlying factors contributing to the low efficiency of ROSI in achieving full embryonic development. These factors encompass the choice of assisted oocyte activation (AOA) methods and their timings, abnormalities in genomic stability, and, particularly, abnormalities in epigenetic modifications. It is important to recognize that round spermatids are immature germ cells, differing significantly from mature spermatozoa in various physiological aspects. Mizuki Sakamoto and colleagues indicated that H3K27me3, derived from round spermatids, is associated with chromatin that is less accessible and leads to impaired gene expression in ROSI embryos18. In a related study by Jing Wang and colleagues, reprogramming defects in ROSI embryos at the pronuclear stages were predominantly associated with the misexpression of a cohort of the genes responsible for minor zygotic genome activation19. They also found that introducing a selective euchromatic histone lysine methyltransferase 2 inhibitor, A366, could potentially enhance the overall developmental rate by approximately twofold.
The mouse stands as one of the most valuable model animals for studying embryonic development. This article elaborates on how to perform ROSI on mice. This comprehensive protocol encompasses the selection of suitable mice, detailed ovulation induction procedures, AOA techniques, injection techniques, and the preparation of surrogate mice. Furthermore, we present a comparative analysis of the effects of two injection regimens on birth efficiency: AOA followed by ROSI (A-ROSI; first regimen) and ROSI followed by AOA (ROSI-A; second regimen). We aim to encourage researchers to conduct mouse ROSI experiments with greater precision, offering more robust support for their clinical application and the fundamental research of embryonic development mechanisms.
B6D2F1 (C57BL/6 x DBA/2), C57BL/6, and ICR mice used in this experiment were purchased from Beijing Vital River Laboratory Animal Technologies Co. Ltd. (Beijing, China). All animal treatments adhered to the experimental procedures and standards approved by the Experimental Animal Ethics Committee of the First Hospital of Jilin University (approval number: 20200435).
1. Preparation of relevant reagents
2. Preparation of oocytes
3. Preparation of round spermatids and spermatozoa
4. Round spermatid injection (ROSI)
5. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)
6. Assisted oocyte activation (AOA)
7. Embryo transfer
8. Statistical analysis
We initiated our investigation by examining AOA's effect on embryos' developmental capability. A schematic illustration of the experimental design is shown in Figure 1A. Before the spermatozoon injection, the oocytes underwent either AOA (A-ICSI) or remained untreated (ICSI). Detailed data on embryonic development is presented in Table 1. The results revealed no significant differences in cleavage, blastocyst, or birth rates between the A-ICSI and ICSI groups (P > 0.05; Figure 1B). These findings indicate that AOA using 10 mM SrCl2 for 20 min did not affect the developmental potential of the embryos.
It was previously reported that there were no discernible differences in the developmental efficiency of ROSI embryos selected either by FACS or by direct visual examination under a microscope22. Our experiments employed FACS technology to identify RS (Figures 2A,B). Under the microscope, mouse round spermatids were approximately 10 µm in diameter and displayed a protrusion-like nucleolus structure in the middle (Figure 2C). We posit that selection through FACS is more accurate than direct visual examination under a microscope. Additionally, the literature supports the direct exploration of RS through morphological differences. ROSI embryos were generated using two distinct methods: the A-ROSI group, where oocytes were subjected to AOA before the round spermatid injection, and the ROSI-A group, where oocytes were subjected to AOA after the round spermatid injection. The schematic diagram of the experimental design is shown in Figure 1C. Notably, no significant differences in the cleavage and blastocyst rates were found among the A-ROSI, ROSI-A, and ICSI groups (P > 0.05; Figure 1D). The blastocyst rates of the A-ROSI, ROSI-A, and ICSI groups were significantly higher than those of the activation group (P < 0.05; Figure 1D). However, the birth rate of the ROSI group was lower than that of the ICSI group, irrespective of whether the oocytes were activated before or after injection (P < 0.05; Figure 1D). Importantly, the birth rate of the A-ROSI group was slightly higher than that of the ROSI-A group (Figure 1D). Further details on embryo development data are presented in Table 1.
Figure 1: ROSI embryos displayed reduced developmental efficiency compared to ICSI embryos. (A) Schematic illustration of the experimental protocol assessing the effect of activation on ICSI embryonic development. Blue = Oocytes were not activated; Yellow = Oocytes were activated. (B) Developmental efficiency of embryos derived from A-ICSI and ICSI. (C) Schematic illustration of the experimental protocol for generating different types of embryos. (D) Developmental efficiency of embryos derived from A-ROSI, ROSI-A, A, and ICSI. **, P < 0.01. Abbreviations: A= Activation E= Embryonic day; ROSI= Round spermatid injection; ICSI= Intracytoplasmic sperm injection. The error bars show standard deviation. The comparison of rates is conducted using the chi-square test. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2: Round spermatids were selected via flow cytometric sorting. (A) A flow cytometric sorting diagram was utilized for the selection of round spermatids. (B) Representative images showcasing the selection of round spermatids. Scale bar: 10 µm. Abbreviations: FSC = Forward scatter; SSC = side scatter; 355 is the excitation wavelength; 460/50 and 670/30 are two detection channels under 355 wavelength laser. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Groups | Pre-implantation development | Post-implantation development | |||
Replicates | Cleavage rate (%) | Blastocyst rate (%) | 2-cell embryos transferred/ No. of recipients | Birth rate (%) | |
A-ICSI | 5 | 99.33 (149/150) | 75.17 (112/149) | 49/5 | 48.98 (24/49) |
A-ROSI | 5 | 99.33 (149/150) | 73.83 (110/149) | 44/5 | 18.18 (8/44) ** |
ROSI-A | 5 | 98.00 (147/150) | 64.63 (95/147) | 45/5 | 13.33 (6/45) ** |
Activation | 5 | 100.00 (150/150) | 12.00 (18/150) ** | 51/5 | 0.00 (0/51) ** |
ICSI | 5 | 98.00 (147/150) | 73.47 (108/147) | 46/5 | 52.17 (24/46) |
Table 1. The developmental efficiency of embryos derived from different groups.
Supplementary Table 1. The proportion of different cell populations sorted by flow cytometry.P3 part is round spermatids. Please click here to download this File.
Assisted oocyte activation
A critical prerequisite for ROSI is AOA since round spermatids alone cannot initiate oocyte activation. Currently, the most established method in mice involves the use of strontium chloride23,24, while the most advanced human application employs electrical activation13,14. The timing of oocyte activation is also of great significance. As reported in the literature, the most optimal activation approach in mice involves initially activating the oocyte and then injecting the round spermatid25. This contrasts with the conventional fertilization process, where sperm initially enters the oocytes, subsequently releasing phospholipase C ζ to activate the oocyte26. Specialized research conducted by Satoshi Kishigami and colleagues emphasizes the differential ability of ROSI to form a male nucleus in pre- or post-activated oocytes. To achieve an efficient offspring production rate, both injection types must be carried out before the oocytes enter the G1 phase25.
The diameter of the injection needle
In the context of ROSI, it is important to note that a larger diameter of the injection needle does not necessarily translate to better outcomes. The injection needle used has a 6-7 µm diameter, slightly smaller than a round spermatid. Therefore, when a round spermatid is aspirated, the cell membrane is subjected to a squeezing effect, potentially leading to the direct exposure of the nucleus. This direct exposure may be conducive to depolymerization and the subsequent formation of the male pronucleus27.
Sealing treatment
Mouse oocytes exhibit less cytoplasmic viscosity compared to other species. Even a small breach in the cell membrane can cause the cytoplasm to flow out easily, resulting in oocyte degeneration28. To mitigate the risk, after injecting the round spermatid into the oocyte cytoplasm and withdrawing the injection needle, it is imperative to aspirate a small portion of the cell membrane near the opening of the oocyte cell membrane to seal the space, akin to the procedure in ICSI21. This sealing process significantly reduces the risk of oocyte degeneration.
Application of ROSI as a model
Beyond clinical applications, ROSI technology has various other applications as a model. It can expedite mouse generation times29, rescue female lethality resulting from a paternally inherited Xist deletion in mice17, generate mice after round spermatid injection into haploid parthenogenetic two-cell blastomeres15, generate transgenic mouse offspring16, and preserve fertility in adolescent children before cancer treatment30,31. Diligent research on mouse ROSI can substantially contribute to advancements in reproductive health research.
Limitations of the article
This article serves as a methodological guide with several limitations, including the absence of a direct comparative selection of RS under a microscope for injection and a perceived lack of innovation.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
We extend our gratitude to Wenjie Zhao for her invaluable assistance in sorting round spermatids through flow cytometry and to Fang Wang for her expertise in mouse embryo transfer. This work received partial support from the Natural Science Foundation of Jilin Province (No. YDZJ202301ZYTS461). We thank Bullet Edits Limited for the linguistic editing and proofreading of the manuscript.
CaCl22H2O | Sigma | C7902 | Preparation of CZB |
Glucose | Sigma | G6152 | Preparation of CZB |
HEPES-Na (basic) | Sigma | H3784 | Preparation of CZB |
Hoechst 33342 | Beyotime | C1025 | FACS |
human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) | Ningbo Second Hormone Company | HCG | Ovulation promoting drugs |
Hyaluronidase | Sigma | H3506 | Removing granulosa cells around the oocyte |
KCl | Sigma | P5405 | Preparation of CZB |
KH2PO4 | Sigma | P5655 | Preparation of CZB |
KSOMaa | Caisson Labs | IVL04-100ML | Potassium simplex optimized medium supplemented with amino acids |
L-glutamine | Sigma | G8540 | Preparation of CZB |
M2 | Sigma | M7167-50ML | Operating fluid |
MgSO47H2O | Sigma | M1880 | Preparation of CZB |
Na2-EDTA2H2O | Sigma | E5134 | Preparation of CZB |
NaCl | Sigma | S5886 | Preparation of CZB |
NaHCO3 | Sigma | S5761 | Preparation of CZB |
Na-lactate 60% syrup d = 1.32 g/L | Sigma | L7900 | Preparation of CZB |
Na-pyruvate | Sigma | P4562 | Preparation of CZB |
Piezo drill tips (ICSI) | Eppendorf | piezoXpert | Piezoelectric membrane rupture |
pregnant mare serum gonadotropin (PMSG) | Ningbo Second Hormone Company | PMSG | Ovulation promoting drugs |
PVA | Sigma | P8136 | Preparation of CZB |
.