Dynamic blastomere behaviour reflects human embryo ploidy by the four-cell stage

Shawn L. Chavez; Kevin E. Loewke; Jinnuo Han; Farshid Moussavi; Pere Colls; Santiago Munné; Barry Behr; Renee A. Reijo Pera

doi:10.1038/ncomms2249

journal article Dec 04, 2012

Dynamic blastomere behaviour reflects human embryo ploidy by the four-cell stage

Shawn L. Chavez Kevin E. Loewke Jinnuo Han Farshid Moussavi Pere Colls Santiago Munné Barry Behr Renee A. Reijo Pera

Nature Communications Vol. 3 No. 1 · Springer Science and Business Media LLC

View at Publisher Save 10.1038/ncomms2249

Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References

52

[1]

Wong C. et al. Non-invasive imaging of human embryos before embryonic genome activation predicts development to the blastocyst stage. Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 1115–1121 (2010). 10.1038/nbt.1686

[2]

Dobson A. T. et al. The unique transcriptome through day 3 of human preimplantation development. Hum. Mol. Genet. 13, 1461–1470 (2004). 10.1093/hmg/ddh157

[3]

Zhang P. et al. Transcriptome profiling of human preimplantation development. PLoS One 4, e7844 (2009). 10.1371/journal.pone.0007844

[4]

Galan A. et al. Functional genomics of 5- to 8-cell stage human embryos by blastomere single-cell cDNA analysis. PLoS One 5, e13615 (2010). 10.1371/journal.pone.0013615

[5]

Vanneste E. et al. Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos. Nat. Med. 15, 577–583 (2009). 10.1038/nm.1924

[6]

Veeck L. L. et al. Significantly enhanced pregnancy rates per cycle through cryopreservation and thaw of pronuclear stage oocytes. Fertil. Steril. 59, 1202–1207 (1993). 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)55977-9

[7]

Miller K. F. & Goldberg J. M. In vitro development and implantation rates of fresh and cryopreserved sibling zygotes. Obst. Gynecol. 85, 999–1002 (1995). 10.1016/0029-7844(95)00084-5

[8]

El-Toukhy T. et al. Cryo-thawed embryos obtained from conception cycles have double the implantation and pregnancy potential of those from unsuccessful cycles. Hum. Reprod. 18, 1313–1318 (2003). 10.1093/humrep/deg235

[9]

Lightfoot D. A., Kouznetsova A., Mahdy E., Wilbertz J. & Hoog C. The fate of mosaic aneuploid embryos during mouse development. Dev. Biol. 289, 384–394 (2006). 10.1016/j.ydbio.2005.11.001

[10]

Johnson D. S. et al. Preclinical validation of a microarray method for full molecular karyotyping of blastomeres in a 24-h protocol. Hum. Reprod 25, 1066–1075 (2010). 10.1093/humrep/dep452

[11]

Kuo H. C., Ogilvie C. M. & Handyside A. H. Chromosomal mosaicism in cleavage-stage human embryos and the accuracy of single-cell genetic analysis. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 15, 276–280 (1998). 10.1023/a:1022588326219

[12]

Baart E. B. et al. Preimplantation genetic screening reveals a high incidence of aneuploidy and mosaicism in embryos from young women undergoing IVF. Hum. Reprod. 21, 223–233 (2006). 10.1093/humrep/dei291

[13]

Antczak M. & Van Blerkom J. Temporal and spatial aspects of fragmentation in early human embryos: possible effects on developmental competence and association with the differential elimination of regulatory proteins from polarized domains. Hum. Reprod. 14, 429–447 (1999). 10.1093/humrep/14.2.429

[14]

Alikani M. et al. Human embryo fragmentation in vitro and its implications for pregnancy and implantation. Fertil. Steril. 71, 836–842 (1999). 10.1016/s0015-0282(99)00092-8

[15]

Ebner T. et al. Embryo fragmentation in vitro and its impact on treatment and pregnancy outcome. Fertil. Steril. 76, 281–285 (2001). 10.1016/s0015-0282(01)01904-5

[16]

Racowsky C. et al. National collection of embryo morphology data into Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcomes Reporting System: associations among day 3 cell number, fragmentation and blastomere asymmetry, and live birth rate. Fertil. Steril. 95, 1985–1989 (2011). 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.02.009

[17]

Hardy K. et al. From cell death to embryo arrest: mathematical models of human preimplantation embryo development. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 98, 1655–1660 (2001). 10.1073/pnas.98.4.1655

[18]

Spanos S. et al. Caspase activity and expression of cell death genes during development of human preimplantation embryos. Reproduction 124, 353–363 (2002). 10.1530/rep.0.1240353

[19]

Pereda J. & Croxatto H. B. Ultrastructure of a seven-cell human embryo. Biol.Reprod. 18, 481–489 (1978). 10.1095/biolreprod18.3.481

[20]

Buster J. E. et al. Biologic and morphologic development of donated human ova recovered by nonsurgical uterine lavage. Am. J. Obstet. Gyn. 153, 211–217 (1985). 10.1016/0002-9378(85)90116-4

[21]

Pelinck M. J. et al. Embryo quality and impact of specific embryo characteristics on ongoing implantation in unselected embryos derived from modified natural cycle in vitro fertilization. Fertil. Steril. 94, 527–534 (2010). 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.03.076

[22]

Gutierrez-Mateo C. et al. Validation of microarray comparative genomic hybridization for comprehensive chromosome analysis of embryos. Fertil. Steril. 95, 953–958 (2011). 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.09.010

[23]

Munne S., Dailey T., Sultan K. M., Grifo J. & Cohen J. The use of first polar bodies for preimplantation diagnosis of aneuploidy. Hum. Reprod. 10, 1014–1020 (1995). 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136027

[24]

Grifo J. A., Tang Y. X., Munne S. & Krey L. Update in preimplantation genetic diagnosis: successes, advances, and problems. Curr. Opin. Obstet. Gyn. 8, 135–138 (1996).

[25]

Harrison R. H., Kuo H. C., Scriven P. N., Handyside A. H. & Ogilvie C. M. Lack of cell cycle checkpoints in human cleavage stage embryos revealed by a clonal pattern of chromosomal mosaicism analysed by sequential multicolour FISH. Zygote 8, 217–224 (2000). 10.1017/s0967199400001015

[26]

Van Blerkom J., Davis P. & Alexander S. A microscopic and biochemical study of fragmentation phenotypes in stage-appropriate human embryos. Hum. Reprod. 16, 719–729 (2001). 10.1093/humrep/16.4.719

[27]

Hardarson T. et al. Internalization of cellular fragments in a human embryo: time-lapse recordings. Reprod. Biomed. Online 5, 36–38 (2002). 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)61594-5

[28]

Lemmen J. G., Agerholm I. & Ziebe S. Kinetic markers of human embryo quality using time-lapse recordings of IVF/ICSI-fertilized oocytes. Reprod. Biomed. Online. 17, 385–391 (2008). 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60222-2

[29]

Barbash-Hazan S. et al. Preimplantation aneuploid embryos undergo self-correction in correlation with their developmental potential. Fertil. Steril. 92, 890–896 (2009). 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.07.1761

[30]

Munne S. et al. Self-correction of chromosomally abnormal embryos in culture and implications for stem cell production. Fertil. Steril. 84, 1328–1334 (2005). 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.06.025

[31]

Coonen E. et al. Anaphase lagging mainly explains chromosomal mosaicism in human preimplantation embryos. Hum. Reprod. 19, 316–324 (2004). 10.1093/humrep/deh077

[32]

Lieb J. D., Albrecht M. R., Chuang P. T. & Meyer B. J. MIX-1: an essential component of the C. elegans mitotic machinery executes X chromosome dosage compensation. Cell 92, 265–277 (1998). 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)80920-4

[33]

Stear J. H. & Roth M. B. Characterization of HCP-6, a C. elegans protein required to prevent chromosome twisting and merotelic attachment. Genes Dev. 16, 1498–1508 (2002). 10.1101/gad.989102

[34]

ALTERED FIDELITY OF MITOTIC CHROMOSOME TRANSMISSION IN CELL CYCLE MUTANTS OF S. CEREVISIAE

Leland H Hartwell, David Smith

Genetics 1985 10.1093/genetics/110.3.381

[35]

Hartwell L. H., Culotti J., Pringle J. R. & Reid B. J. Genetic control of the cell division cycle in yeast. Science 183, 46–51 (1974). 10.1126/science.183.4120.46

[36]

Albertson D. G. Formation of the first cleavage spindle in nematode embryos. Dev. Biol. 101, 61–72 (1984). 10.1016/0012-1606(84)90117-9

[37]

Gonczy P. et al. Dissection of cell division processes in the one cell stage Caenorhabditis elegans embryo by mutational analysis. J. Cell Biol. 144, 927–946 (1999). 10.1083/jcb.144.5.927

[38]

Abrams E. W. et al. Dynamic assembly of Brambleberry mediates nuclear envelope fusion during early development. Cell 150, 521–532 (2012). 10.1016/j.cell.2012.05.048

[39]

Montag M., Spring H. & Trendelenburg M. F. Structural analysis of the mitotic cycle in pre-gastrula Xenopus embryos. Chromosoma 96, 187–196 (1988). 10.1007/bf00302357

[40]

Fox D. T., Gall J. G. & Spradling A. C. Error-prone polyploid mitosis during normal Drosophila development. Genes Dev. 24, 2294–2302 (2010). 10.1101/gad.1952710

[41]

Mendiburo M. J., Padeken J., Fulop S., Schepers A. & Heun P. Drosophila CENH3 is sufficient for centromere formation. Science 334, 686–690 (2011). 10.1126/science.1206880

[42]

Keltz M., Skorupski J., Bradley K. & Stein D. Predictors of embryo fragmentation and outcome after fragment removal in in vitro fertilization. Fertil. Steril. 86, 321–324 (2006). 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.01.048

[43]

Eftekhari-Yazdi P., Valojerdi M. R., Ashtiani S. K., Eslaminejad M. B. & Karimian L. Effect of fragment removal on blastocyst formation and quality of human embryos. Reprod. Biomed. Online 13, 823–832 (2006). 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)61031-0

[44]

Monk M., Boubelik M. & Lehnert S. Temporal and regional changes in DNA methylation in the embryonic, extraembryonic and germ cell lineages during mouse embryo development. Development 99, 371–382 (1987). 10.1242/dev.99.3.371

[45]

Howlett S. K. & Reik W. Methylation levels of maternal and paternal genomes during preimplantation development. Development 113, 119–127 (1991). 10.1242/dev.113.1.119

[46]

Sanford J. P., Clark H. J., Chapman V. M. & Rossant J. Differences in DNA methylation during oogenesis and spermatogenesis and their persistence during early embryogenesis in the mouse. Genes Dev. 1, 1039–1046 (1987). 10.1101/gad.1.10.1039

[47]

Sathananthan A. H. et al. Centrioles in the beginning of human development. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 88, 4806–4810 (1991). 10.1073/pnas.88.11.4806

[48]

Palermo G., Munne S. & Cohen J. The human zygote inherits its mitotic potential from the male gamete. Hum. Reprod. 9, 1220–1225 (1994). 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a138682

[49]

The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of embryo implantation

M. Meseguer, J. Herrero, A. Tejera et al.

Human Reproduction 2011 10.1093/humrep/der256

[50]

Mamas T., Gordon A., Brown A., Harper J. & Sengupta S. Detection of aneuploidy by array comparative genomic hybridization using cell lines to mimic a mosaic trophectoderm biopsy. Fertil. Steril. 97, 943–947 (2012). 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.12.048

Showing 50 of 52 references

Cited By

275

Time-lapse imaging: Morphokinetic analysis of in vitro fertilization outcomes

Carla Giménez, Laura Conversa · 2023

Fertility and Sterility

Giant cells: Linking McClintock’s heredity to early embryogenesis and tumor origin throughout millennia of evolution on Earth

Jinsong Liu · 2022

Seminars in Cancer Biology

Genome maintenance during embryogenesis

Mumingjiang Munisha, John C. Schimenti · 2021

DNA Repair

Time-lapse technology for embryo culture and selection

Kersti Lundin, Hannah Park · 2020

Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences

Unbalanced human embryos secrete more hyperglycosylated human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG-H) than balanced ones

Dimitar Parvanov, Dragomira Nikolova · 2020

Journal of Assisted Reproduction an...

The dualistic origin of human tumors

Jinsong Liu · 2018

Seminars in Cancer Biology

Dedifferentiation into blastomere-like cancer stem cells via formation of polyploid giant cancer cells

N Niu, I Mercado-Uribe · 2017

Oncogene

Time lapse imaging: is it time to incorporate this technology into routine clinical practice?

Priya Bhide, Abha Maheshwari · 2017

Human Fertility

Prediction model for aneuploidy in early human embryo development revealed by single-cell analysis

Maria Vera-Rodriguez, Shawn L. Chavez · 2015

Nature Communications

Intrinsic retroviral reactivation in human preimplantation embryos and pluripotent cells

Edward J. Grow, Ryan A. Flynn · 2015

Nature

Metrics

275

Citations

52

References

Details

Published: Dec 04, 2012
Vol/Issue: 3(1)
License: View

Authors

Cite This Article

Shawn L. Chavez, Kevin E. Loewke, Jinnuo Han, et al. (2012). Dynamic blastomere behaviour reflects human embryo ploidy by the four-cell stage. Nature Communications, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2249

Dynamic blastomere behaviour reflects human embryo ploidy by the four-cell stage

You May Also Like