Literature DB >> 16957049

Developmental competence of human in vitro aged oocytes as host cells for nuclear transfer.

V J Hall1, D Compton, P Stojkovic, M Nesbitt, M Herbert, A Murdoch, M Stojkovic.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Improving human nuclear transfer (NT) efficiencies is paramount for the development of patient-specific stem cell lines, although the opportunities remain limited owing to difficulties in obtaining fresh mature oocytes.
METHODS: Therefore, the developmental competence of aged, failed-to-fertilize human oocytes as an alternate cytoplasmic source for NT was assessed and compared with use of fresh, ovulation-induced oocytes. To further characterize the developmental potential of aged oocytes, parthenogenetic activation, immunocytochemical analysis of essential microtubule proteins involved in meiotic and mitotic division, and RT-PCR in single oocytes (n = 6) was performed to determine expression of oocyte-specific genes [oocyte-specific histone 1 (H1FOO), growth differentiation factor 9 (GDF9), bone morphogenetic protein 15 (BMP15), zygote arrest 1 (ZAR1)] and microtubule markers [nuclear mitotic arrest (NuMA), minus-end directed motor protein HSET and the microtubule kinesin motor protein EG5].
RESULTS: For NT, enucleation and fusion rates of aged oocytes were significantly lower compared with fresh oocytes (P < 0.05). Cleavage rates and subsequent development were poor. In addition, parthenote cleavage was low. Immunocytochemical analysis revealed that many oocytes displayed aberrant expression of NuMA and EG5, had disrupted meiotic spindles and tetrapolar spindles. One of the six oocytes misexpressed GDF9, BMP15 and ZAR1. Two oocytes expressed EG5 messenger RNA (mRNA), and HSET and NuMA were not detectable. RT-PCR of mRNA for oocyte specific genes and microtubule markers in single aged oocytes.
CONCLUSIONS: Thus, aneuploidy and spindle defects may contribute to poor parthenogenetic development and developmental outcomes following NT.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16957049     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/del345

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  21 in total

Review 1.  Delineating nuclear reprogramming.

Authors:  Jolene Ooi; Pentao Liu
Journal:  Protein Cell       Date:  2012-03-31       Impact factor: 14.870

2.  Association of creatin kinase B and peroxiredoxin 2 expression with age and embryo quality in cumulus cells.

Authors:  Maw-Sheng Lee; Chung-Hsien Liu; Tsung-Hsien Lee; Hui-Mei Wu; Chun-Chia Huang; Lii-Shung Huang; Chuan-Mu Chen; En-Hui Cheng
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 3.  The ups and downs of somatic cell nucleus transfer (SCNT) in humans.

Authors:  Josef Fulka; Alena Langerova; Pasqualino Loi; Grazyna Ptak; David Albertini; Helena Fulka
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Two-staged nuclear transfer can enhance the developmental ability of goat-sheep interspecies nuclear transfer embryos in vitro.

Authors:  Li-Bing Ma; Lu Cai; Jia-Jia Li; Xiu-Li Chen; Feng-Yu Ji
Journal:  In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim       Date:  2010-11-17       Impact factor: 2.416

5.  Human oocytes reprogram somatic cells to a pluripotent state.

Authors:  Scott Noggle; Ho-Lim Fung; Athurva Gore; Hector Martinez; Kathleen Crumm Satriani; Robert Prosser; Kiboong Oum; Daniel Paull; Sarah Druckenmiller; Matthew Freeby; Ellen Greenberg; Kun Zhang; Robin Goland; Mark V Sauer; Rudolph L Leibel; Dieter Egli
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2011-10-05       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Reprogramming within hours following nuclear transfer into mouse but not human zygotes.

Authors:  Dieter Egli; Alice E Chen; Genevieve Saphier; Justin Ichida; Claire Fitzgerald; Kathryn J Go; Nicole Acevedo; Jay Patel; Manfred Baetscher; William G Kearns; Robin Goland; Rudolph L Leibel; Douglas A Melton; Kevin Eggan
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2011-10-04       Impact factor: 14.919

Review 7.  The status of human nuclear transfer.

Authors:  Vanessa J Hall; Miodrag Stojkovic
Journal:  Stem Cell Rev       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 5.739

8.  Cell Reprogramming, IPS Limitations, and Overcoming Strategies in Dental Bioengineering.

Authors:  Gaskon Ibarretxe; Antonia Alvarez; Maria-Luz Cañavate; Enrique Hilario; Maitane Aurrekoetxea; Fernando Unda
Journal:  Stem Cells Int       Date:  2012-05-28       Impact factor: 5.443

9.  Therapeutic cloning: promises and issues.

Authors:  Charlotte Kfoury
Journal:  Mcgill J Med       Date:  2007-07

Review 10.  Epigenetic modifications of embryonic stem cells: current trends and relevance in developing regenerative medicine.

Authors:  Henry Chung; Kuldip S Sidhu
Journal:  Stem Cells Cloning       Date:  2008-11-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.