Search

Climate-driven species range expansions are underway with more tropically affiliated species, including Scleractinian corals, becoming increasingly abundant at higher latitudes. However, uncertainty remains on how these range shifts will affect reef-scale ecosystem processes, which will ultimately depend on the traits of the taxa that dominate these assemblages. Here, we quantified spatiotemporal patterns in the taxonomic and trait structure of coral assemblages along the subtropical-temperate coast of Western Australia (27°–34°S). Coral abundance was generally low and coral cover < 5% across our study sites. Coral assemblages shared similarities in morphological trait structures across the latitudinal gradient, mostly characterised by taxa with simple morphologies; yet subtle differences were also observed across latitudes, with high-latitude corals characterised by slower growth rates and reduced maximum colony sizes. We found a 3.4-fold increase (from 1 to 3.4 individuals m−2) in coral abundance at one heavily disturbed location, where canopy-forming seaweeds were replaced by turfing algae, a pattern that was partly driven by an increase in the relative contribution of warm affinity taxa, such as Acropora spp. We predicted these changes would be reflected in different components of functional diversity; yet, despite a localised signal of tropicalisation, we only observed subtle changes in the functional identity, richness, evenness, and divergence. The spatially invariant trait structure of coral assemblages suggests that the nature of ecosystem functions will likely remain unchanged during early stages of tropicalisation, and hence their contribution to temperate reef-scale ecological processes will depend on dominance over other benthic foundational species. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Several evidences indicate that premature luteinization (PL) may affect IVF outcome. The primary end-point of the present study was to verify the effect of PL on the pregnancy rate (PR) of our oocyte-donation programme. METHODS: PL was defined as serum progesterone ≥1.2 ng/ml on the day of HCG. We analysed retrospectively 240 oocyte-donation cycles in which 120 women donated twice, with PL in the first donation cycle and no PL in the following one, acting as its own control. Recipients (n = 240) were divided in two groups according to the presence of PL (n = 120) or not (n = 120). Both groups were compared regarding donor cycle parameters and recipient cycle outcome. RESULTS: There was no difference in PR between the groups (55.7 versus 54.4%, respectively). The number of total oocytes (18.2 ± 0.6 versus 20.8 ± 0.6; P = 0.003) and the number of mature oocytes retrieved (16.9 ± 0.6 versus 19.4 ± 0.6; P = 0.005) were different among donors with progesterone <1.2 ng/ml and PL, respectively. There were no differences between the oocyte recipients in fertilization, cleavage, embryo division on day 3, blastocyst development or fragmentation rates. The number of embryos transferred, number of embryos cryopreserved, and implantation and miscarriage rates were similar between the groups. CONCLUSION: PL does not appear to have a negative impact on ongoing PR in our oocyte-donation programme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: This descriptive study evaluates the impact on endometrial development of standard and high doses of a GnRH antagonist in stimulated cycles compared with GnRH agonist and natural cycles. METHODS: Thirty-one oocyte donors were treated with a combination of rFSH and 0.25 mg/day ganirelix (standard dose), 2 mg/day ganirelix (high dose) or 0.6 mg/day buserelin (long protocol). Vaginal progesterone (200 mg/day) was administered in the luteal phase. Endometrial biopsies were performed 2 and 7 days after HCG administration. Additional biopsies were carried out in a subset of 12 subjects, 2 and 7 days following the LH peak of their previous natural cycle. Biopsies were evaluated histologically and by scanning electron microscopy. Gene expression profiles were also studied. RESULTS: At HCG +2, all the parameters studied were similar in all the groups and comparable to those observed in the natural cycle. At HCG +7, endometrial dating, steroid receptors and the presence of pinopodes were comparable in both GnRH antagonist groups and in the natural cycle. In buserelin group, endometrial dating and pinopode expression suggested an arrested endometrial development. For window of implantation genes, expression patterns were closer to those in the natural cycle following standard- or high-dose ganirelix than after buserelin administration. CONCLUSION: No relevant alteration was observed in the endometrial development in the early and mid-luteal phases in women undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation for oocyte donation following daily treatment with a standard- or high-dose GnRH antagonist. In addition, the endometrial development after GnRH antagonist mimics the natural endometrium more closely than after GnRH agonist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Highly purified hMG (hp-hMG) has recently shown better cycle outcome than the recombinant FSH (rFSH) when compared in GnRH agonist long protocol cycles. However, they have not yet been compared in GnRH antagonist cycles. METHODS A RCT comparing the ongoing pregnancy rate (primary end-point) in 280 patients undergoing IVF/ICSI after stimulation with hp-hMG or rFSH controlled with a GnRH antagonist. RESULTS No significant differences were observed between hp-hMG and rFSH in terms of the ongoing pregnancy rate per started cycle (35.0 versus 32.1%, respectively; P = 0.61); relative risk: 1.09 (95% confidence interval: 0.78–1.51; risk difference: 2.9%). No differences were observed for implantation, clinical pregnancy and pregnancy loss rates. More oocytes were obtained from patients receiving rFSH then hMG (14.4 ± 8.1 versus 11.3 ± 6.0, respectively; P = 0.001). Estradiol was higher at the end of stimulation in the hp-hMG group (P = 0.02), whereas progesterone was higher in patients stimulated with rFSH (P CONCLUSIONS A similar outcome was observed for hp-hMG and rFSH when used for stimulation in GnRH antagonist cycles. However, some differences were found in ovarian response in terms of oocyte yield and hormonal profile. Clinical Trials.gov Trial registration number: NCT00669786. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]