Comparison of Maturation, Fertilization, Development, and Gene Expression of Mouse Oocytes Grown In Vitro and In Vivo

Abstract

These results showed that in vitro grown oocytes did not have the same developmental capacity as in vivo grown oocytes. We assume that the aberrant expression of maternal-derived genes in the in vitro grown oocytes may cause the poor embryo viability.

Expression of G protein estrogen receptor (GPER) on membrane of mouse oocytes during maturation

“…It has been reported that the expressions of growth differentiation factor-9 (GDF-9) and insulin-like growth factor II (IGF-II) are higher in vivo matured oocytes than in vitro matured oocytes [36]. Our results showed that not only GPER was expressed on oocyte Fig.…”

In vitro follicle growth under non-attachment conditions and decreased FSH levels reduces Lhcgr expression in cumulus cells and promotes oocyte developmental competence

“…Given the fact that competence of oocytes obtained with in vitro techniques is as yet suboptimal when compared to oocytes grown and matured in vivo [3,[5][6][7][8][9], the development of more appropriate in vitro conditions is a prerequisite for obtaining large numbers of competent oocytes in a reproducible manner.…”

Morphology and Aneuploidy of in vitro Matured (IVM) Human Oocytes

“…Possible reasons include suboptimal IVM conditions as well as genetic and epigenetic characteristics of oocytes themselves. In many human and animal 6 to 8-cell IVM embryos, genome activation does not take place (Kim et al 2004;Schramm et al, 2003). This hindered embryo development is thought to be a consequence of disturbed cytoplasmic maturation or asyncronicity between the cytoplasmic and nuclear maturation in the oocyte.…”

“…Reasons for development stagnation could be manifold, ranging from cytoplasmic immaturity and meiotic spindle formation abnormalities (Combelles et al, 2003;Eichenlaub-Ritter et al, 1988;Miyara et al, 2003;Mrazek & Fulka, 2003;Neal et al, 2002;Pickering et al, 1988) to chromatin fragmentation followed by the appearance of micronuclei (Junk et al, 2002). Also, the in vitro cultivation conditions can be sub-optimal (Chian and Tan, 2002;Junk et al, 2002;Trounson et al, 2001) or the intrinsic factors such as abnormal cell cycle control or affected gene regulation can impede proper oocyte development (Combelles et al, 2003;Eichenlaub-Ritter & Peschke, 2002;Kim et al, 2004). For all those reasons, the safe routine clinical use of IVM oocytes is still under debate, since the quality of such oocytes seems low.…”

“…Most research regarding oocyte aneuploidy in ART cycles has been done on oocytes that failed to be fertilized within 24-48 hours after insemination (Anachory et al, 2003;Angell et al, 1991a, Benkhalifa et al, 2003Clyde et al, 2003;Cupisti et al, 2003;Kim et al, 2004;Pellestor et al, 2002Pellestor et al, , 2005Pellestor et al, , 2006. There are great discrepancies on the aneuploidy rate ranging from 8-54 %, which can be a consequence of different stimulation protocols , women age (Kuliev et al, , 2005 Most frequently chromosomes 13, 15, 16, 21, 22 and X are affected in oocytes (Anahory et al, 2003;Benkhalifa et al, 2003;Clyde et al, 2003;Cupisti et al, 2003;Pellestor et al, 2002;Pujol et al, 2003;Sandalinas et al, 2002), which is similar to most affected chromosomes in embryos that include chromosomes 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, X and Y (Abdelhadi et al, 2003;Munne et al, 2003Munne et al, , 2004, supporting the idea that meiosis I is the main source of aneuploidies in human.…”