Table 2.
Treatment | Time period | n | Oocyte stage n (%) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MII | AII-TII | PNE | PNM | PNL | MIT | |||
Uninjected | 0H | 11 | 11 (100.0) | |||||
18H | 21 | 21 (100.0)c | ||||||
Conventional | 0H | 17 | 16 (94.1) | 1 (5.9) | ||||
6H | 20 | 16 (80.0)a | 3 (15.0) | 1 (5.0) | ||||
18H | 25 | 2 (8.0)d | 4 (16.0) | 3 (12.0) | 8 (32.0) | 5 (20.0) | 3 (12.0) | |
Piezo | 0H | 16 | 16 (100.0) | |||||
6H | 21 | 2 (9.5)b | 13 (61.9) | 4 (19.1) | 2 (9.5) | |||
18H | 24 | 3 (12.5)d | 3 (12.5) | 1 (4.2) | 2 (8.3) | 11 (45.8) | 4 (16.7) | |
Sham-Conv | 0H | 12 | 11 (91.7) | 1 (8.3) | ||||
6H | 14 | 13 (92.9)a | 1 (7.1) | |||||
18H | 13 | 13 (100.0)c | ||||||
Sham-Piezo | 0H | 13 | 13 (100.0) | |||||
6H | 13 | 13 (100.0)a | ||||||
18H | 13 | 11 (84.6)c | 2 (15.4) |
Within time period (a,b6H, c,d18H) proportions of oocytes at MII with different superscripts differ significantly (P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences at 0H
MII metaphase II, AII-TII anaphase II to telophase II, PNE early pronucleus, PNM mid pronucleus, PNL late pronucleus, MIT first mitosis