Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:56:08.441Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relative expression of the developmentally important candidate genes in immature oocytes and in vitro-produced embryos of buffalo (Bubalus bubalis)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

Satish Kumar Open the ORCID record for Satish Kumar [Opens in a new window]  and
Manmohan Singh Chauhan
Satish Kumar*
Affiliation:
Animal Biotechnology Centre, ICAR – National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal132001, Haryana, India
Manmohan Singh Chauhan
Affiliation:
Animal Biotechnology Centre, ICAR – National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal132001, Haryana, India
*
Author for correspondence: Satish Kumar. Animal Biotechnology Centre, ICAR – National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal132001, Haryana, India. Tel: +91 1842259526. Fax: +91 1842250042. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The study was undertaken to examine the relative abundance (RA) of the major developmental important candidate genes in different grades of immature oocytes (A-grade, B-grade, C-grade and D-grade) and various stages of in vitro-produced embryos (2-cell, 4-cell, 8–16-cell, morula, and blastocyst) of buffalo using RT-qPCR. Results showed that the RA of GLUT1, CX43, HSP70.1 and GDF9 was significantly higher (P < 0.05) in the A-grade of oocytes than the C-grade and D-grade but did not differ significantly from the B-grade of oocytes. Similarly, RA of BMP15 and Survivin were significantly higher (P < 0.05) in A-grade than the other grades of oocytes, however, poly(A) polymerase expression was not significantly different (P > 0.05) among the immature oocytes. The expression of GLUT1 was significantly higher (P < 0.05) in the blastocysts, but the expression of CX43 (P < 0.05; P > 0.05), HSP70.1 (P < 0.05; P > 0.05) and GDF9 (P > 0.05) was higher at the 2-cell stage than the other stages of embryos. Interestingly, the expression levels of poly(A) polymerase (P < 0.05), BMP15 (P < 0.05; P > 0.05) and Survivin (P > 0.05) were higher at the 8–16-cell stage than the other stages of embryos. It is concluded that A-grade of immature oocytes has shown more mRNA abundance for the major developmental important genes; therefore A-grade oocytes may be considered as the most developmentally competent and suitable for handmade cloning research in buffalo.

Keywords

BuffaloDevelopmental genesEmbryoExpressionOocyte
Type
Research Article
Information
Zygote , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , August 2022 , pp. 509 - 515
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bahire, SV, Rajput, PK, Kumar, V, Kumar, D, Kataria, M and Kumar, S (2019). Quantitative expression of mRNA encoding BMP/SMAD signalling genes in the ovaries of Booroola carrier and non-carrier GMM sheep. Reprod Domest Anim 54, 1375–83.10.1111/rda.13535CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Biase, FH, Fonseca Merighe, GK, Santos Biase, WK, Martelli, L and Meirelles, FV (2008). Global poly(A) mRNA expression profile measured in individual bovine oocytes and cleavage embryos. Zygote 16, 29–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brevini-Gandolfi, TA, Favetta, LA, Mauri, L, Luciano, AM, Cillo, F and Gandolfi, F (1999). Changes in poly(A) tail length of maternal transcripts during in vitro maturation of bovine oocytes and their relation with developmental competence. Mol Reprod Dev 52, 427–33.3.0.CO;2-G>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brevini, TA, Lonergan, P, Cillo, F, Francisci, C, Favetta, LA, Fair, T and Gandolfi, F (2002). Evolution of mRNA polyadenylation between oocyte maturation and first embryonic cleavage in cattle and its relation with developmental competence. Mol Reprod Dev 63, 510–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chauhan, MS, Singla, SK, Palta, P, Manik, RS and Madan, ML (1998). In vitro maturation and fertilization, and subsequent development of buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) embryos: Effects of oocyte quality and type of serum. Reprod Fertil Dev 10, 173–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coussens, PM and Nobis, W (2002). Bioinformatics and high throughput approach to create genomic resources for the study of bovine immunobiology. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 86, 229–44.10.1016/S0165-2427(02)00005-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graf, A, Krebs, S, Heininen-Brown, M, Zakhartchenko, V, Blum, H and Wolf, E (2014). Genome activation in bovine embryos: review of the literature and new insights from RNA sequencing experiments. Anim Reprod Sci 149, 46–58.10.1016/j.anireprosci.2014.05.016CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hosoe, M, Kaneyama, K, Ushizawa, K, Hayashi, KG and Takahashi, T (2011). Quantitative analysis of bone morphogenetic protein 15 (BMP15) and growth differentiation factor 9 (GDF9) gene expression in calf and adult bovine ovaries. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 9, 33.10.1186/1477-7827-9-33CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jeon, K, Kim, EY, Tae, JC, Lee, CH, Lee, KS, Kim, YO, Jeong, DK, Cho, SK, Kim, JH, Lee, HY, Riu, KZ, Cho, SG and Park, SP (2008). Survivin protein expression in bovine follicular oocytes and their in vitro developmental competence. Anim Reprod Sci 108, 319–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kathirvel, M, Soundian, E and Kumanan, V (2013). Differential expression dynamics of growth differentiation factor9 (GDF9) and bone morphogenetic factor15 (BMP15) mRNA transcripts during in vitro maturation of buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) cumulus–oocyte complexes. Springerplus 2, 206.10.1186/2193-1801-2-206CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kawamura, K, Sato, N, Fukuda, J, Kodama, H, Kumagai, J, Tanikawa, H, Nakamura, A, Honda, Y, Sato, T and Tanaka, T (2003). Ghrelin inhibits the development of mouse preimplantation embryos in vitro . Endocrinology 144, 2623–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kumar, S and Chauhan, MS (2021). Relative abundance of pluripotency-associated candidate genes in immature oocytes and in vitro produced buffalo embryos (Bubalus bubalis). Zygote 29, 459–67.10.1017/S0967199421000101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, S, Rajput, PK, Bahire, SV, Jyotsana, B, Kumar, V and Kumar, D (2020). Differential expression of BMP/SMAD signaling and ovarian-associated genes in the granulosa cells of FecB introgressed GMM sheep. Syst Biol Reprod Med 66, 185–201.10.1080/19396368.2019.1695977CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, GS, Kim, HS, Hwang, WS and Hyun, SH (2008). Characterization of porcine growth differentiation factor-9 and its expression in oocyte maturation. Mol Reprod Dev 75, 707–14.10.1002/mrd.20810CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Livak, KJ and Schmittgen, TD (2001). Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2−DDCT method. Methods 25, 402–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madan, ML, Das, SK and Palta, P (1996). Application of reproductive technology to buffaloes. Anim Reprod Sci 42, 299–306.10.1016/0378-4320(96)01534-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahesh, YU, Gibence, HR, Shivaji, S and Rao, BS (2017). Effect of different cryo-devices on in vitro maturation and development of vitrified-warmed immature buffalo oocytes. Cryobiology 75, 106–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Niemann, H and Wrenzycki, C (2000). Alterations of expression of developmentally important genes in pre-implantation bovine embryos by in vitro culture conditions: implications for subsequent development. Theriogenology 53, 21–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nover, L and Scharf, KD (1997). Heat stress proteins and transcription factors. Cell Mol Life Sci 53, 80–103.10.1007/PL00000583CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Park, SY, Kim, EY, Jeon, K, Cui, XS, Lee, WD, Kim, NH, Park, SP and Lim, JH (2007). Survivin acts as anti-apoptotic factor during the development of bovine preimplantation embryos. Mol Reprod Dev 74, 582–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pennetier, S, Uzbekova, S, Perreau, C, Papillier, P, Mermillod, P and Dalbies-Tran, R (2004). Spatio-temporal expression of the germ cell marker genes MATER, ZAR1, GDF9, BMP15, and VASA in adult bovine tissues, oocytes, and preimplantation embryos. Biol Reprod 71, 1359–66.10.1095/biolreprod.104.030288CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rajhans, R, Kumar, GS, Dubey, PK, Sharma, G (2010). Effect of timing of development on total cell number and expression profile of HSP-70.1 and GLUT-1 in buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) oocytes and preimplantation embryos produced in vitro. Cell Biol Int 34, 463–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Read, CC, Willhelm, G and Dyce, PW (2018). Connexin 43 coupling in bovine cumulus cells, during the follicular growth phase, and its relationship to in vitro embryo outcomes. Mol Reprod Dev 85, 579–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sadeesh, EM, Selokar, NL, Balhara, AK and Yadav, PS (2016a). Differences in developmental competence and gene expression profiles between buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) preimplantation embryos cultured in three different embryo culture media. Cytotechnology 68, 1973–86.10.1007/s10616-016-0010-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sadeesh, EM, Sikka, P, Balhara, AK and Balhara, S (2016b). Developmental competence and expression profile of genes in buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) oocytes and embryos collected under different environmental stress. Cytotechnology 68, 2271–85.10.1007/s10616-016-0022-yCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shahid, B, Jalalib, S, Khanc, MI, and Shamid, SA (2014). Different methods of oocytes recovery for in vitro maturation in Nili Ravi buffalo’s oocytes. APCBEE Procedia 8, 359–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, GT, Nath, A, Prasad, S, Singhal, S, Singh, N, Gade, NE, Dubey, PK and Saikumar, G (2012). Expression and characterization of constitutive heat shock protein 70.1 (HSPA-1A) gene in in vitro produced and in vivo-derived buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) embryos. Reprod Domest Anim 47, 975–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shimasaki, S, Moore, RK, Otsuka, F and Erickson, GF (2004). The bone morphogenetic protein system in mammalian reproduction. Endocr Rev 25, 72–101.10.1210/er.2003-0007CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wähle, E (1991). A novel poly(A)-binding protein acts as a specificity factor in the second phase of messenger RNA polyadenylation. Cell 66, 759–68. Erratum in: Cell 67, 639.10.1016/0092-8674(91)90119-JCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Watson, AJ, Natale, DR and Barcroft, LC (2004). Molecular regulation of blastocyst formation. Anim Reprod Sci 82–83, 583–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wrenzycki, C, Herrmann, D, Carnwath, JW and Niemann, H (1996). Expression of the gap junction gene connexin 43 (Connexin 43) in pre-implantation bovine embryos derived in vitro or in vivo . J Reprod Fertil 108, 17–24.10.1530/jrf.0.1080017CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wrenzycki, C, Herrmann, D, Carnwath, JW and Niemann, H (1998). Expression of RNA from developmentally important genes in preimplantation bovine embryos produced in TCM supplemented with BSA. J Reprod Fertil 112, 387–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wrenzycki, C, Herrmann, D, Carnwath, JW and Niemann, H (1999). Alterations in the relative abundance of gene transcripts in preimplantation bovine embryos cultured in medium supplemented with either serum or PVA. Mol Reprod Dev 53, 8–18.3.0.CO;2-K>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wrenzycki, C, Herrmann, D, Korsawe, K, Hadeler, KG, Niemann, H (2000). Relative abundance of specific mRNAs in bovine embryos produced in vivo or in vitro employing two different culture systems. Theriogenology 53, 415.Google Scholar
Wrenzycki, C, Herrmann, D and Niemann, H (2007). Messenger RNA in oocytes and embryos in relation to embryo viability. Theriogenology 68, S77–83.10.1016/j.theriogenology.2007.04.028CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed