Transcriptome profiling of rabbit parthenogenetic blastocysts developed under in vivo conditions

Parthenogenetic embryos are one attractive alternative as a source of embryonic stem cells, although many aspects related to the biology of parthenogenetic embryos and parthenogenetically derived cell lines still need to be elucidated. The present work was conducted to investigate the gene expression profile of rabbit parthenote embryos cultured under in vivo conditions using microarray analysis. Transcriptomic profiles indicate 2541 differentially expressed genes between parthenotes and normal in vivo fertilised blastocysts, of which 76 genes were upregulated and 16 genes downregulated in in vivo cultured parthenote blastocyst, using 3 fold-changes as a cut-off. While differentially upregulated expressed genes are related to transport and protein metabolic process, downregulated expressed genes are related to DNA and RNA binding. Using microarray data, 6 imprinted genes were identified as conserved among rabbits, humans and mice: GRB10, ATP10A, ZNF215, NDN, IMPACT and SFMBT2. We also found that 26 putative genes have at least one member of that gene family imprinted in other species. These data strengthen the view that a large fraction of genes is differentially expressed between parthenogenetic and normal embryos cultured under the same conditions and offer a new approach to the identification of imprinted genes in rabbit. © 2012 Naturil-Alfonso et al.This work was supported by Generalitat Valenciana research programme (Prometeo 2009/125). Carmen Naturil was supported by Generalitat Valenciana research programme (Prometeo 2009/125). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Naturil Alfonso, C.; Saenz De Juano Ribes, MDLD.; Peñaranda, D.; Vicente Antón, JS.; Marco Jiménez, F. (2012). Transcriptome profiling of rabbit parthenogenetic blastocysts developed under in vivo conditions. PLoS ONE. 7(12):1-11. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051271S111712Harness, J. V., Turovets, N. A., Seiler, M. J., Nistor, G., Altun, G., Agapova, L. S., … Keirstead, H. S. (2011). Equivalence of Conventionally-Derived and Parthenote-Derived Human Embryonic Stem Cells. PLoS ONE, 6(1), e14499. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0014499Lu, Z., Zhu, W., Yu, Y., Jin, D., Guan, Y., Yao, R., … Zhou, Q. (2010). Derivation and long-term culture of human parthenogenetic embryonic stem cells using human foreskin feeders. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, 27(6), 285-291. doi:10.1007/s10815-010-9408-5Koh, C. J., Delo, D. M., Lee, J. W., Siddiqui, M. M., Lanza, R. P., Soker, S., … Atala, A. (2009). Parthenogenesis-derived multipotent stem cells adapted for tissue engineering applications. Methods, 47(2), 90-97. doi:10.1016/j.ymeth.2008.08.002Vrana, K. E., Hipp, J. D., Goss, A. M., McCool, B. A., Riddle, D. R., Walker, S. J., … Cibelli, J. B. (2003). Nonhuman primate parthenogenetic stem cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(Supplement 1), 11911-11916. doi:10.1073/pnas.2034195100Chen, Z., Liu, Z., Huang, J., Amano, T., Li, C., Cao, S., … Liu, L. (2009). Birth of Parthenote Mice Directly from Parthenogenetic Embryonic Stem Cells. Stem Cells, 27(9), 2136-2145. doi:10.1002/stem.158Sritanaudomchai, H., Ma, H., Clepper, L., Gokhale, S., Bogan, R., Hennebold, J., … Mitalipov, S. (2010). Discovery of a novel imprinted gene by transcriptional analysis of parthenogenetic embryonic stem cells. Human Reproduction, 25(8), 1927-1941. doi:10.1093/humrep/deq144Fang, Z. F., Gai, H., Huang, Y. Z., Li, S. G., Chen, X. J., Shi, J. J., … Sheng, H. Z. (2006). Rabbit embryonic stem cell lines derived from fertilized, parthenogenetic or somatic cell nuclear transfer embryos. Experimental Cell Research, 312(18), 3669-3682. doi:10.1016/j.yexcr.2006.08.013Wang, S., Tang, X., Niu, Y., Chen, H., Li, B., Li, T., … Ji, W. (2007). Generation and Characterization of Rabbit Embryonic Stem Cells. Stem Cells, 25(2), 481-489. doi:10.1634/stemcells.2006-0226Piedrahita, J. A., Anderson, G. B., & BonDurant, R. H. (1990). On the isolation of embryonic stem cells: Comparative behavior of murine, porcine and ovine embryos. Theriogenology, 34(5), 879-901. doi:10.1016/0093-691x(90)90559-cNaturil-Alfonso, C., Saenz-de-Juano, M. D., Peñaranda, D. S., Vicente, J. S., & Marco-Jiménez, F. (2011). Parthenogenic blastocysts cultured under in vivo conditions exhibit proliferation and differentiation expression genes similar to those of normal embryos. Animal Reproduction Science, 127(3-4), 222-228. doi:10.1016/j.anireprosci.2011.08.005Besenfelder, U., Strouhal, C., & Brem, G. (1998). A Method for Endoscopic Embryo Collection and Transfer in the Rabbit. Journal of Veterinary Medicine Series A, 45(1-10), 577-579. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0442.1998.tb00861.xMehaisen, G. M. K., Viudes-de-Castro, M. P., Vicente, J. S., & Lavara, R. (2006). In vitro and in vivo viability of vitrified and non-vitrified embryos derived from eCG and FSH treatment in rabbit does. Theriogenology, 65(7), 1279-1291. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2005.08.007Bilodeau-Goeseels, S., & Schultz, G. A. (1997). Changes in Ribosomal Ribonucleic Acid Content Within in Vitro-produced Bovine Embryos1. Biology of Reproduction, 56(5), 1323-1329. doi:10.1095/biolreprod56.5.1323Conesa, A., Gotz, S., Garcia-Gomez, J. M., Terol, J., Talon, M., & Robles, M. (2005). Blast2GO: a universal tool for annotation, visualization and analysis in functional genomics research. Bioinformatics, 21(18), 3674-3676. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bti610Edgar, R. (2002). Gene Expression Omnibus: NCBI gene expression and hybridization array data repository. Nucleic Acids Research, 30(1), 207-210. doi:10.1093/nar/30.1.207Weltzien, F.-A., Pasqualini, C., Vernier, P., & Dufour, S. (2005). A quantitative real-time RT-PCR assay for European eel tyrosine hydroxylase. General and Comparative Endocrinology, 142(1-2), 134-142. doi:10.1016/j.ygcen.2004.12.019Llobat, L., Marco-Jiménez, F., Peñaranda, D., Saenz-de-Juano, M., & Vicente, J. (2011). Effect of Embryonic Genotype on Reference Gene Selection for RT-qPCR Normalization. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 47(4), 629-634. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0531.2011.01934.xLiu, N., Enkemann, S. A., Liang, P., Hersmus, R., Zanazzi, C., Huang, J., … Liu, L. (2010). Genome-wide Gene Expression Profiling Reveals Aberrant MAPK and Wnt Signaling Pathways Associated with Early Parthenogenesis. Journal of Molecular Cell Biology, 2(6), 333-344. doi:10.1093/jmcb/mjq029Abdoon, A. S., Ghanem, N., Kandil, O. M., Gad, A., Schellander, K., & Tesfaye, D. (2012). cDNA microarray analysis of gene expression in parthenotes and in vitro produced buffalo embryos. Theriogenology, 77(6), 1240-1251. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2011.11.004Labrecque, R., & Sirard, M.-A. (2011). Gene expression analysis of bovine blastocysts produced by parthenogenic activation or fertilisation. Reproduction, Fertility and Development, 23(4), 591. doi:10.1071/rd10243Rizos, D., Clemente, M., Bermejo-Alvarez, P., de La Fuente, J., Lonergan, P., & Gutiérrez-Adán, A. (2008). Consequences ofIn VitroCulture Conditions on Embryo Development and Quality. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 43, 44-50. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0531.2008.01230.xLonergan, P., Rizos, D., Kanka, J., Nemcova, L., Mbaye, A., Kingston, M., … Boland, M. (2003). Temporal sensitivity of bovine embryos to culture environment after fertilization and the implications for blastocyst quality. Reproduction, 337-346. doi:10.1530/rep.0.1260337Memili, E., & First, N. L. (2000). Zygotic and embryonic gene expression in cow: a review of timing and mechanisms of early gene expression as compared with other species. Zygote, 8(1), 87-96. doi:10.1017/s0967199400000861Latham, K. E. (2001). Embryonic genome activation. Frontiers in Bioscience, 6(3), d748-759. doi:10.2741/a639Niemann, H., & Wrenzycki, C. (2000). Alterations of expression of developmentally important genes in preimplantation bovine embryos by in vitro culture conditions: Implications for subsequent development. Theriogenology, 53(1), 21-34. doi:10.1016/s0093-691x(99)00237-xCorcoran, D., Fair, T., Park, S., Rizos, D., Patel, O. V., Smith, G. W., … Lonergan, P. (2006). Suppressed expression of genes involved in transcription and translation in in vitro compared with in vivo cultured bovine embryos. Reproduction, 131(4), 651-660. doi:10.1530/rep.1.01015Morison, I. M., Ramsay, J. P., & Spencer, H. G. (2005). A census of mammalian imprinting. Trends in Genetics, 21(8), 457-465. doi:10.1016/j.tig.2005.06.008Bischoff, S. R., Tsai, S., Hardison, N., Motsinger-Reif, A. A., Freking, B. A., Nonneman, D., … Piedrahita, J. A. (2009). Characterization of Conserved and Nonconserved Imprinted Genes in Swine1. Biology of Reproduction, 81(5), 906-920. doi:10.1095/biolreprod.109.078139Cruz-Correa, M., Zhao, R., Oveido, M., Bernabe, R. D., Lacourt, M., Cardona, A., … Giardiello, F. M. (2009). Temporal stability and age-related prevalence of loss of imprinting of the insulin-like growth factor-2 gene. Epigenetics, 4(2), 114-118. doi:10.4161/epi.4.2.7954Park, C.-H., Uh, K.-J., Mulligan, B. P., Jeung, E.-B., Hyun, S.-H., Shin, T., … Lee, C.-K. (2011). Analysis of Imprinted Gene Expression in Normal Fertilized and Uniparental Preimplantation Porcine Embryos. PLoS ONE, 6(7), e22216. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0022216Thurston, A., Taylor, J., Gardner, J., Sinclair, K. D., & Young, L. E. (2007). Monoallelic expression of nine imprinted genes in the sheep embryo occurs after the blastocyst stage. Reproduction, 135(1), 29-40. doi:10.1530/rep-07-0211Li, Y., & Sasaki, H. (2011). Genomic imprinting in mammals: its life cycle, molecular mechanisms and reprogramming. Cell Research, 21(3), 466-473. doi:10.1038/cr.2011.15Mamo, S., Gal, A., Polgar, Z., & Dinnyes, A. (2008). Expression profiles of the pluripotency marker gene POU5F1 and validation of reference genes in rabbit oocytes and preimplantation stage embryos. BMC Molecular Biology, 9(1), 67. doi:10.1186/1471-2199-9-67Navarrete Santos, A., Tonack, S., Kirstein, M., Pantaleon, M., Kaye, P., & Fischer, B. (2004). Insulin acts via mitogen-activated protein kinase phosphorylation in rabbit blastocysts. Reproduction, 128(5), 517-526. doi:10.1530/rep.1.0020

Development of Cheaper Embryo Vitrification Device Using the Minimum Volume Method

[EN] This study was designed to compare the efficiency of the Cryotop and Calibrated plastic inoculation loop (CPIL) devices for vitrification of rabbit embryos on in vitro development and implantation rate, offspring rate at birth and embryonic and fetal losses. CPIL is a simple tool used mainly by microbiologists to retrieve an inoculum from a culture of microorganisms. In experiment 1, embryos were vitrified using a Cryotop device and a CPIL device. There were no significant differences in hatched/hatching blastocyst stage rates after 48 h of culture among the vitrified groups (62±4.7% and 62±4.9%, respectively); however, the rates were significantly lower (P<0.05) than those of the fresh group (95±3.4%). In experiment 2, vitrified embryos were transferred using laparoscopic technique. The number of implanted embryos was estimated by laparoscopy as number of implantation sites at day 14 of gestation. At birth, total offspring were recorded. Embryonic and fetal losses were calculated as the difference between implanted embryos and embryos transferred and total born at birth and implanted embryos, respectively. The rate of implantation and development to term was similar between both vitrification devices (56±7.2% and 50±6.8% for implantation rate and 40±7.1% and 35±6.5% for offspring rate at birth); but significantly lower than in the fresh group (78±6.6% for implantation rate and 70±7.2% for offspring rate at birth, P<0.05). Likewise, embryonic losses were similar between both vitrification devices (44±7.2% and 50±6.8%), but significantly higher than in the fresh group (23±6.6%, P < 0.05). However, fetal losses were similar between groups (10±4.4%, 15±4.8% and 8±4.2%, for vitrified, Cryotop or CPIL and fresh, respectively). These results indicate that the CPIL device is as effective as the Cryotop device for vitrification of rabbit embryos, but at a cost of 0.05 per device.This research was supported by the projects Spanish Research project AGL2014-53405-C2-1-P Comision Interministerial de Ciencia y Tecnologia (FMJ, JSV) and Generalitat Valenciana research program (Prometeo II 2014/036, JSV, FMJ).Marco Jiménez, F.; Jiménez Trigos, ME.; Almela-Miralles, V.; Vicente Antón, JS. (2016). Development of Cheaper Embryo Vitrification Device Using the Minimum Volume Method. PLoS ONE. 11(2):1-9. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148661S1911

Effect of Embryo Vitrification on Rabbit Foetal Placenta Proteome during Pregnancy

Very limited information on the post-implantatory effects of vitrification has been published till now. We observed in a previous study that the vitrification procedure for the cryopreservation of embryos introduced transcriptomic and proteomic modifications in the rabbit foetal placenta at the middle of gestation. Now, we have conducted a proteomic study to determine whether protein alterations in the foetal placenta induced by the vitrification procedure remain during pregnancy. In this study, we used 2D-DIGE and mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF-TOF and LC-MS/MS analysis) to identify the protein changes during middle and late stages of gestation (Day 14 and Day 24, respectively) in rabbit foetal placenta. We identified 11 differentially expressed proteins at Day 14 and 13 proteins at Day 24. Data are available via ProteomeXchange with identifiers PXD001840 and PXD001836. In addition, we demonstrate the presence of three proteins, serum albumin, isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 [NADP+], and phosphoglycerate mutase 1, which were altered during pregnancy. We demonstrate the existence of changes in foetal placental protein during pregnancy induced by the vitrification procedure, which brings into question whether vitrification effects observed during foetal development could lead to physiological and metabolic disorders in adulthood. This effect, taken together with other effects reported in the literature, suggests that embryo cryopreservation is not neutral.This work was supported by the Generalitat Valenciana research program (Prometeo 2014/036) and the Spanish Research Projects (CICYT AGL2011-29831-C03-01). M. D. Saenz-de-Juano was supported by a research grant from Generalitat Valenciana (Programa VALI+d, ACIF/2011/254). Nofima AS provided support in the form of salaries for author KH, but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the Author Contributions section.Saenz De Juano Ribes, MDLD.; Vicente Antón, JS.; Hollung, K.; Marco Jiménez, F. (2015). Effect of Embryo Vitrification on Rabbit Foetal Placenta Proteome during Pregnancy. PLoS ONE. 10(4):e0125157-e0125157. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0125157Se0125157e012515710

Optimierte Performancequantifizierung von verketteten Prozessen: Durch Anpassung der Kennzahl "First Pass Yield"

Bedingt durch das dynamische und komplexe Umfeld von produzierenden Unternehmen sind diese bestrebt, die eigene Performance der Produktionsprozesse kontinuierlich zu verbessern. Eine Kennzahl zur Quantifizierung der Prozessstabilität und -qualität ist der sogenannte „First Pass Yield“ (FPY). Die Produkte durchlaufen eine Vielzahl an Prozessschritten, an denen Fehler entstehen, die durch Prüfschritte entdeckt werden können. Es ist in der Fachliteratur weit verbreitet, die FPY-Werte der Einzelprozesse miteinander zu multiplizieren, um den Gesamt-FPY zu erhalten. Allerdings kann diese Berechnungsmethode zu falschen Ergebnissen führen, weshalb in diesem Beitrag eine optimierte Berechnung des Gesamt-FPY beschrieben wird

Reproductive physiopathology of the rabbit doe.

The main components of the female sexual function will be discussed in this chapter, with an emphasis on those reproductive disorders best characterised as having an impact on the reproductive efficiency of rabbit