Selected Amino Acids Promote Mouse Pre-implantation Embryo Development in a Growth Factor-Like Manner.
L-Glutamine
L-Proline
amino acids
blastocyst development
hatching
low-density culture
pre-implantation embryo
Journal
Frontiers in physiology
ISSN: 1664-042X
Titre abrégé: Front Physiol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101549006
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
07
08
2019
accepted:
11
02
2020
entrez:
27
3
2020
pubmed:
27
3
2020
medline:
27
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Groups of amino acids, and some selected amino acids, added to media used for culture of pre-implantation embryos have previously been shown to improve development in various ways including survival to the blastocyst stage, increased blastocyst cell number and improved hatching. In this study, we cultured 1-cell mouse embryos for 5 days to the hatching blastocyst stage in isosmotic medium (270 mOsm/kg) at high density (10 embryos/10 μL), where autocrine/paracrine support of development occurs, and low density (1 embryo/100 μL), where autocrine/paracrine support is minimized and development is compromised. When 400 μM L-Pro or 1 mM L-Gln was added to embryos at low density, the percentage of embryos reaching the blastocyst stage and the percentage hatching increased compared to low-density culture without these amino acids, and were now similar to those for embryos cultured at high density without amino acids. When L-Pro or L-Gln was added to embryos at high density, the percentage of embryos reaching the blastocyst stage didn't change but hatching improved. Neither embryo culture density nor the presence of these amino acids had any effect on blastocyst cell number. D-Pro and the osmolytes Gly and Betaine did not improve embryo development in low- or high-density culture indicating the mechanism was stereospecific and not osmotic, respectively. L-Pro- and L-Gln-mediated improvement in development is observed from the 5-cell stage and persists to the blastocyst stage. Molar excess of Gly, Betaine or L-Leu over L-Pro eliminated improvement in development and hatching consistent with them acting as competitive inhibitors of transporter-mediated uptake across the plasma membrane. The L-Pro effect is dependent on mTORC1 signaling (rapamycin sensitive) while that for L-Gln is not. The addition of L-Pro leads to significant nuclear translocation of p-Akt
Identifiants
pubmed: 32210831
doi: 10.3389/fphys.2020.00140
pmc: PMC7076138
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
140Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Morris, Ozsoy, Zada, Zada, Zamfirescu, Todorova and Day.
Références
Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2011 Jun;300(6):C1270-9
pubmed: 21346154
Reprod Biomed Online. 2004 Jul;9(1):59-69
pubmed: 15257821
Biol Reprod. 1987 Feb;36(1):125-9
pubmed: 3567272
Amino Acids. 2013 Apr;44(4):1107-13
pubmed: 23247926
Mol Cell Biol. 2004 Aug;24(15):6710-8
pubmed: 15254238
J Reprod Fertil. 1989 Jul;86(2):679-88
pubmed: 2760894
Cell Cycle. 2015;14(20):3292-305
pubmed: 26375799
Biol Reprod. 1999 Sep;61(3):731-40
pubmed: 10456851
Biochem J. 2005 Aug 1;389(Pt 3):745-51
pubmed: 15804236
Biol Reprod. 1994 May;50(5):1027-33
pubmed: 8025158
Hum Reprod Update. 2003 Nov-Dec;9(6):557-82
pubmed: 14714592
J Assist Reprod Genet. 1995 Feb;12(2):97-105
pubmed: 7670281
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2001 Sep;18(9):519-25
pubmed: 11665668
Amino Acids. 2013 Sep;45(3):407-11
pubmed: 23595206
Reprod Biomed Online. 2003 Jun;6(4):470-81
pubmed: 12831597
Biol Reprod. 1997 Jan;56(1):229-37
pubmed: 9002654
Theriogenology. 2001 Jun 1;55(9):1907-18
pubmed: 11414495
Biol Reprod. 2009 Oct;81(4):759-67
pubmed: 19553604
Biol Reprod. 2009 Dec;81(6):1041-54
pubmed: 19605782
Methods Mol Biol. 2019;2029:273-285
pubmed: 31273749
J Assist Reprod Genet. 1997 Aug;14(7):398-403
pubmed: 9285325
J Mol Cell Biol. 2011 Apr;3(2):108-22
pubmed: 21307025
Stem Cell Reports. 2013 Oct 10;1(4):307-21
pubmed: 24319666
Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2010 May;298(5):C982-92
pubmed: 20164384
Mol Reprod Dev. 1995 Jun;41(2):232-8
pubmed: 7654376
Br J Pharmacol. 2012 Sep;167(2):256-78
pubmed: 22519513
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Nov 25;100(24):13982-7
pubmed: 14615585
Biol Reprod. 2009 Feb;80(2):286-94
pubmed: 18923161
J Cell Physiol. 2007 Jan;210(1):266-77
pubmed: 17044075
Int J Dev Biol. 2013;57(11-12):837-44
pubmed: 24623075
Curr Top Dev Biol. 2001;52:55-106
pubmed: 11529430
Development. 2008 Dec;135(24):4123-30
pubmed: 19029042
Front Physiol. 2019 Jul 11;10:705
pubmed: 31354503
Biol Reprod. 1995 Jan;52(1):96-104
pubmed: 7711189
Hum Reprod. 2015 Apr;30(4):917-24
pubmed: 25697730
Biol Reprod. 2007 Nov;77(5):813-21
pubmed: 17634444
Theriogenology. 2006 Jul 15;66(2):404-14
pubmed: 16420958
Cell Death Differ. 2015 Jul;22(7):1094-105
pubmed: 25857264
Mol Cell Biol. 2004 Nov;24(21):9508-16
pubmed: 15485918
Biochim Biophys Acta. 1988 Jun 22;941(2):241-56
pubmed: 2454661
Nature. 2015 Feb 19;518(7539):413-6
pubmed: 25487152
Biol Reprod. 2001 Jan;64(1):1-12
pubmed: 11133652
Hum Reprod. 1992 Apr;7(4):558-62
pubmed: 1522203
Mol Reprod Dev. 1990 Jan;25(1):45-51
pubmed: 2393584
Biol Reprod. 1993 Feb;48(2):377-85
pubmed: 8439627
Hum Reprod Update. 2010 Mar-Apr;16(2):166-76
pubmed: 19825850