MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1929349603 · doi:10.1093/biolreprod/85.s1.696

Bone Morphogenetic Protein 15 (BMP15) and Fibroblast Growth Factor 10 (FGF10) Stimulate Cumulus Expansion and Differently Regulate Transcription of Expansion Inducing Genes in Bovine Cumulus Cells.

2011· article· en· W1929349603 on OpenAlexaff
Ester Siqueira Caixeta, Mariana Fernandes Machado, P. F. Lima, A. C. S. Castilho, Rúbia Bueno da Silva, Christopher A. Price, J. Buratini

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of Reproduction · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBioenergy crop production and management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyFGF10Bone morphogenetic protein 15Bone morphogenetic proteinCell biologyBone morphogenetic protein 4Transcription factorBone morphogenetic protein 7GeneGeneticsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The oocyte actively participates in the regulatory mechanisms of cumulus-oocyte complex (COC) maturation via secretion of paracrine factors. BMP15 and FGF10 were localized to the oocyte and improved blastocyst rates following IVM/IVF in cattle. In this study we tested the hypotheses that FGF10 and BMP15 would enhance cumulus expansion and that the mechanisms would include the transcriptional control of epidermal growth factor (EGF)-like family members [amphiregulin (AREG), epiregulin (EREG) and betacellulin (BTC)] and of major expansion-inducing genes [cyclooxygenase 2 (COX2), hyaluronan synthase 2 (HAS2), pentraxin 3 (PTX3), tumor necrosis factor-stimulated gene-6 protein (TSG6)]. Immature COCs (grades 1 and 2) were obtained from 2-8 mm follicles from abattoir ovaries. Groups of 20 COCs were matured for 4, 12, and 22 hours with grading doses of FGF10 (0, 0.5, 10 and 50 ng/ml; n=4) or BMP15 (0, 10, 50 and 100 ng/ml; n=4). After culture for 22 hours, cumulus expansion was visually assessed (grades 1, 2 and 3). To assess of treatments on gene expression, cumulus cells were mechanically separated from COCs after 4, 12 and 22 hours of culture and stored at -80°C. Total RNA was extracted using RNeasy (Qiagen), and 100 ng of RNA was reverse-transcribed. Expression of target genes was assessed by real time RT-PCR and normalized by cyclophilin (CYC-A) expression. Relative mRNA abundance was determined by the Pfaffl equation. Effects of FGF10 and BMP15 treatment were tested by ANOVA and groups were compared by Tukey-Kramer HSD test. Non parametric analysis was used when data were not normally distributed. Both FGF10 (10 ng/ml) and BMP15 (100ng/ml) increased the proportion of COC with fully expanded cumulus (grade 3). FGF10 did not affect the expression of EGF-like family members, but at 10 ng/ml stimulated mRNA abundance of COX2 (4 and 12 hours), PTX3 (12 and 22 hours) and TSG6 (22 hours). In contrast, BMP15 (100 ng/ml) increased mRNA expression of AREG and EREG from 12 hours of culture, before stimulating the expression of COX2, PTX3 and TSG6 at 22 hours of culture. HAS2 mRNA expression was stimulated by BMP15 treatment (100 ng/ml) only at 12 hours of culture in association with the onset of AREG and EREG upregulation. In conclusion, both FGF10 and BMP15 enhanced cumulus expansion in cattle, but induced different gene expression patterns in cumulus cells. While FGF10 increased COX2 promptly and PTX3/TSG6 subsequently without altering AREG and EREG, the increases in COX2, PTX3, TSG6, HAS2 expression induced by BMP15 were observed only after or in association with the increase in AREG and EREG expression. This observation suggests the BMP15 stimulates the expression of expansion-inducing genes via the EGF-like family members, while FGF10 appears to act upon more directly pathways.Supported by FAPESP. (poster)

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.177 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology of ReproductionSame topicBioenergy crop production and managementFrench-language works237,207