Superovulation alters DNA methyltransferase protein expression in mouse oocytes and early embryos
- 228 Downloads
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.
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.
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.
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.
KeywordsDNMT DNA methylation Early embryo Oocyte Superovulation
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.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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