In mammals, the sperm deliver mRNA of unknown function into the oocytes during fertilization. The role of sperm microRNAs (miRNAs) in preimplantation development is unknown. miRNA profiling identified six miRNAs expressed in the sperm and the zygotes but not in the oocytes or preimplantation embryos. Sperm contained both the precursor and the mature form of one of these miRNAs, miR-34c. The absence of an increased level of miR-34c in zygotes derived from α-amanitin-treated oocytes and in parthenogenetic oocytes supported a sperm origin of zygotic miR-34c. Injection of miR-34c inhibitor into zygotes inhibited DNA synthesis and significantly suppressed first cleavage division. A 3′ UTR luciferase assay and Western blotting demonstrated that miR-34c regulates B-cell leukemia/lymphoma 2 (Bcl-2) expression in the zygotes. Coinjection of anti-Bcl-2 antibody in zygotes partially reversed but injection of Bcl-2 protein mimicked the effect of miR-34c inhibition. Oocyte activation is essential for the miR-34c action in zygotes, as demonstrated by a decrease in 3′ UTR luciferase reporter activity and Bcl-2 expression after injection of precursor miR-34c into parthenogenetic oocytes. Our findings provide evidence that sperm-borne miR-34c is important for the first cell division via modulation of Bcl-2 expression.

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small non-coding RNAs that regulate the expression of other genes by transcriptional inhibition or translational repression. miR-34a is a known tumor suppressor gene and inhibits abnormal cell growth. However, its role in other tumorigenic processes is not fully known. This study aimed to investigate the action of miR-34a on cell invasion. We found that miR-34a is expressed at various levels in cervical cancer (HeLa, SiHa, C4I, C33a and CaSki) and trophoblast (BeWo and JAR) cell lines. Transient forced expression of miR-34a did not affect the proliferation of these cell lines. Computational miRNA target prediction suggested that Notch1 and Jagged1 were targets of miR-34a. By using functional assays, miR-34a was demonstrated to bind to the 3' untranslated regions of Notch1 and Jagged1. Forced expression of miR-34a altered the expression of Notch1 and Jagged1 protein as well as Notch signaling as shown by the response of Hairy Enhancer of Split-1 protein to these treatments using western blot analysis. Forced expression of miR-34a suppressed the invasiveness of HeLa and JAR cells. By using gamma-secretase inhibitor (N-[N-(3,5-difluorophenacetyl)-l-alanyl]-S-phenylglycine t-butyl ester) that interfered Notch signaling and RNA interference that knockdown Notch1 expression, we confirmed that downregulation of Notch1 reduced the invasiveness of the cells. Transfection of intracellular domain of Notch nullifies the effect of miR-34a on the invasiveness of the cells. Besides, we identified that miR-34a affected cell invasion by regulating expression of urokinase plasminogen activator through Notch. Our results provide evidence that miR-34a inhibits invasiveness through regulation of the Notch pathway and its downstream matrix degrading enzyme.

Problem In mammals, implantation involves interactions between an activated blastocyst and a receptive endometrium. There are controversies on the role of microRNAs in preimplantation embryo development. The actions of endometrial microRNAs on implantation are beginning to be understood. Method of Study Review of literature on microRNAs in preimplantation embryos and endometrium. Results Emerging evidence suggests a role of microRNAs in blastocyst activation and implantation. Differential expression of microRNAs is found between receptive and non‐receptive endometria. Members of the let‐7, miR‐200, miR‐30 families, and the miR‐17‐92 clusters are more commonly found to be associated with endometrial receptivity. Experimental studies show that the targets of the differentially expressed microRNAs affect endometrial receptivity, decidualization, and embryo implantation. Free and exosome/microvesicle containing microRNAs have been detected in human and ovine uterine luminal fluid (ULF). They may serve as mediators of embryo–endometrium dialog. Some observations suggest that the microRNAs in ULF may be used as biomarkers in infertility treatment. Conclusion MicroRNAs in endometrium and blastocysts are involved in the implantation process.

MicroRNAs interact with multiple mRNAs resulting in their degradation and/or translational repression. This report used the delayed implantation model to determine the role of miRNAs in blastocysts. Dormant blastocysts in delayed implanting mice were activated by estradiol. Differential expression of 45 out of 238 miRNAs examined was found between the dormant and the activated blastocysts. Five of the nine members of the microRNA lethal-7 (let-7) family were down-regulated after activation. Human blastocysts also had a low expression of let-7 family. Forced-expression of a family member, let-7a in mouse blastocysts decreased the number of implantation sites (let-7a: 1.1±0.4; control: 3.8±0.4) in vivo, and reduced the percentages of blastocyst that attached (let-7a: 42.0±8.3%; control: 79.0±5.1%) and spreaded (let-7a: 33.5±2.9%; control: 67.3±3.8%) on fibronectin in vitro. Integrin-β3, a known implantation-related molecule, was demonstrated to be a target of let-7a by 3′-untranslated region reporter assay in cervical cancer cells HeLa, and Western blotting in mouse blastocysts. The inhibitory effect of forced-expression of let-7a on blastocyst attachment and outgrowth was partially nullified in vitro and in vivo by forced-expression of integrin-β3. This study provides the first direct evidence that let-7a is involved in regulating the implantation process partly via modulation of the expression of integrin-β3. (200 words).

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are membrane-bound vesicles released by cells and act as media for transfer of proteins, small RNAs and mRNAs to distant sites. They can be isolated by different methods. However, the biological activities of the purified EVs have seldom been studied. In this study, we compared the use of ultracentrifugation (UC), ultra-filtration (UF), polymer-based precipitation (PBP), and PBP with size-based purification (PBP+SP) for isolation of EVs from human endometrial cells and mouse uterine luminal fluid (ULF). Electron microscopy revealed that the diameters of the isolated EVs were similar among the tested methods. UF recovered the highest number of EVs followed by PBP, while UC and PBP+SP were significantly less efficient (P<0.05). Based on the number of EVs-to-protein ratios, PBP had the least protein contamination, significantly better than the other methods (P<0.05). All the isolated EVs expressed exosome-enriched proteins CD63, TSG101 and HSP70. Incubation of the trophoblast JEG-3 cells with an equal amount of the fluorescence-labelled EVs isolated by the studied methods showed that many of the PBP-EVs treated cells were fluorescence positive but only a few cells were labelled in the UC- and UF-EVs treated groups. Moreover, the PBP-EVs could transfer significantly more miRNA to the recipient cells than the other 3 methods (P<0.05). The PBP method could isolate EVs from mouse ULF; the diameter of the isolated EVs was 62±19 nm and expressed CD63, TSG101 and HSP70 proteins. In conclusion, PBP could best preserve the activities of the isolated EVs among the 4 methods studied and was able to isolate EVs from a small volume of sample. The simple setup and low equipment demands makes PBP the most suitable method for rapid EV assessment and isolation of EVs in clinical and basic research settings.