Embryo development and embryo transfer in the European mink (Mustela lutreola), an endangered mustelid species
S. Amstislavsky A B D , E. Kizilova A , Y. Ternovskaya C , G. Zudova C , H. Lindeberg B , J. Aalto B and M. Valtonen BA Institute of Cytology and Genetics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Siberian Division, 630090, prosp. Lavrentjeva 10, Novosibirsk, Russia.
B Institute of Applied Biotechnology, University of Kuopio, PO Box 1627, FIN-70211 Kuopio, Finland.
C Institute of Zootaxy and Ecology of Animals, Russian Academy of Sciences, Siberian Division, 630091, Frunze str., 11, Novosibirsk, Russia.
D Corresponding author. Email: amstis@bionet.nsc.ru
Reproduction, Fertility and Development 18(4) 459-467 https://doi.org/10.1071/RD05135
Submitted: 10 October 2005 Accepted: 1 January 2006 Published: 4 April 2006
Abstract
The European mink is an endangered Mustelidae species and thus requires effective conservation measures, although little is known about reproduction in this species. In particular, preimplantation development has not been studied and, therefore, embryonic development and the growth of embryos was documented in the present study for European mink using light and fluorescent microscopy. Embryos develop in the oviducts and then migrate into the uterus on Day 6 post coitum (p.c.) at the morula stage. Embryos expanded as blastocysts from Day 7 until implantation on Day 12 p.c. Based on these findings, the use of embryo transfer for a conservation programme for the European mink was evaluated. Embryos were flushed from European mink resource females and transferred into the uterine horns of recipient hybrid females (honoriks and nohoriks). These hybrids were obtained by mating European polecat males with European mink females and vice versa. A total of 40 embryos was transferred and 20 live kits were born. The rates of pre- and postnatal survival were 50% and 70%, respectively. Both male and female offspring were lighter at birth in the embryo transfer group compared with naturally born controls, but there was no difference at 3 months of age.
Extra keywords: interspecies barrier, reproductive technologies, species ex situ conservation.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the Finnish Academy (grant no. 201702). The authors thank Nikolai Martinov for taking care of the animals on the farm during the study and Valery Cindrenko and Ewen MacDonald for the help with the preparation of this manuscript. The authors thank the collective microscopy centre of the Siberian Department of the Russian Academy of Sciences for the use of microscopes.
Amstislavsky, S. (2006). [Interspecies transfer of embryos and cell nuclei as an approach for endangered species conservation]. Ontogenez (Russian J. Dev.) 37, 1–9.[In Russian]
Enders, A. C. , and Schlafke, S. (1972). Implantation in the ferret: epithelial penetration. Am. J. Anat. 133, 291–315.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
Li, Z. , Jiang, Q. , Zhang, Y. , Liu, X. , and Engelhardt, J. (2001). Successful production of offspring after superovulation and in vitro culture of embryos from domestic ferrets (Mustela putorius furos). Reproduction 122, 611–618.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
Lindeberg, H. , and Järvinen, M. (2003). Early embryonic development and in vitro culture of in vivo produced embryos in the farmed European polecat (Mustela putorius). Theriogenology 60, 965–975.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
Valtonen, M. , King, W. , Gustavson, I. , and Mäkinen, A. (1985). Embryonic development in the blue fox. Nord. Veterinärmed. 37, 243–248.
Wildt, D. , Monfort, S. , Donoghue, A. , Johnston, L. , and Howard, J. (1992). Embryogenesis in conservation biology: or, how to make an endangered species embryo. Theriogenology 37, 161–184.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Zhelezova, A. I. , and Golubitza, A. N. (1978). [Transfer of blastocysts in the mink]. Dokl. Akad. Nauk USSR 238, 462–465.[In Russian]