Abstract
The mouse epididymal sperm aneuploidy (mESA) assay using 3-chromosome fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was recently developed for assessing the aneugenic potential of chemicals on male germ cells. This study was designed to identify the major technical factors that affect inter-scorer and inter-laboratory variability of the mESA assay. Two laboratories participated in this study (GSF and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, LLNL). Mice (102/ElxC3H/El) F(1) were exposed in one laboratory (GSF) to vinblastine (VBL; single intraperitoneal injection of 0, 0.5, 1.0 or 2.0 mg/kg), one of the 10 priority compounds of the Commission of the European Communities (CEC) Aneuploidy Program. Twenty-two days later the mESA assay was applied to analyze sperm aneuploidy. In the initial evaluation, small but statistically significant differences were found between the two laboratories in baseline frequencies and there was also disagreement in the determination of a VBL aneuploid effect. Therefore, experiments were conducted to identify the sources of the inter-laboratory differences and technical factors that affected assay reliability and the VBL study was repeated. A harmonization experiment was conducted by bringing the microscope scorers from both laboratories to the same site (LLNL) for a cross-training exercise. Following this exercise, a second group of VBL-treated and control mice were evaluated, and we concluded that VBL is not a sperm aneugen. Our research has identified scoring criteria as the major source of inter-laboratory variation and emphasizes the importance of strict technical controls for the mESA assay, including controlling slide preparations for treatment-induced reductions in sperm count, coding of slides and selection of statistical tests. These considerations are particularly important for the interpretation of small effects (< or =2-fold) on sperm aneuploidy. Our findings suggest that 2-fold differences in frequencies can result from differences among scorers, samples and treatment groups, and are readily within the normal variation for the mESA assay. Such small differences should be viewed with caution until independently confirmed.
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
