, Volume 85, Issue 3, pp 427–437 | Cite as

Meiosis in the foetal mouse ovary

I. An analysis at the light microscope level using surface-spreading
  • R. M. Speed


The identification and progression of the prophase stages of meiosis in the mouse foetal ovary are reported, from d 13 of gestation to d 1 postpartum. Air-dried Giemsa-stained oocyte preparations are compared with surface-spread silver-stained cells. The latter method allows a more detailed quantitative analysis of the pachytene stage. Numbers of synaptonemal complexes can be counted, and the degree of synapsis determined. The progression of cells appears to be relatively synchronous, in agreement with previous reports. The activity of nucleolar organisers, in particular one associated with the shortest synaptonemal complex (chromosome No. 19) is described. At late pachytene the lateral elements of the No. 19 bivalent desynapse precociously with apparent nucleolar involvement.


Quantitative Analysis Developmental Biology Synaptonemal Complex Nucleolar Organiser Lateral Element 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baker, T.G.: Oogenesis and ovulation. In “Reproduction in mammals.” I. Germ cells and fertilization. (C.R. Austin, R.V. Short, eds.) Cambridge University Press (1972)Google Scholar
  2. Bakken, A.H., McClanahan, M.: Patterns of RNA synthesis in early meiotic prophase oocytes from fetal mouse ovaries. Chromosoma (Berl.) 67, 21–40 (1978)Google Scholar
  3. Borum, K.: Oogenesis in the mouse. A study of the meiotic prophase. Exp. Cell Res. 24, 495–507 (1961)Google Scholar
  4. Borum, K.: Oogenesis in the mouse. Exp. Cell Res. 45, 39–47 (1966)Google Scholar
  5. Crone, M., Levy, E., Peters, H.: The duration of the premeiotic DNA synthesis in mouse oocytes. Exp. Cell Res. 39, 678–688 (1965)Google Scholar
  6. Darlington, C.D.: Recent advances in cytology. London. Churchill (1965)Google Scholar
  7. Dresser, M.E., Moses, M.J.: Silver staining of synaptonemal complexes in surface spreads for light and electron microscopy. Exp. Cell Res. 121, 416–419 (1979)Google Scholar
  8. Elsevier, S.M., Ruddle, F.H.: Localisation of genes coding for 18 S and 28 S ribosomal RNA within the genome of Mus musculus. Chromosoma (Berl.) 52, 219–228 (1975)Google Scholar
  9. Fabricant, J.D., Schneider, E.L.: Studies of the genetic and immunologic components of the maternal age effect. Dev. Biol. 66, 337–343 (1978)Google Scholar
  10. Fletcher, J.M.: Light microscope analysis of meiotic prophase chromosomes by silver staining. Chromosoma (Berl.) 72, 241–248 (1979)Google Scholar
  11. Gosden, R.G.: Chromosomal anomalies of preimplantation mouse embryos in relation to maternal age. J. Reprod. Fert. 35, 351–354 (1973)Google Scholar
  12. Henderson, S.A., Edwards, R.G.: Chiasma frequency and maternal age in mammals. Nature (Lond.) 218, 22–28 (1968)Google Scholar
  13. Holm, P.B., Rasmussen, S.W., Wettstein, D. von: The possible contribution of electron microscopy to the understanding of the mechanism of non-disjunction in man. Mut. Res. 61, 115–119 (1979)Google Scholar
  14. Howell, W.M., Black, D.A.: Controlled silver-staining of nucleolus organizer-regions with a protective colloidal developer: a 1-step method. Experientia (Basel) 36, 1014–1015 (1980)Google Scholar
  15. Jagiello, G., Fang, J.S.: Analysis of diplotene chiasma frequencies in mouse oocytes and spermatocytes in relationship to ageing and sexual dimorphism. Cytogenet. Cell Genet. 23, 53–60 (1979)Google Scholar
  16. Jones, G.H., Wallace, B.M.N.: Meiotic chromosome pairing in Stethophyma grossum spermatocytes studied by a surface-spreading and silver-staining technique. Chromosoma (Berl.) 78, 187–201 (1980)Google Scholar
  17. Mirre, C., Hartung, M., Stahl, A.: Association of ribosomal genes in the fibrillar center of the nucleolus: A factor influencing translocation and non disjunction in the human meiotic oocyte. Proc. natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 77, 6017–6021 (1980)Google Scholar
  18. Moses, M.J.: Microspreading and the synaptonemal complex in cytogenetic studies. Chromosomes today 6, 71–82 (1977)Google Scholar
  19. Moses, M.J., Slatton, G.H., Gambling, T.M., Starmer, C.F.: Synaptonemal complex karyotyping in spermatocytes of the Chinese hamster (Cricetulus griseus). III. Quantitative evaluation. Chromosoma (Berl.) 60, 345–375 (1977)Google Scholar
  20. Peters, H., Levy, E., Crone, M.: Deoxyribonucleic acid synthesis in oocytes of mouse embryos. Nature 195, 915–916 (1962)Google Scholar
  21. Solari, A.J.: Synaptonemal complexes and associated structures in microspread human spermato cytes. Chromosoma (Berl.) 81, 315–337 (1980)Google Scholar
  22. Solari, A.J., Counce, S.J.: Synaptonemal complex karyotyping in Melanoplus differentialis. J. Cell Sci. 26, 229–250 (1977)Google Scholar
  23. Stahl, A., Luciani, J.M.: Nucleoli and chromosomes: Their relationship during the meiotic prophase of the human fetal oocyte. Humangenetik 14, 269–284 (1972)Google Scholar
  24. Tres, L.L.: Extensive pairing of the XY bivalent in mouse spermatocytes as visualized by whole-mount electron microscopy. J. Cell Sci., 25, 1–15 (1977)Google Scholar
  25. Winking, H., Nielsén, K., Gropp, A.: Variable positions of NORs in Mus musculus. Cytogenet. Cell Genet. 26, 158–164 (1980)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. M. Speed
    • 1
  1. 1.MRC Clinical and Population Cytogenetics UnitWestern General HospitalEdinburghScotland

Personalised recommendations