| Literature DB >> 35835981 |
Masatoshi Ooga1,2,3, Rei Inoue4, Kousuke Kazama4, Sayaka Wakayama5, Satoshi Kamimura5,6, Teruhiko Wakayama5.
Abstract
The underlying mechanism for parental asymmetric chromatin dynamics is still unclear. To reveal this, we investigate chromatin dynamics in parthenogenetic, androgenic, and several types of male germ cells-fertilized zygotes. Here we illustrate that parental conflicting role mediates the regulation of chromatin dynamics. Sperm reduces chromatin dynamics in both parental pronuclei (PNs). During spermiogenesis, male germ cells acquire this reducing ability and its resistance. On the other hand, oocytes can increase chromatin dynamics. Notably, the oocytes-derived chromatin dynamics enhancing ability is dominant for the sperm-derived opposing one. This maternal enhancing ability is competed between parental pronuclei. Delayed fertilization timing is critical for this competition and compromises parental asymmetric chromatin dynamics and zygotic transcription. Together, parental competition for the maternal factor enhancing chromatin dynamics is a determinant to establish parental asymmetry, and paternal repressive effects have supporting roles to enhance asymmetry.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35835981 PMCID: PMC9283401 DOI: 10.1038/s42003-022-03623-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Commun Biol ISSN: 2399-3642
Fig. 1Sperm represses histone mobility in both parental PNs.
a, b Changes in histone mobility during the early and mid-stages of ICSI and parthenogenetically activated zygotes. zFRAP analysis was performed at 4, 6, and 8 hpi or hpa. A recovery curve indicating the average fluorescence recovery rate is shown (a). The average mobile fraction (MF) is shown as a gray bar (b). Single dots indicate the MF score of each male and female pronuclei (mPN, fPN), respectively. Blue, mPN; pink, fPN-4h; orange, fPN-6h; and red, fPN-8h. For parthenogenetic (partheno)-zygotes with 2PN, the average MF score is shown. Error bar indicates the standard error (SE). The examined number of embryos (n) = 34, 36, 35, 28, 29, 28, respectively. c mPN was enucleated at 4 hpi/hpa from ICSI- and ROSI-zygotes. Two PN partheno-zygotes were prepared as controls. The remaining fPN was subjected to zFRAP analysis at 8 hpi/hpa. n = 24, 37, 30, respectively. d Illustration of the preparation of 1PN-zygotes. e Fluorescence images of each single PN: sperm-derived mPN (sp-mPN), spindle transfer-derived fPN (spt-fPN), and round spermatid-derived mPN (rs-mPN). f Average MF scores of 1PN-ICSI, -ROSI, and -spt-partheno. n = 64, 45, 45, respectively. g Two sperm were injected into enucleated MII oocytes (upper-left). Sperm (sp) were stained with Hoechst 33342. Fluorescence images of PNs: 1♂ (2sp) and 2♂ (2sp) indicate the one and two male PN-zygotes injected with two sperm (2sp), respectively (upper right and lower left). Two sperm injected into un-enucleated MII oocytes (2♂ + 1♀; lower right). h Average MF scores of the zygotes shown in g. As a control, one sperm was injected into enucleated MII- (same as 1PN-ICSI in f; 1♂(1sp)) and normal ICSI-zygotes (1♂ + 1♀). Blue and red dots indicated mPN and fPN, respectively. n = 33, 28, 14, 12, 49, respectively. i Recovery curve of ROSI-, ELSI-, tICSI-, ICSI-, and iICSI-zygotes. n = 42,39, 34, 97, 47, respectively. j Recovery curve of androgenic zygotes prepared by co-injection of sperm and round spermatid. n = 17, 17, respectively. The error bar indicates SE.
Fig. 2Parental PNs compete for chromatin dynamics promoting factors.
a Illustration of the preparation of 1, 2, and 4PN partheno-zygotes and fluorescence images of the fPNs. Sr indicates strontium, which induces oocyte activation. b Average MF scores of the partheno-zygotes prepared as shown in a. n = 66, 43, 19, respectively. c Illustration of the preparation of sp-mPN-enucleated zygotes. d Average MF scores of the zygotes prepared as shown in c. Blue, mPN; pink, fPN-8h; orange, fPN-10h; and red, fPN-11h). Asterisks indicate significant differences. Illustration of the preparation of delay ICSI-zygotes. n = 24, 24, 26, 30, 29, 26, respectively. e Illustration of the preparation of delay ICSI-zygotes. f Control and delay ICSI are shown. The second polar body is indicated with a red arrow. Fluorescence images of the mPN and fPN. The inset shows lower magnification images of the second polar body near the fPN. g Average MF scores of the delay ICSI-zygotes prepared as shown in e, f. n = 30, 29, 23, respectively. The error bar indicates SE.
Fig. 3Chromatin dynamics play a regulatory role for the establishment of parental asymmetric transcriptional activity.
a Fluorescence images of 5-EU incorporation in delay ICSI-zygotes were shown. b Relative fluorescent signals were shown in the bar graph. Asterisks show significant differences by paired t-test. n = 27, 29, 24, respectively. c The average Recovery curve and MF scores of IVF- zygotes treated with 100-µg/ml α-amanitin, 0.1-µg/ml Act. D, 20-µM Pol IIIi and control zygotes were treated with 1 (Act. D) or 0.1% (Pol IIIi) dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) were shown. Treatment with these inhibitors started soon after mRNA injection (around 2hpi). zFRAP analysis was started at 8 hpi. n = 32, 26, 28, 29, 28, 28, respectively. d Schematic illustration, indicating male germ cells acquire the ability to repress chromatin dynamics and resistance during spermiogenesis. e In the zygotes, parental PNs compete for oocyte-derived histone mobility-promoting factors (red arrows) and the sperm-derived repressive factors (blue arrows), which are antagonistic. Probably, more histone mobility-promoting factors caused a more dynamic state and conferred resistance to reduce histone mobility in the sp-mPN. In the delayed ICSI-zygotes, more promoting factors in fPN caused reversed parental asymmetry. The error bar indicates SE.