Histological Assessment of Ovarian Follicle Number in Mice as a Screen for Ovarian Toxicity

  • J. J. Heindel
  • P. J. Thomford
  • D. R. Mattison


Reproductive processes in both males and females are susceptible to interference from chemical insult (1). While there are biological markers of male reproductive toxicity (2,3), there are few markers for female reproductive toxicity (4,5). In addition, current methods for assessing female reproductive vulnerability to xenobiotics are inadequate. For example, some forms of end-organ toxicity (e.g., ovarian, tubal or uterine) are not addressed. For that reason, subtle disruption of reproductive function is not detected in standard reproductive toxicity protocols.


Antral Follicle Reproductive Toxicity Glycol Monomethyl Ether Follicle Number Propylene Glycol Monomethyl Ether 
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. 1.
    Mattison DR, ed. Reproductive toxicology. New York: Alan R. Liss, Inc., 1983.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aman RP. Use of animal models for detecting specific alterations in reproduction. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1982; 2:13–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Committee on Biological Markers of the National Research Council. Biological markers in environmental health research. Environ Health Perspect 1987; 74:3–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hatch M. Introduction: biological assessments in female reproductive toxicology. Environ Health Perspect 1987; 75:55–6.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Miller RK. Biomarkers of toxicity during pregnancy. Environ Health Perspect 1987; 74:77–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lamb JC IV. Reproductive toxicity testing: evaluating and developing new testing systems. J Am Coll Toxicol 1985; 4:163–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reel JR, Lawton AD, Wolkowskityl R, Davis GW, Lamb JC IV. Evaluation of a new reproductive toxicology protocol using diethylstilbestrol as a positive control compound. J Am Coll Toxicol 1985; 4:147–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Takizawa K, Yagi H, Jerina DM, Mattison DR. Experimental ovarian toxicity following intraovarian injection of benzo(a)pyrene or its metabolites in mice and rats. In: Dixon RL, ed. Target organ toxicity: gonads (reproductive and genetic toxicology). New York: Raven Press, 1985:69–94.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pedersen T, Peters H. Proposal for a classification of oocytes and follicles in the mouse ovary. J Reprod Fertil 1968; 17:555–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kastenbaum MA, Hoel DG, Bowman KO. Sample size requirements: one-way analysis of variance. Biometrika 1970; 57:421–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mattison DR, Nightingale MS. Oocyte destruction by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons is not linked to the inducibility of ovarian aryl hydrocarbon (benzo(a)pyrene) hydroxylase activity in (DBA/2N x C57BL/6N)F1 x DBA/2N backcross mice. Pediatr Pharmacol (New York) 1982; 2:11–21.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Takizawa K, Yagi H, Jerina DM, Mattison DR. Murine strain differences in ovotoxicity following intraovarian injection with benzo(a)pyrene,(+)-(7R,8S), (-)-(7R,8S)-dihydrodiol, or (+)-(7R,8S)-diol(9S,10r)-epoxide-2. Cancer Res 1984; 44:2571–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. J. Heindel
    • 1
  • P. J. Thomford
    • 2
    • 3
  • D. R. Mattison
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Developmental and Reproductive Toxicology GroupNational Toxicology Program, NIEHS, RTP, NCUSA
  2. 2.University of Arkansas for Medical SciencesLittle RockUSA
  3. 3.National Center Toxicological ResearchJeffersonUSA

Personalised recommendations