Pozo dentro de pozo (WOW) versus tela de poliéster (PM): una comparación de sistemas de cultivo individual de embriones bovinos
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rccp.v35n2a03Palabras clave:
embriones bovinos, calidad embrionaria, recuperación de embriones, cultivo in vitro, producción in vitro de embriones, cultivo de malla de poliéster, cultivo individual, cultivo pozo-dentro-de-pozoResumen
Antecedentes: México está innovando en la industria ganadera a través de la generación in vitro de embriones bovinos con tecnologías de cultivo individual como lo son Pozo dentro de Pozo (WOW) y Malla de Poliéster (PM). Estos mantienen los embriones en áreas separadas mientras comparten un mismo medio de cultivo celular. Objetivo: Comparar la cantidad y calidad de embriones bovinos producidos en los sistemas WOW y PM contra el sistema de cultivo convencional en grupo (CG). Métodos: En total se evaluaron 345 embriones fertilizados in vitro para determinar la producción de blastocistos generados en los tres sistemas. Para contar el número de células por blastocisto, 69 embriones en cada sistema se tiñeron diferencialmente para trofectodermo (TE), masa celular interna (ICM) y células apoptóticas. Se realizó un análisis de expresión génica por qPCR de los embriones obtenidos en los tres sistemas. Resultados: Los sistemas WOW, PM y CG desarrollaron similares cantidades de blastocistos (41, 35 y 36%, respectivamente; p>0,05). Los blastocistos en los tres sistemas mostraron cantidades adecuadas de ICM y células apoptóticas. Los blastocistos en el sistema PM mostraron un mayor número de células TE [63,7% versus 58,6% en el sistema CG (p<0,05)]. La expresión relativa de mRNA de los genes embrionarios POUF5F1, GNAS y TP53 no difirió significativamente entre los sistemas (p>0,05). La expresión de ATP5B fue mayor en WOW que en PM (p<0,05), pero similar a CG (p<0,05). La expresión de TJP3 fue mayor en PM que en WOW y CG (p<0,05). La expresión de ID2 y CLDN4 fue mayor en WOW que en PM y CG (p<0,05). El gráfico de biplot del análisis de componentes principales reveló que CG se encontró cerca de embriones degenerados, mientras que PM se encontró cerca de embriones en arresto, ICM, TE, y TJP3. El WOW se localizó hacia blastocistos, mórulas y la expresión de CLDN4, ID2 y GNAS. Conclusión: En el modelo bovino los sistemas PM y WOW son buenas opciones para cultivar embriones individuales, ya que se obtienen resultados muy similares a los obtenidos con el sistema CG. Además, los resultados de PCA sugieren que los embriones individuales desarrollados en el sistema WOW generan blastocistos con mayor capacidad de formar TE e ICM, lo que podría mejorar su éxito de implantación.
Descargas
Citas
Adjaye J, Herwig R, Brink TC, Herrmann D, Greber B, Sudheer S, Groth D, Carnwath JW, Lehrach H, Niemann H. Conserved molecular portraits of bovine and human blastocysts as a consequence of the transition from maternal to embryonic control of gene expression. Physiol Genomics 2007; 31(2):315-327. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1152/physiolgenomics.00041.2007
Betts D, King W. Genetic regulation of embryo death and senescence. Theriogenology 2001; 55(1):171-191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(00)00453-2
Bougarn S, Cunha P, Gilbert FB, Meurens F, Rainard P. Technical note: Validation of candidate reference genes for normalization of quantitative PCR in bovine mammary epithelial cells responding to inflammatory stimuli. J Dairy Sci 2011; 94(5):2425-2430. DOI: http://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2010-3859
Byrne A, Southgate J, Brison D, Leese H. Analysis of apoptosis in the preimplantation bovine embryo using TUNEL. Repro 1999; 117(1):97-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1530/jrf.0.1170097
Corcoran D, Fair T, Park S, Rizos D, Patel OV, Smith GW, Coussens PM, Ireland JJ, Boland MP, Evans AC, Lonergan P. Suppressed expression of genes involved in transcription and translation in in vitro compared with in vivo cultured bovine embryos. Repro 2006; 131(4):651-660. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1530/rep.1.01015
Dai SJ, Xu CL, Wang J, Sun YP, Chian RC. Effect of culture medium volume and embryo density on early mouse embryonic development: tracking the development of the individual embryo. J Assist Reprod Genet 2012; 29(7):617-623. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-012-9744-8
Ealy AD, Wooldridge LK, McCoski SR. Board invited review: Post-transfer consequences of in vitro-produced embryos in cattle. J Anim Sci 2019; 97(6):2555-2568. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skz116
El-Aziz AHA, Mahrous UE, Kamel SZ, Sabed AA. Factors Influencing in vitro Production of Bovine Embryos: A Review. Asian J Anim Vet Adv 2016; 11(12):737-756. DOI: http://doi.org/10.3923/ajava.2016.737.756
Fleming TP, Sheth B, Fesenko I. Cell adhesion in the preimplantation mammalian embryo and its role in trophectoderm differentiation and blastocyst morphogenesis. Front Biosci 2001; 6(6):D1000-1007.
Fouladi-Nashta A, Alberio R, Kafi M, Nicholas B, Campbell K, Webb R. Differential staining combined with TUNEL labelling to detect apoptosis in preimplantation bovine embryos. Reprod Biomed Online 2005; 10(4):497-502. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60827-9
Fujita T, Umeki H, Shimura H, Kugumiya K, Shiga K. Effect of group culture and embryo-culture conditioned medium on development of bovine embryos. J Reprod Dev 2006; 52(1):137-142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1262/jrd.16084
Furuse M, Moriwaki K. The role of claudin-based tight junctions in morphogenesis. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2009; 1165(58-61. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04441.x
Gad A, Schellander K, Hoelker M, Tesfaye D. Transcriptome profile of early mammalian embryos in response to culture environment. Anim Reprod Sci 2012; 134(1-2):76-83. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2012.08.014
Garcia EV, Hamdi M, Barrera AD, Sanchez-Calabuig MJ, Gutierrez-Adan A, Rizos D. Bovine embryo-oviduct interaction in vitro reveals an early cross talk mediated by BMP signaling. Repro 2017; 153(5):631-643. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1530/REP-16-0654
González-Mariscal L, Quirós M, Diaz-Coranguez M. ZO proteins and redox-dependent processes. Antioxidants & redox signaling 2011; 15(5):1235-1253. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1089/ars.2011.3913
Goovaerts IG, Leroy JL, Jorssen EP, Bols PE. Noninvasive bovine oocyte quality assessment: possibilities of a single oocyte culture. Theriogenology 2010; 74(9):1509-1520. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.06.022
Gopichandran N, Leese HJ. The effect of paracrine/autocrine interactions on the in vitro culture of bovine preimplantation embryos. Repro 2006; 131(2):269-277. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1530/rep.1.00677
GuimarÃes ASB, Rocha LF, Jesus RDLd, Vasconcelos GL, Anghinoni G, Santana ALA, Barbosa LP. In vitro performance of Zebu (Bos indicus) and Taurus (Bos taurus) donor cow embryos. Rev bras saúde prod anim 2020; 21(1):1-11. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1590/s1519-994021200142020
Guo G, Huss M, Tong GQ, Wang C, Sun LL, Clarke ND, Robson P. Resolution of cell fate decisions revealed by single-cell gene expression analysis from zygote to blastocyst. Dev Cell 2010; 18(4):675-685. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2010.02.012
Hansen PJ. Implications of Assisted Reproductive Technologies for Pregnancy Outcomes in Mammals. Annu Rev Anim Biosci 2020a; 8(395-413. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-animal-021419-084010
Hansen PJ. The incompletely fulfilled promise of embryo transfer in cattle-why aren't pregnancy rates greater and what can we do about it? J Anim Sci 2020b; 98(11): DOI: http://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skaa288
Jiang Z, Dong H, Zheng X, Marjani SL, Donovan DM, Chen J, Tian XC. mRNA levels of imprinted genes in bovine in vivo oocytes, embryos and cross species comparisons with humans, mice and pigs. Sci Rep 2015; 5(1):1-10. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1038/srep17898
Khatib H. Imprinting of Nesp55 gene in cattle. Mamm Genome 2004; 15(8):663-667. DOI: http://doi.org//10.1007/s00335-004-2331-2
Khosla S, Dean W, Reik W, Feil R. Culture of preimplantation embryos and its long-term effects on gene expression and phenotype. Hum Reprod Update 2001; 7(4):419-427. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/7.4.419
Kiener TK, Sleptsova-Friedrich I, Hunziker W. Identification, tissue distribution and developmental expression of tjp1/zo-1, tjp2/zo-2 and tjp3/zo-3 in the zebrafish, Danio rerio. Gene Expr Patterns 2007; 7(7):767-776. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.modgep.2007.05.006
Kirchhof N, Carnwath J, Lemme E, Anastassiadis K, Scholer H, Niemann H. Expression pattern of Oct-4 in preimplantation embryos of different species. Biol Reprod 2000; 63(6):1698-1705. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod63.6.1698
Komori K, Fujii S, Montagne K, Nakamura H, Kimura H, Otake K, Fujii T, Sakai Y. Development of a well-of-the-well system-based embryo culture plate with an oxygen sensing photoluminescent probe. Sens Actuators B Chem 2012; 162(1):278-283. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2011.12.078
Kues W, Sudheer S, Herrmann D, Carnwath J, Havlicek V, Besenfelder U, Lehrach H, Adjaye J, Niemann H. Genome-wide expression profiling reveals distinct clusters of transcriptional regulation during bovine preimplantation development in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008; 105(50):19768-19773. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0805616105
Liang M, Ayanga B, Du S, Godwin AK, Hartsock JK, Evans SC. Ovca1, a candidate gene of the genetic modifier of Tp53, Mop2, affects mouse embryonic lethality. Genes Chromosom Cancer 2008; 47(4):315-325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/gcc.20535
Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD. Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2(-Delta Delta C(T)) Method. Methods 2001; 25(4):402-408. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1006/meth.2001.1262
Lopera-Vasquez R, Hamdi M, Maillo V, Lloreda V, Coy P, Gutierrez-Adan A, Bermejo-Alvarez P, Rizos D. Effect of bovine oviductal fluid on development and quality of bovine embryos produced in vitro. Reprod Fertil Dev 2017; 29(3):621-629. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1071/RD15238
Lopes JS, Alcazar-Trivino E, Soriano-Ubeda C, Hamdi M, Canovas S, Rizos D, Coy P. Reproductive Outcomes and Endocrine Profile in Artificially Inseminated versus Embryo Transferred Cows. Animals 2020; 10(8):DOI: http://doi.org/10.3390/ani10081359
Lopez-Damian EP, Jimenez-Medina JA, Alarcon MA, Lammoglia MA, Hernandez A, Galina CS, Fiordelisio T. Cryopreservation induces higher oxidative stress levels in Bos indicus embryos compared with Bos taurus. Theriogenology 2020; 143(74-81. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2019.12.001
Marianowski P, Szymusik I, Grzechocinska B, Cyganek A. The comparison of two different embryo culture methods in the course of in vitro fertilization program. Folia Histochem Cytobiol 2007; 45(I):115-117.
Maylem ERS, Leoveras MED, Atabay EC, Atabay EP. Assessing the Quality of Bovine Embryos Produced In Vitro Through the Inner Cell Mass and Trophectoderm Ratio. Philipp J Sci 2017; 146(4):469-474.
Meo SC, Yamazaki W, Ferreira CR, Perecin F, Saraiva NZ, Leal CL, Garcia JM. Parthenogenetic activation of bovine oocytes using single and combined strontium, ionomycin and 6-dimethylaminopurine treatments. Zygote 2007; 15(4):295-306. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1017/S0967199407004285
Monteiro F, Freitas E, Melo D, Carvalho L, Teixeira A, Coelho L, Trinca L, Barros C. Resistance of embryos from Bos indicus cattle during early stages of in vitro development to heat shock compared to embryos crossbred from crossbred cattle. Anim Reprod 2018; 4(1):51-58.
Moriwaki K, Tsukita S, Furuse M. Tight junctions containing claudin 4 and 6 are essential for blastocyst formation in preimplantation mouse embryos. Dev Biol 2007; 312(2):509-522. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2007.09.049
Paria B, Dey S. Preimplantation embryo development in vitro: cooperative interactions among embryos and role of growth factors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1990; 87(12):4756-4760. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.87.12.4756
Paula-Lopes F, Lima RSd, Satrapa RA, Barros CM. Physiology and endocrinology symposium: influence of cattle genotype (Bos indicus vs. Bos taurus) on oocyte and preimplantation embryo resistance to increased temperature. J Anim Scie 2013; 91(3):1143-1153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2012-5802
Piedrahita JA. The role of imprinted genes in fetal growth abnormalities. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 2011; 91(8):682-692. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bdra.20795
Roberts RM, Ezashi T, Das P. Trophoblast gene expression: transcription factors in the specification of early trophoblast. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2004; 2(1):1-9. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7827-2-47
Roth Z. Stress‐induced alterations in oocyte transcripts are further expressed in the developing blastocyst. Mol Reprod Dev 2018; 85(11):821-835. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mrd.23045
Ruddock NT, Wilson KJ, Cooney MA, Korfiatis NA, Tecirlioglu RT, French AJ. Analysis of imprinted messenger RNA expression during bovine preimplantation development. Biol Reprod 2004; 70(4):1131-1135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.103.022236
Salvador I, Cebrian Serrano A, Salamone DF, Silvestre M. Effect of number of oocytes and embryos on in vitro oocyte maturation, fertilization and embryo development in bovine. Span J Agric Res 2011; 9(3):744-752.
Scanavez A, Campos C, Santos R. Pregnancy and pregnancy loss rates in recipients of bovine embryos produced in vitro. Arq Bras Med Vet Zootec 2013; 65(3):722-728. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-09352013000300017
Schiffmacher AT, Keefer CL. CDX2 regulates multiple trophoblast genes in bovine trophectoderm CT‐1 cells. Mol Reprod Dev 2013; 80(10):826-839. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mrd.22212
Serafini PC, Silva ID, Smith GD, Motta EL, Rocha AM, Baracat EC. Endometrial claudin-4 and leukemia inhibitory factor are associated with assisted reproduction outcome. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2009; 7(1):1-9. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7827-7-30
Sikora KM, Magee DA, Berkowicz EW, Berry DP, Howard DJ, Mullen MP, Evans RD, MacHugh DE, Spillane C. DNA sequence polymorphisms within the bovine guanine nucleotide-binding protein Gs subunit alpha (Gsα)-encoding (GNAS) genomic imprinting domain are associated with performance traits. BMC Genet 2011; 12(1):4.
Somfai T, Inaba Y, Aikawa Y, Ohtake M, Kobayashi S, Akai T, Hattori H, Konishi K, Imai K. Culture of bovine embryos in polyester mesh sections: the effect of pore size and oxygen tension on in vitro development. Reprod Domest Anim 2010; 45(6):1104-1109. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.2009.01502.x
Sugimura S, Akai T, Hashiyada Y, Somfai T, Inaba Y, Hirayama M, Yamanouchi T, Matsuda H, Kobayashi S, Aikawa Y, Ohtake M, Kobayashi E, Konishi K, Imai K. Promising system for selecting healthy in vitro-fertilized embryos in cattle. PLoS One 2012; 7(5):e36627. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036627
Sugimura S, Akai T, Somfai T, Hirayama M, Aikawa Y, Ohtake M, Hattori H, Kobayashi S, Hashiyada Y, Konishi K, Imai K. Time-lapse cinematography-compatible polystyrene-based microwell culture system: a novel tool for tracking the development of individual bovine embryos. Biol Reprod 2010; 83(6):970-978. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.110.085522
Thouas GA, Korfiatis NA, French AJ, Jones GM, Trounson AO. Simplified technique for differential staining of inner cell mass and trophectoderm cells of mouse and bovine blastocysts. Reprod Biomed Online 2001; 3(1):25-29.
DOI: http://doi.org/10.1016/s1472-6483(10)61960-8
Thurston A, Taylor J, Gardner J, Sinclair KD, Young LE. Monoallelic expression of nine imprinted genes in the sheep embryo occurs after the blastocyst stage. Repro 2008; 135(1):29. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1530/REP-07-0211
Urrego R, Rodriguez-Osorio N, Niemann H. Epigenetic disorders and altered gene expression after use of assisted reproductive technologies in domestic cattle. Epigenetics 2014; 9(6):803-815. DOI: http://doi.org/10.4161/epi.28711
Vajta G, Korösi T, Du Y, Nakata K, Ieda S, Kuwayama M, Nagy ZP. The Well-of-the-Well system: an efficient approach to improve embryo development. Reprod Biomed Online 2008; 17(1):73-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60296-9
Vajta G, Peura T, Holm P, Paldi A, Greve T, Trounson A, Callesen H. New method for culture of zona‐included or zona‐free embryos: The Well of the Well (WOW) system. Mol Reprod Dev 2000; 55(3):256-264.
Vajta G, Rienzi L, Bavister BD. Zona-free embryo culture: is it a viable option to improve pregnancy rates? Reprod Biomed Online 2010a; 21(1):17-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.03.014
Vajta G, Rienzi L, Cobo A, Yovich J. Embryo culture: can we perform better than nature? Reprod Biomed Online 2010b; 20(4):453-469. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2009.12.018
Van Eijk M, Van Rooijen M, Modina S, Scesi L, Folkers G, Van Tol H, Bevers M, Fisher S, Lewin H, Rakacolli D. Molecular cloning, genetic mapping, and developmental expression of bovine POU5F1. Biol Reprod 1999; 60(5):1093-1103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod60.5.1093
Xie Y, Awonuga A, Liu J, Rings E, Puscheck EE, Rappolee DA. Stress induces AMPK-dependent loss of potency factors Id2 and Cdx2 in early embryos and stem cells [corrected]. Stem Cells Dev 2013; 22(10):1564-1575. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/scd.2012.0352
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2021 Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Pecuarias
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
Los autores permiten a RCCP reimprimir el material publicado en él.
La revista permite que los autores tengan los derechos de autor sin restricciones, y permitirá que los autores conserven los derechos de publicación sin restricciones.
