Free Standard AU & NZ Shipping For All Book Orders Over $80!
Register      Login
Reproduction, Fertility and Development Reproduction, Fertility and Development Society
Vertebrate reproductive science and technology
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > RD > RD06129
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 19(1)

Embryo culture and long-term consequences

Jeremy G. Thompson A B , Megan Mitchell A and Karen L. Kind A
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Research Centre for Reproductive Health, School of Paediatrics and Reproductive Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.

B Corresponding author. Email: jeremy.thompson@adelaide.edu.au

Reproduction, Fertility and Development 19(1) 43-52 https://doi.org/10.1071/RD06129
Published: 12 December 2006

Abstract

The development of pre-elongation (ruminants) and preimplantation (e.g. mouse and humans) embryos ex vivo has evolved over the past four decades into a reliable technology that is used as a research tool in developmental biology, as well as other embryo technologies, for application in infertility treatment, species conservation and selective breeding. It is clear from a variety of embryo culture studies that adaptive responses by embryos during culture can lead to significant alterations in subsequent developmental profiles, the mechanisms of which are not entirely clear but are unlikely to be limited to a single mechanism because this does not account for the variability seen in responses and the emerging list of specific cellular stressors that cause long-term deviations in fetal development. Epigenetic mechanisms, especially deviation of methylation patterns, and adaptation via causal pathways linking gene expression signalling with critical developmental time points, especially of placental development, are two candidates. Observational studies on post-transfer consequences must now be designed so that specific candidate pathways are followed to elucidate their role in perturbed development following transfer.


Acknowledgments

National Institute of Health grant (U01 HD044664) supports JGT and KLK. A National Health and Medical Research Programme grant (250306) also supports JGT.


References

Abramczuk, J. , Solter, D. , and Koprowski, H. (1977). The beneficial effect of EDTA on development of mouse one-cell embryos in chemically defined medium. Dev. Biol. 61, 378–383.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | Berg D., Beaumont S., Thompson J., Phung H., and Dunlop J. (2002). Exogenous protein reduces ammonium ion flux from in-vitro produced bovine blastocysts. In ‘Proceedings of the 35th Society for Reproduction Annual Meeting’. p. 133. (Allen Press: Baltimore, MD.)

Bertolini, M. , Mason, J. B. , Beam, S. W. , Carneiro, G. F. , Sween, M. L. , Kominek, D. J. , Moyer, A. L. , Famula, T. R. , Sainz, R. D. , and Anderson, G. B. (2002). Morphology and morphometry of in vivo- and in vitro-produced bovine concepti from early pregnancy to term and association with high birth weights. Theriogenology 58, 973–994.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | Biggers J. D., Whitten W. K., and Whittingham D. G. (1971). The culture of mouse embryos in vitro. In ‘Methods of Mammalian Embryology’. (Eds J. C. Daniel, Jr and W. H. Freeman.) pp. 86–116. (WH Freeman & Co.: San Francisco.)

Biggers, J. D. , McGinnis, L. K. , and Lawitts, J. A. (2005). One-step versus two-step culture of mouse preimplantation embryos: is there a difference? Hum. Reprod. 20, 3376–3384.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | Gardner D. K. (1998). Embryo development and culture techniques. In ‘Animal Breeding. Technology for the 21st Century’. (Ed. A. J. Clark.) pp.13–46. (Harwood Academic Publishers: Amsterdam.)

Gardner, D. K. , and Lane, M. (1993). Amino acids and ammonium regulate mouse embryo development in culture. Biol. Reprod. 48, 377–385.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | Hartwich K. M., Robinson J. S., and Walker S. K. (2000). Foetal outcome following the exposure of ovine embryos to high ammonium concentrations in vitro. In ‘31st Proceedings of the Australian Society for Reproductive Biology’. p. 67. (ASRB: Canberra.)

Hemberger, M. , and Cross, J. C. (2001). Genes governing placental development. Trends Endocrinol. Metab. 12, 162–168.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | Quinn P., Warnes G. M., Walker S. K., and Seamark R. F. (1984). Culture of preimplantation sheep and goat embryos. In ‘Reproduction in Sheep’. (Eds D. R. Lindsay and D. T. Pearce.) pp. 289–290. (Australian Academy of Science and Wool Corporation: Canberra.)

Rinaudo, P. , and Schultz, R. M. (2004). Effects of embryo culture on global pattern of gene expression in preimplantation mouse embryos. Reproduction 128, 301–311.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | Thompson J. G., Peterson A. J., and McMillan W. H. (2000b). Bovine embryo production in vitro: new redevelopments and post-transfer consequences. In ‘Cloned Animal and Placentation’. (Eds R. M. Roberts, R. Yanagimachi, T. Kariya and K. Hashizume.) pp. 18–22. (Yokendo: Tokyo.)

Thompson, J. G. , Kind, K. L. , Roberts, C. T. , Robertson, S. A. , and Robinson, J. S. (2002). Epigenetic risks related to assisted reproductive technologies: Short- and long-term consequences for the health of children conceived through assisted reproduction technology: more reason for caution? Hum. Reprod. 17, 2783–2786.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed | Walker S. K., Heard T. M., Bee C. A., Frensham A. B., Warnes D. M., and Seamark R. F. (1992a). Culture of embryos from farm animals. In ‘Embryonic Development and Manipulation in Animal Production’. (Eds A. Lauria and F. Gandolfi.) pp. 77–92. (Portland Press: London.)

Walker, S. K. , Heard, T. M. , and Seamark, R. F. (1992b). In-vitro culture of sheep embryos without co-culture: successes and perspectives. Theriogenology 37, 111–126.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Walker, S. K. , Hartwich, K. M. , and Seamark, R. F. (1996). The production of unusually large offspring following embryo manipulation: concepts and challenges. Theriogenology 45, 111–120.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Wang, S. , Cowan, C. A. , Chipperfield, H. , and Powers, R. D. (2005). Gene expression in the preimplantation embryo: in-vitro developmental changes. Reprod. Biomed. Online 10, 607–616.
| PubMed |

Whitten, W. K. , and Biggers, J. D. (1968). Complete development in-vitro of the preimplantation stages of the mouse in a simple chemically defined medium. J. Reprod. Fertil. 17, 399–401.
| PubMed |

Whittingham, D. G. (1971). Culture of mouse ova. J. Reprod. Fertil. Suppl. 14, 7–21.
| PubMed |

Wrenzycki, C. , Herrman, D. , Carnwarth, J. W. , 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.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

Wrenzycki, C. , Herrmann, D. , Keskintepe, L. , Martins, A. , Sirisathien, S. , Brackett, B. , and Niemann, H. (2001). Effects of culture system and protein supplementation on mRNA expression in pre-implantation bovine embryos. Hum. Reprod. 16, 893–901.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

Wright, R. W. , and Bondioli, K. R. (1981). Aspects of in-vitro fertilisation and embryo culture in domestic animals. J. Anim. Sci. 53, 702–729.
| PubMed |

Young, L. E. , Sinclair, K. D. , and Wilmut, I. (1998). Large offspring syndrome in cattle and sheep. Rev. Reprod. 3, 155–163.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

Young, L. E. , Fernandes, K. , McEvoy, T. G. , Butterwith, S. C. , Gutierrez, C. G. , Carolan, C. , Broadbent, P. J. , Robinson, J. J. , Wilmut, I. , and Sinclair, K. D. (2001). Epigenetic change in IGF2R is associated with fetal overgrowth after sheep embryo culture. Nat. Genet. 27, 153–154.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |

Zander, D. L. , Thompson, J. G. , and Lane, M. (2006). Perturbations in mouse embryo development and viability caused by ammonium are more severe after exposure at the cleavage stages. Biol. Reprod. 74, 288–294.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |