4.1 Article

Real-time qRT-PCR analysis of EGF receptor in cumulus-oocyte complexes recovered by laparoscopy in hormonally treated goats

期刊

ZYGOTE
卷 19, 期 2, 页码 127-136

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0967199410000225

关键词

Cumulus cells; EGF receptor; Goat; Oocyte; Real-time qRT-PCR

资金

  1. FINEP
  2. CNPq
  3. PNPD/CAPES (Brazil)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ovarian stimulation with exogenous follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) has been used to increase the number of viable oocytes for laparoscopic oocyte recovery (LOR) in goats. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of two FSH protocols for ovarian stimulation in goats on the expression pattern of epidermal growth factor (EGF) receptor (EGFR) in cumulus-oocyte complexes (COCs) recovered by LOR. After real-time qRT-PCR analysis, expression profiles of morphologically graded COCs were compared prior to and after in vitro maturation (IVM) on a FSH protocol basis. The use of a protocol with higher number of FSH injections at a shorter interval resulted in GI/GII COCs with a higher level of EGFR expression in cumulus cells, but not in the oocyte, which was correlated with an elevated meiotic competence following IVM. Based on the maturation profile and EGFR expression patterns observed between groups, the morphological selection of COCs prior to IVM was not a good predictor of oocyte meiotic competence. Therefore, EGFR may be a good candidate marker for indirect prediction of goat oocyte quality. The IVM process of goat COCs increased the EGFR expression in oocytes and cumulus cells, which seemed to be strongly associated with the resumption of meiosis. In summary, differential EGFR expression in goat cumulus cells was associated with the in vivo prematuration process, and in turn, the upregulation in the entire COC was associated with IVM. Cause-and-effect relationships between such increased expression levels, particularly in the oocyte, and oocyte competence itself still need to be further investigated.

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

4.1
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