Epigenetics and its role in male infertility

Male infertility is a common and complex problem affecting 1 in 20 men. Despite voluminous research in this field, in many cases, the underlying causes are unknown. Epigenetic factors play an important role in male infertility and these have been studied extensively. Epigenetic modifications control a number of processes within the body, but this review will concentrate on male fertility and the consequences of aberrant epigenetic regulation/modification. Many recent studies have identified altered epigenetic profiles in sperm from men with oligozoospermia and oligoasthenoteratozoospermia. During gametogenesis and germ cell maturation, germ cells undergo extensive epigenetic reprogramming that involves the establishment of sex-specific patterns in the sperm and oocytes. Increasing evidence suggests that genetic and environmental factors can have negative effects on epigenetic processes controlling implantation, placentation and fetal growth. This review provides an overview of the epigenetic processes (histone-to-protamine exchange and epigenetic reprogramming post-fertilization), aberrant epigenetic reprogramming and its association with fertility, possible risks for ART techniques, testicular cancer and the effect of environmental factors on the epigenetic processes

Quantitative proteomics: assessing the spectrum of in-gel protein detection methods

Proteomics research relies heavily on visualization methods for detection of proteins separated by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Commonly used staining approaches involve colorimetric dyes such as Coomassie Brilliant Blue, fluorescent dyes including Sypro Ruby, newly developed reactive fluorophores, as well as a plethora of others. The most desired characteristic in selecting one stain over another is sensitivity, but this is far from the only important parameter. This review evaluates protein detection methods in terms of their quantitative attributes, including limit of detection (i.e., sensitivity), linear dynamic range, inter-protein variability, capacity for spot detection after 2D gel electrophoresis, and compatibility with subsequent mass spectrometric analyses. Unfortunately, many of these quantitative criteria are not routinely or consistently addressed by most of the studies published to date. We would urge more rigorous routine characterization of stains and detection methodologies as a critical approach to systematically improving these critically important tools for quantitative proteomics. In addition, substantial improvements in detection technology, particularly over the last decade or so, emphasize the need to consider renewed characterization of existing stains; the quantitative stains we need, or at least the chemistries required for their future development, may well already exist