Literature DB >> 6709062

Development of reconstituted mouse eggs suggests imprinting of the genome during gametogenesis.

M A Surani, S C Barton, M L Norris.   

Abstract

It has been suggested that the failure of parthenogenetic mouse embryos to develop to term is primarily due to their aberrant cytoplasm and homozygosity leading to the expression of recessive lethal genes. The reported birth of homozygous gynogenetic (male pronucleus removed from egg after fertilization) mice and of animals following transplantation of nuclei from parthenogenetic embryos to enucleated fertilized eggs, is indicative of abnormal cytoplasm and not an abnormal genotype of the activated eggs. However, we and others have been unable to obtain such homozygous mice. We investigated this problem further by using reconstituted heterozygous eggs, with haploid parthenogenetic eggs as recipients for a male or female pronucleus. We report here that the eggs which receive a male pronucleus develop to term but those with two female pronuclei develop only poorly after implantation. Therefore, the cytoplasm of activated eggs is fully competent to support development to term but not if the genome is entirely of maternal origin. We propose that specific imprinting of the genome occurs during gametogenesis so that the presence of both a male and a female pronucleus is essential in an egg for full-term development. The paternal imprinting of the genome appears necessary for the normal development of the extraembryonic membranes and the trophoblast.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1984        PMID: 6709062     DOI: 10.1038/308548a0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nature        ISSN: 0028-0836            Impact factor:   49.962


  266 in total

Review 1.  Fertility preservation for children treated for cancer (1): scientific advances and research dilemmas.

Authors:  R Grundy; R G Gosden; M Hewitt; V Larcher; A Leiper; H A Spoudeas; D Walker; W H Wallace
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 3.791

Review 2.  Genomic imprinting: implications for human disease.

Authors:  J G Falls; D J Pulford; A A Wylie; R L Jirtle
Journal:  Am J Pathol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 4.307

3.  Parental allele-specific chromatin configuration in a boundary-imprinting-control element upstream of the mouse H19 gene.

Authors:  S Khosla; A Aitchison; R Gregory; N D Allen; R Feil
Journal:  Mol Cell Biol       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 4.272

Review 4.  Above and within the genome: epigenetics past and present.

Authors:  F D Urnov; A P Wolffe
Journal:  J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 2.673

Review 5.  Mechanisms of genomic imprinting.

Authors:  K Pfeifer
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-09-05       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 6.  Remodelling the paternal chromatin at fertilization in mammals.

Authors:  David W McLay; Hugh J Clarke
Journal:  Reproduction       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 3.906

Review 7.  Close yet so far away: a look into the management strategies of genetic imprinting disorders.

Authors:  Mark A Pianka; Alec T McIntosh; Sahaj D Patel; Pegah R Bakhshi; Mira Jung
Journal:  Am J Stem Cells       Date:  2018-10-01

Review 8.  Regulation and flexibility of genomic imprinting during seed development.

Authors:  Michael T Raissig; Célia Baroux; Ueli Grossniklaus
Journal:  Plant Cell       Date:  2011-01-28       Impact factor: 11.277

Review 9.  Genomic imprinting and endosperm development in flowering plants.

Authors:  Rinke Vinkenoog; Catherine Bushell; Melissa Spielman; Sally Adams; Hugh G Dickinson; Rod J Scott
Journal:  Mol Biotechnol       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.695

10.  Effects of ooplasm manipulation on DNA methylation and growth of progeny in mice.

Authors:  Yong Cheng; Kai Wang; Lori D Kellam; Young S Lee; Cheng-Guang Liang; Zhiming Han; Namdori R Mtango; Keith E Latham
Journal:  Biol Reprod       Date:  2008-12-10       Impact factor: 4.285

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.