4.5 Article

Cdk1, but not Cdk2, is the sole Cdk that is essential and sufficient to drive resumption of meiosis in mouse oocytes

期刊

HUMAN MOLECULAR GENETICS
卷 21, 期 11, 页码 2476-2484

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/hmg/dds061

关键词

-

资金

  1. Jane Foundation, Gothenburg, Sweden
  2. Dan Olssons Foundation, Gothenburg, Sweden
  3. LUA/ALF-medel Vastra Gotalandsregionen, Sweden
  4. Swedish Research Council
  5. Swedish Cancer Foundation
  6. Faculty of Natural Sciences
  7. University of Gothenburg, Sweden
  8. Torsten and Ragnar Soderberg Foundation, Sweden
  9. Novo Nordisk Foundation, Denmark
  10. Stiftelsen J.C. Kempes Minnes Stipendiefond

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mammalian oocytes are arrested at the prophase of meiosis I during fetal or postnatal development, and the meiosis is resumed by the preovulatory surge of luteinizing hormone. The in vivo functional roles of cyclin-dependent kinases (Cdks) during the resumption of meiosis in mammalian oocytes are largely unknown. Previous studies have shown that deletions of Cdk3, Cdk4 or Cdk6 in mice result in viable animals with normal oocyte maturation, indicating that these Cdks are not essential for the meiotic maturation of oocytes. In addition, conventional knockout of Cdk1 and Cdk2 leads to embryonic lethality and postnatal follicular depletion, respectively, making it impossible to study the functions of Cdk1 and Cdk2 in oocyte meiosis. In this study, we generated conditional knockout mice with oocyte-specific deletions of Cdk1 and Cdk2. We showed that the lack of Cdk1, but not of Cdk2, leads to female infertility due to a failure of the resumption of meiosis in the oocyte. Re-introduction of Cdk1 mRNA into Cdk1-null oocytes largely resumed meiosis. Thus, Cdk1 is the sole Cdk that is essential and sufficient to drive resumption of meiosis in mouse oocytes. We also found that Cdk1 maintains the phosphorylation status of protein phosphatase 1 and lamin A/C in oocytes in order for meiosis resumption to occur.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据