| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Embryo |
a Centre de Recherche en Biologie de la Reproduction, Department of Animal Sciences, Laval University, Québec, Canada G1K 7P4
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
early development, embryo, gene regulation, in vitro fertilization
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
In all eukaryotic cells, the genetic information is partially compacted into the nucleus through nucleosomes. The nucleosome consists of 145 base pairs of DNA wrapped around an octamer of H2A, H2B, H3, and H4 histone proteins (two of each). Histone H1 attaches itself to the exterior of the octamer to stabilize the DNA strands, and it contributes to the formation of higher-order structure (i.e., heterochromatin) [2]. Repeating units of nucleosome with the addition of histone H1 and linker DNA form the dense, compact fiber called chromatin [3]. The histone-DNA interactions within the nucleosome core particle and the histone tail interactions in the chromatin fiber are thought to influence the expression or repression of transcription [4]. The amino-terminal tails protruding from the core are subject to enzyme-catalyzed and posttranslational modification, such has acetylation, methylation, phosphorylation, and ubiquitination [5–7], which can affect their charge and function [3]. Therefore, the histones play structural and regulatory roles that are still not fully understood.
The modifications mediated by the histone acetyltransferases (HATs) have been associated with transcriptional activity [8, 9]. The general thought is that acetylation of specific lysine residues on the epsilon-amino groups, in the amino-terminal tails of histones, neutralizes the positive charges of the histone N-termini, causing a reduction in their affinity for DNA and, thereby, increasing the accessibility of transcription factors to the DNA template. Histone acetyltransferases can be separated in two types, type A and type B, depending on their subcellular localization, origin, and function. Type A HATs are found in the nucleus, where they play important roles in the regulation of gene expression by functioning as transcriptional coactivators. Type B HATs primarily acetylate nascent histones in the cytoplasm and may function in chromatin assembly [10, 11]. However, HAT1, a type B HAT, has been localized in the nucleus [12, 13]. Many HATs have a coactivating role for different transcriptional factors, and some HATs can also acetylate transcription factors [14].
Acetylation is a reversible process, and the histone deacetylase (HDAC) is responsible for the opposite reaction, which often results in transcriptional repression [8, 9]. To date, 10 mammalian HDACs have been cloned, and these can be divided into two classes according to their size, their sequence homology, and their protein-protein interactions. Class I is composed of enzymes significantly homologous to the yeast protein RPD3 and includes HDAC1, HDAC2, HDAC3, and HDAC8. The HDACs composing class II are HDA1-like enzymes and include HDAC4, HDAC5, HDAC6, HDAC7, HDAC9, and HDAC10. The third group, class III enzymes, are human homologues to yeast Sir2 protein, which contains seven members (SIRT1 to SIRT7). However, class III homologues have yet to be proven as being functional HDACs [15]. Both acetylases and deacetylases can be parts of large, multisubunit complexes, and most of them were first identified as proteins involved in transcriptional regulation.
In the present study, we investigated the expression profile of seven genes involved in chromatin formation or modification in the bovine oocyte and across development of the preimplantation embryo with quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Two of those genes are HATs: GCN5, a type A enzyme, and HAT1, a type B enzyme. Four are HDACs: HDAC1, HDAC2, and HDAC3, class I enzymes; and HDAC7, a class II deacetylase. We also verified histone H2A levels, because previous studies from our lab indicated that this mRNA is a stable quantitative marker [16].
Our objective was to measure mRNA levels of these genes as an indication of their possible role in the ability of the oocyte to reprogram the chromatin. Knowing the mRNA profiles of these genes would provide greater knowledge regarding chromatin silencing and activation, thus helping us to understand the MZT.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Oocyte Recovery and Selection
Bovine ovaries were collected at a commercial slaughterhouse and transported to the laboratory in a thermoflask with a standard saline solution supplemented with an antimycotic agent. Cumulus-oocyte complexes (COCs) from follicles (3- to 5-mm diameter) were collected by aspiration using an 18-gauge needle attached to a 10-ml syringe. The COCs were selected according to their morphological characteristics [17], and classes 1, 2, and 3 were put through in vitro-production procedures after being washed three times in Hepes-buffered Tyrode medium (TLH) supplemented with 0.3% (w/v) BSA (fraction V), 0.2 mM pyruvic acid, and 50 µg/ml of gentamicin. Some of the COCs from classes 1, 2, and 3 were mechanically treated to separate the cumulus cells from the oocyte. The denuded oocytes were transferred and washed three times with PBS buffer to prevent cumulus cell contamination. Groups of 20 oocytes were then briefly centrifuged, the supernatant discarded, and the oocytes immediately frozen and stored at -80°C until RNA extraction.
In Vitro Maturation
Groups of 10 COCs were incubated in medium droplets under mineral oil. Each droplet had 50 µl of maturation medium composed of modified synthetic oviduct fluid (SOF) supplemented with 0.8% BSA, MEM nonessential amino acids (Gibco BRL, Burlington, ON, Canada), MEM essential amino acids (Gibco BRL), and 1 mM glutamine supplemented with 1 µg/ml of 17ß-estradiol [18]. After the addition of the oocytes, the droplets were incubated in a humidified atmosphere for 23–24 h at 38.5°C with 5% CO2 in air. After 24 h of in vitro maturation, oocytes in metaphase II (MII) were collected, and groups of 20 were mechanically denuded, washed three times in PBS buffer, and centrifuged. The supernatant was then discarded, and the oocytes were immediately frozen at -80°C until RNA extraction.
In Vitro Fertilization
For IVF, five oocytes were added to 52-µl droplets. The droplets were composed of modified Tyrode lactate medium supplemented with 0.6% BSA (fatty-acid free), 0.2 mM pyruvic acid, 2 µg/ml of heparin, and 50 µg/ml of gentamicin. Before the transfer, the COCs were washed twice in TLH. Following the transfer, 2 µl of PHE (1 mM hypotaurine, 2 mM penicillamine, and 250 mM epinephrine) were added to each droplet. The semen came from a single bull (Centre d'Insémination Artificielle du Québec; CIAQ, St. Hyacinthe, QC, Canada). The spermatozoa were thawed in 35°C water for 1 min, added to a discontinuous Percoll gradient (45% over a 90% Percoll), and centrifuged at 700 x g for 30 min at 26°C. The pellet was resuspended in 1 ml of modified Tyrode medium and centrifuged at 250 x g for 5 min at 26°C. The supernatant was discarded, and the spermatozoa were resuspended in IVF medium to obtain a final concentration of 1 x 106 cells/ml. Two microliters of the sperm suspension were added to the droplets, and the incubation took place in a humidified atmosphere at 38.5°C in 5% CO2 in air for 15–18 h.
In Vitro Culture
Following insemination, presumably fertilized oocytes were mechanically denuded by repeated pipetting, washed three times in PBS buffer, and transferred to culture droplets (50 µl) in groups of 20–30 embryos. The embryo culture was held in modified SOF under mineral oil at 38.5°C in 5% CO2 in a reduced oxygen atmosphere (7%) with saturated humidity. The SOF was replaced every 72 h to prevent ammonium accumulation resulting from amino acid degradation, which can be toxic. A dual-culture system was used. The SOFC1 medium used for the first 72 h contained 0.8% BSA, MEM nonessential amino acids, 1 mM glutamine, and 10 µM EDTA. That medium was then replaced by the SOFC2 medium containing 0.8% BSA, MEM nonessential amino acids, MEM essential amino acids, and 1 mM glutamine for the remaining culture. Two-cell embryos were collected 36 h postfertilization, 8-cell embryos after 72 h, and blastocysts after Day 8. These were all washed three times in PBS buffer and centrifuged. The supernatant was then discarded, and the embryos and blastocysts were frozen at -80°C until RNA extraction.
RNA Extraction and RT Reaction
All the pools were done in triplicate and contained 20 oocytes or embryos from these different developmental stages: germinal vesicle (GV) oocytes, MII oocytes, 2-cell embryos, 8-cells embryos, and blastocysts. The total RNA was extracted from those pools using the Strataprep Total RNA Microprep kit (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA), and a DNase I treatment was performed directly in the column as described by the manufacturer. Before precipitation, 30 µg of glycogen (Gibco BRL) were added as a carrier. The RNA precipitation was carried out using a one-fifth volume of sodium acetate (1.4 M, pH 4.0) and one volume of isopropanol. The mixture was incubated at -80°C for 10 min before centrifugation at 13 000 rpm for 15 min. The pellets were washed with 70% ethanol, centrifuged for 5 min at 8000 rpm, and air-dried. The entire RNA pellet was used for the RT. The RNA pellet was dissolved in 3.4 µl of sterile water and primed using 100 ng of oligodt-18. Secondary structures were removed and the oligodt-18 annealed to the mRNA by heating the sample at 72°C for 2 min, then the reaction was quenched rapidly on ice. Next, 5x RT buffer, 4 mM dNTPs, 10 mM dithiothreitol, and 200 U of Superscript II RT (Gibco BRL) were added to obtain a total reaction mix volume of 10 µl. This mix was first heated at 42°C for 1 h and then at 70°C for 10 min to terminate the reaction. When the reaction was completed, 10 µl of water were added to the RT to get a final volume of 20 µl (the equivalent of 1 oocyte or embryo/µl). The RTs were carried out in a PTC-100 Programmable Thermal Controller (MJ Research, Inc., Watertown, MA).
Quantitative PCR
The quantification of all gene transcripts was done by real-time quantitative RT-PCR [19]. The primers for each gene were designed from conserved sequences of human and mouse found in GenBank (Table 1). The reaction mixture consisted of 2 µl cDNA (1 oocyte or embryo/µl), except for H2A (for which only 1 µl of cDNA was used), 50 ng of each primer, 14.4 µl of water, 3 mM MgCl2, and 2 µl of Master SYBR Green mix (Roche Diagnostics, Laval, QC, Canada) for a total of 20 µl. A Light Cycler apparatus (Roche Diagnostics) was used for quantification using SYBR Green to detect the double-stranded DNA produced during the amplification. For each gene studied, a specific standard curve was made using a series of dilutions from the corresponding PCR product. These PCRs products were previously cleaned on Qiaquick columns (Qiagen, Inc., Mississauga, ON, Canada), and the concentration was evaluated by visual comparative analysis using a standardized mass ladder (Gibco BRL). The program used for all genes consisted of a denaturing cycle of 10 min at 95°C; 45–50 cycles of PCR (95°C for 0 sec, 57°C for 5 sec, and 72°C for 16 sec); a melting cycle consisting of 95°C for 0 sec, 70°C for 30 sec, and a step cycle starting at 70°C until 95°C with a 0.2°C/sec transition rate; and finally, a cooling cycle of 40°C for 30 sec.
|
Statistical Analysis
Results obtained for each gene in each pool of cDNA were normalized with a ratio of H2A. Data are presented as the mean ± SEM. Statistically significant differences in means between each developmental stage in terms of mRNA expression were calculated by the Tukey Studentized Range (honestly significant difference) test. Differences were considered to be statistically significant at the 95% confidence level (P < 0.05).
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
The bovine cDNA of all genes (HDAC1, HDAC2, HDAC3, HDAC7, HAT1, GCN5, and H2A) was detected in all unfertilized oocytes and embryo stages tested, from immature oocytes to blastocysts, except for one RT from a 2-cell stage triplicate that did not show a signal for HDAC1, HDAC3, and HAT1 and another from an 8-cell stage triplicate that did not show a signal for HDAC1 and HDAC3.
Figure 1 shows results obtained from the Light Cycler apparatus for one of the triplicates for the H2A gene (used to normalize). We observe in Figure 1A that the sample amplification curves start rising between the 27th and 29th cycles of PCR, showing that the mRNA levels in all developmental stages are close to the same (confirmed in Fig. 4), whereas the negative control stayed flat, meaning that no product was detected. The exponential phase of the amplification curves are used by the Light Cylcer software to calculate the concentration of the accumulating PCR products in the samples. The negative derivative of fluorescence (with respect to temperature) is plotted to generate a melting peak (Fig. 1B). The melting peak can be used to evaluate the specificity of the amplification. In this example, the melting peak observed around 79.5°C for the negative control represents primer dimer formation, and the melting peak observed around 90°C is specific for the H2A PCR product.
|
|
Results from the quantitative analysis of the four HDAC genes studied are presented in Figure 2. The HDAC1 gene (Fig. 2A) is strongly expressed in the blastocyst stage compared to the other developmental stages, which remained constant (P < 0.05). As for the HDAC2 gene (Fig. 2B), it is also highly expressed in the blastocyst stage compared to all other stages, except for the MII stage, which has an intermediate expression level (P < 0.05). The lowest level of mRNA of HDAC2 is at the 8-cell stage (P < 0.05). No significant differences (P > 0.05) were observed between the expression levels of HDAC3 (Fig. 2C) and HDAC7 (Fig. 2D) throughout the developmental stages. Although high variance in blastocyst embryos for the HDAC3 gene precluded a statistical difference from being observed, its expression pattern strongly resembles those of HDAC1 and HDAC2.
|
The expression profile of the two HATs studied are presented in Figure 3. The level of expression of HAT1 (Fig. 3A) in the blastocysts is significantly higher than in the GV oocytes and the 8-cell embryos (P < 0.05). The expression levels of HAT1 are the same from the oocyte up to the 8-cell stage. The expression pattern of GCN5 (Fig. 3B) showed no significant difference (P > 0.05) in levels throughout embryonic development. Similar levels of the H2A genes (Fig. 4) were also found in all oocytes and embryo stages.
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
The mRNA of HDAC1, HDAC2, HDAC3, HDAC7, HAT1, and GCN5 are expressed throughout development of the preimplantation embryo, from the immature oocyte to the blastocyst stage (Figs. 2–4). An earlier study by RT-PCR showed that mouse HDAC1, HDAC2, and HDAC3 are expressed from the oocyte through the blastocyst stage at varying levels [20]. Those authors found that the patterns for HDAC2 and HDAC3 demonstrate high levels of mRNA in the oocyte, followed by degradation until the 4-cell stage and then a major increase in the blastocyst. They also observed that very low levels of transcripts are found in immature oocytes, MII oocytes, and 1-cell embryos for HDAC1 compared to HDAC2 and HDAC3; however, extremely high levels of HDAC1 are found in 4-cell embryos [20]. Segev et al. [21] looked at the expression patterns for bovine HDAC1, HDAC2, and HDAC3 from immature oocytes to 8-cell embryos. Those authors did not detect any mRNA encoding for HDAC1 and HDAC2 in the immature oocytes with normal RT-PCR using an equivalent of four oocytes or embryos from each stage per PCR reaction. Here, we demonstrated that using two oocytes or embryos per reaction on a quantitative PCR with SYBR Green was sufficient to detect HDAC1 and HDAC2 mRNA in the immature oocytes. Steuerwald et al. [22] compared the sensitivity of fluorescent-monitored product accumulation versus conventional product identification by gel electrophoresis. With the SYBR Green 1, they detected ß-actin cDNA formation at the 12th cycle, and when using ethidium bromide-stained gel electrophoresis, a minimum of 20 cycles were required to detect a faded band corresponding to the PCR product generated from the same cDNA template. Without a doubt, real-time PCR with detection by means of fluorescence provides an enhanced way to verify the presence of genes when working with modest quantities of cDNA template.
We observed two different expression patterns for the HDACs (Fig. 2), one for HDAC1 and HDAC2 (class I HDACs) and the other for HDAC7 (class II HDAC). Although no significant difference could be found between the different developmental stages for the HDAC3 (class I HDAC) gene, its profile clearly tended to resemble those of the other class I HDACs. However, even if the patterns for the class I HDACs tend to be similar, their expression levels differ. In Figure 2, the levels of HDAC1 expression appear higher than those of the other HDACs at every developmental stage, and HDAC2 expression levels seem higher than those of HDAC3 and HDAC7. The mRNA levels for the HDAC1 transcripts are present in greater numbers than are those of HDAC2, HDAC3, and HDAC7 at all developmental stages. These differences are more noticeable in the blastocyst stage, when its level of expression is approximately 42-, 322-, and 1420-fold higher than that of HDAC2, HDAC3, and HDAC7, respectively. In all three class I HDACs, we have the impression that the lowest mRNA levels are found at the 8-cell stage, suggesting that the mRNA is, perhaps, more translated either at or just before this developmental stage.
Our study confirms the work of Segev et al. [21], who demonstrated that HDAC1, HDAC2, and HDAC3 proteins are expressed during oocyte maturation and embryogenesis. That work also highlighted that HDAC1 and HDAC2 protein expression is increased at the 8-cell stage. Here, we found that the increase in mRNA expression from the 8-cell stage to the blastocyst is quite important for HDAC1 and HDAC2. A possible explanation for the similar expression patterns observed for HDAC1, HDAC2, and HDAC3 is that in mammals, these three genes are isoforms, orthologues to the yeast RPD3 gene. Those genes are highly similar in the human: HDAC1 (482 residues) and HDAC2 (488 residues) share 84% identity, whereas HDAC3 (428 residues) shares less identity to HDAC1 and HDAC2 (51%). However, even if they are isoforms, they do not act the same way. They may differ in substrate specificity, intracellular localization, and posttranslational modification. Hassig et al. [23] determined by immunoprecipitation in HeLa cells that HDAC1 and HDAC2 are coimmunoprecipitated, whereas Grozinger et al. [24] found that HDAC3 preferentially associates with HDAC4 and HDAC5. However, in some cell lines, HDAC3 has been described to associate with HDAC1 and HDAC2 (discussed in [24]), and recently, HDAC1 was proven to form hetero-oligomers (in vitro) with HDAC2 and HDAC3 [25]. Combining this information with the data that we obtained, we can state that HDAC1, HDAC2, and HDAC3 proteins not only interact together but exhibit the equivalent mRNA profile in the early embryo development. However, despite these homologies, HDAC1, HDAC2, and HDAC3 are definitely deviant in their functions. In chicken DT40 cells, HDAC1 and HDAC2 are preferentially localized in the nuclei [26]. However, HDAC3, a class I HDAC, is the only enzyme known to shuttle between the nucleus and cytoplasm, and this property appears to be fundamental for its function [27]. Moreover, by generating HDAC1, HDAC2, or HDAC3 knock-out DT40 cells, HDAC1 and HDAC2 were shown to be nonessential [26], whereas HDAC3 was shown to be essential for the viability of the cells [27]. Observations from the literature indicate that HDAC7 could also shuttle in and out of the cell nucleus [28] analogous to HDAC4 and HDAC5, which are other class II HDACs [29]. The HDAC7 interacts with HDAC3 in the nucleus and correlates with enzymatic activity, whereas in the cytoplasm, HDAC7 does not associate with HDAC3 and is enzymatically inactive [28]. Consequently, this strengthens the fact that HDAC3 must be necessary for the viability of the cells. Treatment of 2-cell mouse embryos with butyrate increases the nuclear concentration of acetylated histone H4 [30]. This increase in the amount of acetylated histone H4 with an HDAC inhibitor means that early embryos have functional HDACs [30, 31]. Furthermore, in mouse oocytes and in 2-cell embryos, HDAC inhibitors increase the number of nuclear-acetylated histone H4 by approximately 2.5-fold more than in 1-cell embryos [30]. Is this increase of acetylated histone H4 in the treated 2-cell embryos caused by a required limitation of the increase in acetylation before MZT? If so, would we observe a similar expression before the bovine MZT at the 8-cell stage. Histone deacetylase inhibitors increase synthesis of TRC, a zygotic gene activation (ZGA) marker protein [32], and prevent development of the transcriptionally repressive status for overall gene expression. Repression could be associated with structural changes in the chromatin, and the discovery that histone deacetylation can be associated with chromatin offers enlightenment regarding how histone deacetylation relates to repression of gene expression [20].
The mRNA expression profile for HAT1 (Fig. 3A) evokes the idea that HAT1, HDAC1, HDAC2, and HDAC3 proteins could have a similar protein expression pattern. Unlike other type B HATs, the HAT1 enzyme seems to be found in the nucleus and/or in the cytoplasm with different ratios, depending on the organism and the cell type considered. Human Hat1 enzyme is extensively found in the nucleus [33], which is in distinction to the yeast homologue, which is located in both the cytoplasm and the nucleus [12]. In Xenopus oocyte, the Hat1 enzyme is largely nuclear; following maturation, the Hat1 enzyme leaves the nucleus to become primarily located in the cytoplasm throughout early embryogenesis [13]. We found that mRNA levels of HAT1 are relatively constant during early bovine development until the blastocyst stage (Fig. 4), and similarly, total Hat1 activity was found to be constant through early Xenopus development [13]. In yeast, HAT1 mutants show no obvious growth defects or phenotypes other than the enzyme defect itself [34]. Although no significant difference was found in the pattern for GCN5 (Fig. 3B), a type A HAT, it remains especially interesting, because the expression appears to be at its maximum during the MII stage. For the preblastocyst period, levels of mRNA for GCN5 are approximately 7.5-fold higher than those of HAT1 for the same period. On the other hand, levels of HAT1 in the blastocyst stage are approximately 1.4-fold higher than those of GCN5. This may indicate that GCN5 protein is perhaps more active than HAT1 for disabling the transcriptionally repressive environment during the preblastocyst stage. This may suggest that GCN5 maternal mRNA is more important during the early stages of development to produce the nuclear GCN5 protein, which will be necessary for the decondensation of chromatin and required further in development after the MZT. The GCN5 protein HAT activity is possibly shared by another nuclear HAT, because the yeast GCN5 knock-out results in slight phenotypic effects, such as slow growth on minimal medium [35]. The double mutant (HAT1 and GCN5) produces a phenotype similar to the GCN5 single mutant [12].
The mRNA expression of histone H2A remained constant during all of the stages tested (Fig. 4). This is surprising, because the number of cells from the oocyte to the blastocyst stage increase by 100-fold in the blastocyst and because the mRNA levels of histone H2A should also increase in a proportional way. This is especially true after the MZT, which occurs at the 8- to 16-cell stage in the bovine. Once the embryonic genome is activated, the transcript level should mirror the number of cells, whereas before the MZT, the maternal RNA pools are the only source of transcript. Thus, the housekeeping mRNA levels should be high in the oocyte and gradually degraded as the embryonic development progresses to the MZT. In a previous report [16], in which we measured the RNA levels of eight housekeeping genes during preimplantation development, nearly all of them followed the normal degradation pattern up to the MZT, followed by a dramatic increase at the blastocyst stage. However, H2A escaped that degradation pattern and was found to be constant across preimplantation. We currently do not have an explanation for why H2A is stable across the preimplantation period, but it is possibly being transcribed constantly throughout this period.
Research using HDAC inhibitors revealed that the relative time of replication of two late-replicating, imprinted genes is advanced [36], and in the mouse 1-cell embryo, the rate of DNA synthesis is increased in the peripheral regions compared to the intranuclear region [37], thus implying that histone acetylation is involved in the regulation of DNA replication. The action of both histone deacetylation and DNA methylation may control the expression of some imprinted genes; however, the modification in DNA methylation, in contrast to histone acetylation, generates a heritable epigenetic status at some specific loci in somatic cells [38].
During the oocyte growth period, RNA particles accumulate in the oocyte cytoplasm to assure the initial stages of embryonic development until the transcription of embryonic DNA (i.e., the MZT). This time period varies across species; the mouse MZT takes place in the late 2-cell stage, compared to the 8- to 16-cell stage for bovine embryos [39]. None of the genes studied here showed a significant decrease in mRNA level at the 8-cell stage, which is consistent with the MZT of bovine embryos. Accordingly, maternal mRNA expression levels should be at their maximum intensity at the oocyte stage and decrease throughout embryonic development. However, our results indicate no significant increase or decrease in mRNA levels from the GV oocyte to the MII stage for any of the genes studied. The most likely explanation is the length of mRNA poly(A) tails, which can be altered by polyadenylation or deadenylation. During oocyte maturation, genes can have a very short tail or a default deadenylation pattern, or they can lengthen their poly(A) tail [40, 41]. As previously mentioned, we used oligodt-18 for primers, which anneals with the poly(A) tail, in the RT reaction to obtain our cDNA. The mRNAs of all the genes tested were found in the oocyte, meaning that some mRNA transcripts had elongated poly(A) tails to get reverse transcribed. So, if none of the genes displayed a significant increase or decrease of mRNA expression levels from the GV oocyte to the MII stage, the plausible explanation is that they maintained their poly(A) tail length by acquiring poly(A) during maturation.
The diversity of HDACs and HATs in their ability to form complexes and in their mRNA patterns strongly indicates that each may be involved in distinct and possibly overlapping functions. A few HATs or HDACs specific to the oocyte may be waiting to be discovered. Given that RT-PCR is not an evaluation of the protein content, it will be important to measure the levels of HAT or HDAC proteins in the oocytes or embryos to correlate with mRNA levels. The protein analysis should allow us to further define the possible roles of HDACs and HATs by measuring quantitative variations in relation to mRNA levels and qualitative variations in terms of cellular localization. By illustrating which mRNA is present at different stages and their specific expression patterns, this study is opening the path for protein analysis.
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
2 Correspondence. FAX: 418 656 3766; marc-andre.sirard{at}crbr.ulaval.ca
Received: 11 April 2002.
First decision: 26 April 2002.
Accepted: 16 August 2002.
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  E. Louden, M. M Chi, and K. H Moley Crosstalk between the AMP-activated kinase and insulin signaling pathways rescues murine blastocyst cells from insulin resistance Reproduction, September 1, 2008; 136(3): 335 - 344. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. Endo, K. Kano, and K. Naito Nuclear Histone Deacetylases Are Not Required for Global Histone Deacetylation During Meiotic Maturation in Porcine Oocytes Biol Reprod, June 1, 2008; 78(6): 1073 - 1080. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Duranthon, A. J Watson, and P. Lonergan Preimplantation embryo programming: transcription, epigenetics, and culture environment Reproduction, February 1, 2008; 135(2): 141 - 150. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. McGraw, C. Vigneault, and M.-A. Sirard Temporal expression of factors involved in chromatin remodeling and in gene regulation during early bovine in vitro embryo development Reproduction, March 1, 2007; 133(3): 597 - 608. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Smith, D. Berg, S. Beaumont, N. T Standley, D. N Wells, and P. L Pfeffer Simultaneous gene quantitation of multiple genes in individual bovine nuclear transfer blastocysts Reproduction, January 1, 2007; 133(1): 231 - 242. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. Armstrong, M. Lako, W. Dean, and M. Stojkovic Epigenetic Modification Is Central to Genome Reprogramming in Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer Stem Cells, April 1, 2006; 24(4): 805 - 814. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Endo, K. Naito, S. Kume, Y. Nishimura, K. Kashima, and H. Tojo Activities of maturation-promoting factor (MPF) and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) are not required for the global histone deacetylation observed after germinal vesicle breakdown (GVBD) in porcine oocytes. Reproduction, March 1, 2006; 131(3): 439 - 447. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Vigneault, S. McGraw, L. Massicotte, and M.-A. Sirard Transcription Factor Expression Patterns in Bovine In Vitro-Derived Embryos Priorto Maternal-Zygotic Transition Biol Reprod, June 1, 2004; 70(6): 1701 - 1709. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Zheng, B. Patel, M. McMenamin, A. M. Paprocki, R. D. Schramm, N. G. Nagl Jr, D. Wilsker, X. Wang, E. Moran, and K. E. Latham Expression of Genes Encoding Chromatin Regulatory Factors in Developing Rhesus Monkey Oocytes and Preimplantation Stage Embryos: Possible Roles in Genome Activation Biol Reprod, May 1, 2004; 70(5): 1419 - 1427. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
