Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-lvtdw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-17T22:56:20.486Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative expression analysis of embryonic development-related genes at different stages of parthenogenetic and in vitro fertilized embryos in caprine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2013

Renu Singh ,
Kuldeep Kumar ,
R. Ranjan ,
Manish Kumar ,
T. Yasotha ,
R.K. Singh ,
B.C. Das ,
M. Sarkar  and
Sadhan Bag
Renu Singh
Affiliation:
Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India243 122.
Kuldeep Kumar
Affiliation:
Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India243 122.
R. Ranjan
Affiliation:
Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India243 122.
Manish Kumar
Affiliation:
Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India243 122.
T. Yasotha
Affiliation:
Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India243 122.
R.K. Singh
Affiliation:
Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India243 122.
B.C. Das
Affiliation:
Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India243 122.
M. Sarkar
Affiliation:
Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India243 122.
Sadhan Bag*
Affiliation:
Physiology and Climatology Division, Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar-243 122, Bareilly, India.
*
All correspondence to: Sadhan Bag. Physiology and Climatology Division, Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar-243 122, Bareilly, India. e-mail: bag658@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Aberrant gene expression occurs in parthenogenetic embryos due to abnormal epigenetic modifications in the genome that probably diminish viability and enhance developmental abnormalities in these embryos. In the present study, five developmentally important genes (HPRT1, Cx43, Sox2, Mest and IGF2R) were analysed at different stages in parthenotes (haploid and diploid) and compared with similar stages in in vitro fertilized (IVF) embryos. The results indicated that in haploid parthenotes expression of HPRT1 was upregulated (P < 0.05) only at the 2–4-cell stage whereas Cx43 expression was significantly (P < 0.05) downregulated in all stages as compared with the control. However, expression of this gene was upregulated (P < 0.05) in 2–4-cell and morula stages of diploid parthenotes. Expression of Sox2 was significantly (P < 0.05) downregulated in morula stage haploid parthenotes, whereas it was upregulated (P < 0.05) in 8–16-cell stage diploid embryos. The expression of Mest was upregulated (P < 0.05) at the 2–4-cell stage of both haploid and diploid parthenotes, whereas it was downregulated in 8–16-cell stage diploid embryos as compared with control. IGF2R expression was upregulated (P < 0.05) only in morula stage haploid and diploid parthenote as compared with control. These results indicate that parthenogenetic embryos showed aberrant gene expression of developmentally important genes such as HPRT1, Cx43, Sox2, Mest and IGF2R in comparison with IVF embryos, this finding may be one of the major reasons for the poor developmental competence of parthenogenetic embryos.

Keywords

Gene expressionIn vitro fertilized embryosParthenogenetic embryos
Type
Research Article
Information
Zygote , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , April 2015 , pp. 198 - 204
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amarnath, D., Li, X., Kato, Y. & Tsunoda, Y. (2007). Gene expression in individual bovine somatic cell cloned embryos at the 8-cell and blastocyst stages of preimplantation development. J. Reprod. Dev. 53, 1247–63.Google Scholar
Bebbere, D., Bogliolo, L., Ariu, F., Fois, S., Leoni, G.G., Succu, S., Berlinguer, F. & Ledda, S. (2010). Different temporal gene expression patterns for ovine preimplantation embryos produced by parthenogenesis or in vitro fertilization. Theriogenology 74, 712–23.Google Scholar
Chen, Y.S., Rebecca, A.P., Rebecca, L.E., Rachel, H., Ernst, J.W. & Nicholas, M.F. (2012). Molecule mesengenic induction of human induced pluripotent stem cells to generate mesenchymal stem/stromal cells. Stem Cells Transl. Med. 1, 83–95.Google Scholar
Davies, W., Isles, A.R. & Wilkinson, L.S. (2005). Imprinted gene expression in the activity during imprinted X-chromosome inactivation in mice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 5198–203.Google Scholar
Feil, R., Khosla, S., Cappai, P. & Loi, P. (1998). Genomic imprinting in ruminants: allele-specific gene expression in parthenogenetic sheep. Mamm. Gen. 9, 831–4.Google Scholar
Finette, B.A., Kendall, H. & Vacek, P.M. (2002). Mutational spectral analysis at the HPRT locus in healthy children. Mutat. Res. 505, 27–41.Google Scholar
Fukui, Y., Sawai, K., Furudate, M., Sato, N., Iwazumi, Y. & Ohsaki, K. (1992). Parthenogenetic development of bovine oocytes treated with ethanol and cytochalasin B after in vitro maturation. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 33, 357–62.Google Scholar
Han, D.W., Song, S.J., Uhum, S.J., Do, J.T., Kim, N.H., Chung, K.S. & Lee, H.T. (2003). Expression of IGF2 and IGF receptor mRNA in bovine nuclear transfered embryos. Zygote 11, 245–52.Google Scholar
Hardy, K., Warner, A., Winston, R.M. & Becker, D.L. (1996). Expression of intercellular junctions during preimplantation development of the human embryo. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 2, 621–32.Google Scholar
John, R.M. & Surani, M.A. (1996). Imprinted genes and regulation of gene expression by epigenetic inheritance. Curr. Opin. Cell. Biol. 8, 348–53.Google Scholar
Kato, Y., Rideout, W.M 3rd, Hilton, K., Barton, S.C., Tsunoda, Y. & Surani, M.A. (1999). Development potential of mouse primordial germ cells. Development 126, 1823–32.Google Scholar
Kihara, A.H., de Castro, L.M., Moriscot, A.S. & Hamassaki, D.E. (2006). Prolonged dark adaptation changes connexin expression in the mouse retina. J. Neurosci. Res. 83, 1331–41.Google Scholar
Laird, D.W. (2006). Life cycle of connexins in health and disease. Biochem. J. 394, 527–43.Google Scholar
Latham, K.E. (2005). Expression of X-linked genes in androgenetic, gynogenetic, and normal mouse preimplantation embryos. Dev. Gen. 17, 212–22.Google Scholar
Li, J., Pan, G., Cui, K., Liu, Y., Xu, S. & Pei, D. (2007). A dominant-negative form of mouse Sox-2 induces trophectoderm differentiation and progressive polyploidy in mouse embryonic stem cells. J. Biol. Chem. 282, 19481–92.Google Scholar
Li, L., Keverne, E.B., Aparicio, S.A., Ishino, F., Barton, S.C. & Surani, M.A. (1999). Regulation of maternal behavior bovine oocytes treated with ethanol and cytochalasin B after in vitro maturation. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 33, 357–62.Google Scholar
Li, X., Kato, Y. & Tsunoda, Y. (2005). Comparative analysis of development-related gene expression in mouse preimplantation embryos with different development potential. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 72, 152–60.Google Scholar
Liu, J.H., Zhu, J.Q., Liang, X.W., Yin, S., Ola, S.I., Hou, Y., Chen, D.Y., Schatten, H. & Sun, Q.Y. (2008). Diploid parthenogenetic embryos adopt a maternal-type methylation pattern on both sets of maternal chromosomes. Genomics 91, 121–8.Google Scholar
Magnani, L. & Cabot, R.A. (2008). In vitro and in vivo derived porcine embryos possess similar, but not identical patterns of Oct-4, Nanog and Sox-2 mRNA expression during cleavage development. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 75, 1726–35.Google Scholar
Mann, J.R. & Lovell-Badge, R.H. (1987). The development of XO gynogenetic mouse embryos. Development 99, 411–6.Google Scholar
Mann, M.R., Lee, S.S., Doherty, A.S., Verona, R.I. & Nolen, L.D. (2004). Selective loss of imprinting in the placenta following preimplantation development in culture. Development 131, 3727–35.Google Scholar
Masui, S., Nakatake, Y., Toyooka, Y., Shimosato, D., Yagi, R., Takahashi, K., Okochi, H., Okuda, A., Matoba, R., Sharov, A.A., Ko, M.S. & Niwa, H. (2007). Pluripotency governed by Sox-2 via regulation of Oct3/4 expression in mouse embryonic stem cells. Nat. Cell Biol. 9, 625–35.Google Scholar
McGrath, J. & Solter, D. (1984). Completion of mouse embryogenesis requires both the maternal and paternal genomes. Cell 37, 179–83.Google Scholar
Ogawa, H., Wu, Q., Komiyama, J., Obata, Y. & Kono, T. (2006). Disruption of parental-specific expression of imprinted genes in uniparental fetuses. FEBS Lett. 580, 5377–84.Google Scholar
Ono, R., Nakamura, K., Inoue, K., Naruse, M., Usami, T., Wakisaka-Saito, N., Hino, T., Suzuki-Migishima, R., Ogonuki, N., Miki, H., Kohda, T., Ogura, A., Yokoyama, M., Kaneko-Ishino, T. & Ishino, F. (2006). Deletion of Peg10, an imprinted gene acquired from a retrotransposon, causes early embryonic lethality. Nat. Genet. 38, 101–6.Google Scholar
Park, S.H., Park, S.B. & Kim, N.H. (2003). Expression of early development related genes in bovine nuclear transferred and fertilized embryos. Zygote 11, 355–60.Google Scholar
Pauler, F.M. & Barlow, D.P. (2006). Imprinting mechanisms—it only takes two. Gen. Dev. 20, 1203–6.Google Scholar
Reuss, B., Hellmann, P., Traub, O., Butterweck, A. & Winterhager, E. (1997). Expression of connexin31 and connexin43 genes in early rat embryos. Dev. Gen. 21, 82–90.Google Scholar
Sturm, K., Lafferty, M. & Tam, P.P.L. (1999). Pgk1 and Hprt1 gene activity in preimplantation mouse embryo is influenced by the paternal origin of the chromosome. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 43, 69–79.Google Scholar
Szabo, P.E. & Mann, J.R. (1996). Maternal and paternal genomes function independently in mouse ova in establishing expression of the imprinted genes Snrpn and Igf2r: no evidence for allelic trans-sensing and counting mechanisms. EMBO J. 15, 6018–25.Google Scholar
Totey, S.M., Singh, G.P., Taneja, M., Pawsche, C.H. & Talwar, G. (1992). In vitro maturation and fertilization of follicular oocytes from buffalo (Bubalus bubalis). J. Reprod. Fertil. 95, 597–607.Google Scholar
Walker, S.K., Hartwich, K.M. & Seemark, F.R. (1996). production of usually large offspring following embryo manipulation: concept and challenges. Theriogenology 45, 111–20.Google Scholar
Yang, L., Chavatte-Palmer, P., Kubota, C., O'Neill, M., Hoagland, T., Renard, J., Taneja, M., Yang, X. & Tian, X.C. (2005). Expression of imprinted genes is aberrant in deceased newborn cloned calves and relatively normal in surviving adult clones. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 71, 431–8.Google Scholar