Comparison of the development of mouse embryos manipulatedwith different biopsy techniques

Comparison of the development of mouse embryos manipulatedwith different biopsy techniques

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis is the detection of inherited diseases and the sex of embryos before implantation in the practice of human medicine as well as in veterinary medicine. The introduction of experimental animal embryo biopsy techniques has been a milestone in the developmental process of preimplantation genetic diagnosis techniques. The aim of the present study was to evaluate in vivo and in vitro development of embryos after biopsy in an experimental mouse model and to perform comparisons across different biopsy techniques (blastomere biopsy and trophectoderm biopsy). At the end of the study, no significant difference was observed between the blastomere biopsy group and the control group in terms of in vitro development, embryo quality, and fetal development, whereas embryo quality and in vivo development were negatively affected in the trophectoderm biopsy group (P< 0.05).

___

  • 1. Handyside AH, Delhanty JDA. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: strategies and surprises. Trends Genet 1997; 13: 270–275.
  • 2. Tarkowski AK. Experiments on the development of isolated blastomeres of mouse eggs. Nature 1959; 184: 1286–1287.
  • 3. Gardner RL, Edwards RG. Control of the sex ratio at full term in the rabbit by transferring sexed blastocysts. Nature 1968; 218: 346–348.
  • 4. Willadsen SM. The viability of early cleavage stages containing half the normal number of blastomeres in the sheep. J Reprod Fertil 1980; 59: 57–62.
  • 5. Santalo ET, Grossmann M, Egozcue J. Does Ca2+/Mg2+-free medium have an effect on the survival of the preimplantation mouse embryo after biopsy? Hum Reprod Update 1996; 2: 257–261.
  • 6. Illmensee K, Kaskar K, Zavos P. In-vitro blastocyst development from serially split mouse embryos and future implications for human ART. Fertil Steril 2006; 86: 1112–1120.
  • 7. Mitalipov SM, Yeoman RR, Kuo HC, Wolf DP. Monozygotic twinning in rhesus monkeys by manipulation of in vitro-derived embryos. Biol Reprod 2002; 66: 1449–1455.
  • 8. Peippo J, Viitala S, Virta J, Räty M, Tammiranta N, Lamminen T, Vilkki J. Birth of correctly genotyped calves after multiplex marker detection from bovine embryo microblade biopsies. Mol Reprod Dev 2007; 74: 1373–1378.
  • 9. Wang Z, Trounson A, Dziadek M. Developmental capacity of mechanically bisected mouse morulae and blastocysts. Reprod Fert Develop 1990; 2: 683–691.
  • 10. Nagashima H, Matsui K, Sawasaki T, Kano Y. Production of monozygotic mouse twins from microsurgically bisected morulae. Reprod Fert Develop 1984; 70: 357–362.
  • 11. Cenariu M, Pall E, Cernea C, Groza I. Evaluation of bovine embryo biopsy techniques according to their ability to preserve embryo viability. J Biomed Biotechnol 2012; 2012: 541384.
  • 12. Bredbacka P, Kankaanpää A, Peippo J. PCR-sexing of bovine embryos: a simplified protocol. Theriogenology 1995; 44: 167–176.
  • 13. Bagis H, Akkoc T, Taskin C, Arat S. Comparison of different cryopreservation techniques: higher survival and implantation rate of frozen-thawed mouse pronuclear embryos in the presence of beta-mercaptoethanol in post-thaw culture. Reprod Domest Anim 2010; 45: 332–337.
  • 14. Krzyminska UB, Lutjen JO, Neil C. Assessment of the viability and pregnancy potential of mouse embryos biopsied at different preimplantation stages of development. Hum Reprod 1990; 5: 203–208.
  • 15. Parks JC, McCallie BR, Janesch AM, Schoolcraft WB, Katz-Jaffe MG. Blastocyst gene expression correlates with implantation potential. Fertil Steril 2010; 95: 1367–1372.
  • 16. Rall WF. Factors affecting the survival of mouse embryos. Cryobiology 1987; 24: 387–402.
  • 17. Wilton LJ, Trounson AO. Biopsy of preimplantation mouse embryos: development of micromanipulated embryos and proliferation of single blastomeres in-vitro. Biol Reprod 1989; 40: 145–152.
  • 18. Bodo S, Baranyai B, Gocza E, Dohy J, Markkula M. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis in cattle: a review. Acta Vet Hung 2001; 49: 99–109.
  • 19. Park JH, Lee JH, Choi KM, Joung SY, Kim JY, Chung GM, Jin DI, Im KS. Rapid sexing of preimplantation bovine embryo using consecutive and multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with biopsied single blastomere. Theriogenology 2001; 55: 1843–1853.
  • 20. Summers PM, Campbell JM, Miller MW. Normal in-vivo development of marmoset monkey embryos after trophectoderm biopsy. Hum Reprod 1988; 3: 389–393.
  • 21. Carson SA, Gentry WL, Smith AL, Buster JE. Trophectoderm microbiopsy in murine blastocysts: comparison of four methods. J Assist Reprod Gen 1993; 10: 427–433.
  • 22. Dokras A, Sargent IL, Ross C, Gardner RL. Barlow DH. Trophectoderm biopsy in human blastocysts. Hum Reprod 1990; 5: 821–825.
  • 23. McArthur SJ, Leigh D, Marshall JT, De Boer KA, Jansen RP. Pregnancies and live births after trophectoderm biopsy and preimplantation genetic testing of human blastocysts. Fertil Steril 2005; 84: 1628–1636.