4.3 Article

The effect of repeated light-dark shifts on uterine receptivity and early gestation in mice undergoing embryo transfer

期刊

SYSTEMS BIOLOGY IN REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE
卷 64, 期 2, 页码 103-111

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/19396368.2017.1408715

关键词

Circadian; embryo transfer; implantation; uterine receptivity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Female shift workers are at increased risk for negative reproductive outcomes, and animal evidence suggests that manipulation of the light-dark cycle is detrimental to early gestation in female mice. Specifically, failure of implantation may be responsible for these findings. The objective of this study was to better delineate which reproductive processes are vulnerable to detrimental effects of maternal circadian disturbance. We exposed mice undergoing embryo transfer to repetitive phase advances of the photoperiod. Embryos were derived from donor sperm and eggs from mice living in normal light-dark conditions to isolate the effects of photoperiod disruption on uterine receptivity and early gestation. Twenty-eight mice receiving embryo transfer underwent an experimental light-dark condition (advance of lights on and lights off by 6 hours every 4 days). Twenty-eight mice remained in a normal light-dark condition. Animals lived in their assigned light-dark condition beginning 2 weeks prior to embryo transfer and ending the day of uterine necropsy (post-coitus day 14.5). Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test demonstrated no significant differences between control and experimental light-dark conditions in pups (Z=0.10, p=.92), resorptions (Z=0.20, p=.84), or implantations (Z=-0.34, p=.73). Pup and placental weights were similar between groups. In this investigation, uterine receptivity and maintenance of early gestation were preserved despite recurrent phase advances in photoperiod. This finding, in the context of the current literature, suggests that the negative effects of circadian disruption are mediated by reproductive processes upstream of implantation.

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

4.3
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