Advertisement

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

, Volume 35, Issue 3, pp 503–513 | Cite as

Superovulation alters DNA methyltransferase protein expression in mouse oocytes and early embryos

  • Fatma Uysal
  • Saffet Ozturk
  • Gokhan Akkoyunlu
Embryo Biology

Abstract

Purpose

DNA methylation is an epigenetic mechanism that plays critical roles during mammalian oocyte and preimplantation embryo development. It is achieved by adding a methyl group to the fifth carbon atom of cytosine residues within cytosine-phosphate-guanine (CpG) and non-CpG dinucleotide sites using DNA methyltransferase (DNMT) enzymes for de novo and maintenance methylation processes. DNMT1, DNMT3A, and DNMT3B play important roles in establishing methylation of developmentally related genes in oocytes and early embryos. The purpose of this study is to identify the effect of superovulation on the expression and subcellular localizations of these three DNMT enzymes in the mouse oocytes and early embryos.

Methods

Three groups composed of control, normal dose [5 IU pregnant mare serum gonadotropin (PMSG) and 5 IU human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG)], and high dose [7.5 IU PMSG and 7.5 IU hCG] were created from 4–5-week-old female BALB/c mice. The relative expression and subcellular localizations of the DNMT proteins in the control and experiment groups have been characterized by using immunofluorescence staining subsequently analyzed in detailed.

Results

DNMT1, DNMT3A, and DNMT3B protein expression in the germinal vesicle and metaphase II oocytes and in one-cell and two-cell embryos differed significantly when some of the normal- and high-dose groups were compared with the control counterparts.

Conclusion

This study has demonstrated for the first time that superovulation alters expression levels of the DNMT proteins, a finding that indicates that certain developmental defects in superovulated oocytes and early embryos may result from impaired DNA methylation processes.

Keywords

DNMT DNA methylation Early embryo Oocyte Superovulation 

Notes

Author’s contribution

F. Uysal performed the experiments. F. Uysal, S. Ozturk, and G. Akkoyunlu analyzed the data. F. Uysal, S. Ozturk, and G. Akkoyunlu wrote the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the Akdeniz University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit (Project Number: 2014.02.0122.013).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Waldman E. Cultural priorities revealed: the development and regulation of assisted reproduction in the United States and Israel. Health Matrix. 2006;16:65–106.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nyboe Andersen A, Goossens V, Bhattacharya S, Ferraretti AP, Kupka MS, de Mouzon J, et al. Assisted reproductive technology and intrauterine inseminations in Europe, 2005: results generated from European registers by ESHRE: ESHRE. The European IVF Monitoring Programme (EIM), for the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). Hum Reprod. 2009;24:1267–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huffman SR, Pak Y, Rivera RM. Superovulation induces alterations in the epigenome of zygotes, and results in differences in gene expression at the blastocyst stage in mice. Mol Reprod Dev. 2015;82:207–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hansen M, Kurinczuk JJ, Bower C, Webb S. The risk of major birth defects after intracytoplasmic sperm injection and in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:725–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schieve LA, Meikle SF, Ferre C, Peterson HB, Jeng G, Wilcox LS. Low and very low birth weight in infants conceived with use of assisted reproductive technology. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:731–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Halliday J, Oke K, Breheny S, Algar E, Amor DJ. Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome and IVF: a case-control study. Am J Hum Genet. 2004;75:526–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jiang Z, Wang Y, Lin J, Xu J, Ding G Huang H. Genetic and epigenetic risks of assisted reproduction. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2017.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Meijerink AM, Oomen RE, Fleischer K, IntHout J, Woldringh GH, Braat DD. Effect of maternal and treatment-related factors on the prevalence of birth defects after PESA-ICSI and TESE-ICSI: a retrospective cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2015;94:1245–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jwa J, Jwa SC, Kuwahara A, Yoshida A, Saito H. Risk of major congenital anomalies after assisted hatching: analysis of three-year data from the national assisted reproduction registry in Japan. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:71–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pinborg A, Loft A, Romundstad LB, Wennerholm UB, Soderstrom-Anttila V, Bergh C, et al. Epigenetics and assisted reproductive technologies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016;95:10–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Uysal F, Akkoyunlu G, Ozturk S. Dynamic expression of DNA methyltransferases (DNMTs) in oocytes and early embryos. Biochimie. 2015;116:103–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Turek-Plewa J, Jagodzinski PP. The role of mammalian DNA methyltransferases in the regulation of gene expression. Cell Mol Biol Lett. 2005;10:631–47.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bestor TH. The DNA methyltransferases of mammals. Hum Mol Genet. 2000;9:2395–402.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Barau J, Teissandier A, Zamudio N, Roy S, Nalesso V, Herault Y, et al. The DNA methyltransferase DNMT3C protects male germ cells from transposon activity. Science. 2016;354:909–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fatemi M, Hermann A, Gowher H, Jeltsch A. Dnmt3a and Dnmt1 functionally cooperate during de novo methylation of DNA. Eur J Biochem. 2002;269:4981–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Margot JB, Ehrenhofer-Murray AE, Leonhardt H. Interactions within the mammalian DNA methyltransferase family. BMC Mol Biol. 2003;4:7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Deplus R, Brenner C, Burgers WA, Putmans P, Kouzarides T, de Launoit Y, et al. Dnmt3L is a transcriptional repressor that recruits histone deacetylase. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30:3831–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tajima S, Suetake I, Takeshita K, Nakagawa A, Kimura H. Domain structure of the Dnmt1, Dnmt3a, and Dnmt3b DNA methyltransferases. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2016;945:63–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Goll MG, Kirpekar F, Maggert KA, Yoder JA, Hsieh CL, Zhang X, et al. Methylation of tRNAAsp by the DNA methyltransferase homolog Dnmt2. Science. 2006;311:395–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    El Hajj N, Haaf T. Epigenetic disturbances in in vitro cultured gametes and embryos: implications for human assisted reproduction. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:632–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nelissen EC, Dumoulin JC, Daunay A, Evers JL, Tost J, van Montfoort AP. Placentas from pregnancies conceived by IVF/ICSI have a reduced DNA methylation level at the H19 and MEST differentially methylated regions. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:1117–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li L, Wang L, Le F, Liu X, Yu P, Sheng J, et al. Evaluation of DNA methylation status at differentially methylated regions in IVF-conceived newborn twins. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:1975–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Whidden L, Martel J, Rahimi S, Chaillet JR, Chan D, Trasler JM. Compromised oocyte quality and assisted reproduction contribute to sex-specific effects on offspring outcomes and epigenetic patterning. Hum Mol Genet. 2016;25:4649–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wang LY, Wang N, Le F, Li L, Lou HY, Liu XZ, et al. Superovulation induced changes of lipid metabolism in ovaries and embryos and its probable mechanism. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0132638.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fauque P, Jouannet P, Lesaffre C, Ripoche MA, Dandolo L, Vaiman D, et al. Assisted reproductive technology affects developmental kinetics, H19 imprinting control region methylation and H19 gene expression in individual mouse embryos. BMC Dev Biol. 2007;7:116.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Akkoyunlu G, Ustunel I, Demir R. The distribution of transglutaminase in the rat oocytes and embryos. Theriogenology. 2007;68:834–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ozturk S, Yaba-Ucar A, Sozen B, Mutlu D, Demir N. Superovulation alters embryonic poly(A)-binding protein (Epab) and poly(A)-binding protein, cytoplasmic 1 (Pabpc1) gene expression in mouse oocytes and early embryos. Reprod Fertil Dev. 2016;28:375–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lawrence LT, Moley KH. Epigenetics and assisted reproductive technologies: human imprinting syndromes. Semin Reprod Med. 2008;26:143–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Van der Auwera I, D’Hooghe T. Superovulation of female mice delays embryonic and fetal development. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:1237–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Krisher RL. The effect of oocyte quality on development. J Anim Sci. 2004;82 E-Suppl:E14–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ertzeid G, Storeng R. The impact of ovarian stimulation on implantation and fetal development in mice. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:221–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Whidden L, Martel J, Rahimi S, Richard Chaillet J, Chan D, Trasler JM. Compromised oocyte quality and assisted reproduction contribute to sex-specific effects on offspring outcomes and epigenetic patterning. Hum Mol Genet. 2016.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    de Waal E, Vrooman LA, Fischer E, Ord T, Mainigi MA, Coutifaris C, et al. The cumulative effect of assisted reproduction procedures on placental development and epigenetic perturbations in a mouse model. Hum Mol Genet. 2015;24:6975–85.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Anckaert E, Fair T. DNA methylation reprogramming during oogenesis and interference by reproductive technologies: studies in mouse and bovine models. Reprod Fertil Dev. 2015;27:739–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fortier AL, McGraw S, Lopes FL, Niles KM, Landry M, Trasler JM. Modulation of imprinted gene expression following superovulation. Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2014;388:51–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    de Waal E, Yamazaki Y, Ingale P, Bartolomei MS, Yanagimachi R, McCarrey JR. Gonadotropin stimulation contributes to an increased incidence of epimutations in ICSI-derived mice. Hum Mol Genet. 2012;21:4460–72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Allen WR, Moor RM. The origin of the equine endometrial cups. I. Production of PMSG by fetal trophoblast cells. J Reprod Fertil. 1972;29:313–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kumar TR, Wang Y, Lu N, Matzuk MM. Follicle stimulating hormone is required for ovarian follicle maturation but not male fertility. Nat Genet. 1997;15:201–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Meduri G, Charnaux N, Driancourt MA, Combettes L, Granet P, Vannier B, et al. Follicle-stimulating hormone receptors in oocytes? J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002;87:2266–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Patsoula E, Loutradis D, Drakakis P, Kallianidis K, Bletsa R, Michalas S. Expression of mRNA for the LH and FSH receptors in mouse oocytes and preimplantation embryos. Reproduction. 2001;121:455–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Patsoula E, Loutradis D, Drakakis P, Michalas L, Bletsa R, Michalas S. Messenger RNA expression for the follicle-stimulating hormone receptor and luteinizing hormone receptor in human oocytes and preimplantation-stage embryos. Fertil Steril. 2003;79:1187–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wada M, Seeger RC, Mizoguchi H, Koeffler HP. Maintenance of normal imprinting of H19 and IGF2 genes in neuroblastoma. Cancer Res. 1995;55:3386–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Market-Velker BA, Zhang L, Magri LS, Bonvissuto AC, Mann MR. Dual effects of superovulation: loss of maternal and paternal imprinted methylation in a dose-dependent manner. Hum Mol Genet. 2010;19:36–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Denomme MM, Zhang L, Mann MR. Embryonic imprinting perturbations do not originate from superovulation-induced defects in DNA methylation acquisition. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:734–8. e2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Liang XW, Cui XS, Sun SC, Jin YX, Heo YT, Namgoong S, et al. Superovulation induces defective methylation in line-1 retrotransposon elements in blastocyst. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2013;11:69.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Histology and Embryology, School of MedicineAkdeniz UniversityAntalyaTurkey

Personalised recommendations