Skip to main content

Cytophysiological differences between the embryoblast and trophoblast of rat embryos as revealed by vital staining

Summary

The cytophysiological method was used to study the early stages of rat development in vitro. Along with the formation of granules de novo in the cytoplasm of embryonic cells neutral red stained some pre-existing structures. The type of intravital staining and the intensity of granule formation differed at various developmental stages. In the early preimplantation stages (from the second to the fifth day) the intensity of granule formation in the embryoblast cells was greater than in the trophoblast cells. Conversely, immediately after the implantation (the seventh-tenth days) the extraembryonic formations (yolk entoderm, ectoplacental cone, giant cells of the trophoblast) stain more intensely; embryonic and intestinal entoderm stain much more weakly. The character of granule dis tribution in the tissues of rat embryos at various developmental periods is explained by the peculiarities of growth and differentiation of individual anlagen of mammals at various stages of ontogenesis.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Literature Cited

  1. V. Ya. Aleksandrov, Byull. éksper. biol.,25, 3, 233 (1948).

    Google Scholar 

  2. D. N. Nasonov and V. Ya. Aleksandrov, The Reaction of Living Matter to External Agents [in Russian], Moscow-Leningrad (1940).

  3. E. A. Pozhidaev, Tsitologiya.,1, 75 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. M. Dalcq and A. Seaton Jones, Bull. cl. sci. Acad. ray. Belg.,35, Ser 5, p. 500 (1949).

    Google Scholar 

  5. A. M. Dalcq, Proc. kon. ned. Akad. Wet. Sec. C.,54, p. 351, 365, 469 (1951).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Idem, Bull Acad. roy. Med. Belg.,17, Ser. 6, p. 236 (1952).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Idem, Soc. Biol.,148, p. 1332 (1954).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Idem, Arch. Biol. Liege,71, p. 93 (1960).

    Google Scholar 

  9. T. Iida, Zool. Mag. (Tokyo),54, p. 364 (1942).

    Google Scholar 

  10. L. Izquierdo and R. Comp., Soc. Biol.,148, p. 1504 (1954).

    Google Scholar 

  11. M. K. Kohima, Embryologia (Nagoya),4, p. 191 (1959).

    Google Scholar 

  12. J. Mulnard, Arch. Biol. (Liege),66, p. 525 (1955).

    Google Scholar 

  13. J. Mulnard, W. Auclari, and D. Marsland J. Embryol. exp. Marph.,7, p. 223 (1959).

    Google Scholar 

  14. L. I. Rebhun, Biol. Bull,113, p. 353 (1957).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Idem,117, p. 518 (1959).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Idem, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci.,90, p. Art. 2, p. 357 (1960).

    Google Scholar 

  17. A. Seaton Jones, Ann. Soc. roy. Zool Belg.,80, p. 76 (1950).

    Google Scholar 

  18. L. G. Worley and E. V. Worley, J. Morph.,73, p. 365 (1943).

    Google Scholar 

  19. L. G. Worley, Ibid.75, p. 77 (1944).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Idem.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Samoshkina, N.A. Cytophysiological differences between the embryoblast and trophoblast of rat embryos as revealed by vital staining. Bull Exp Biol Med 57, 94–98 (1964). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00783486

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00783486

Keywords

  • Public Health
  • Developmental Stage
  • Giant Cell
  • Developmental Period
  • Embryonic Cell