The Incidence of DNA Double-Strand Breaks Is Higher in Late-Cleaving and Less Developmentally Competent Porcine Embryos1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies in different species, including human, mice, bovine, and swine, demonstrated that early-cleaving embryos have higher capacity to develop to the blastocyst stage and produce better quality embryos with superior capacity to establish pregnancy than late-cleaving embryos. It has also been shown that experimentally induced DNA damage delays embryo cleavage kinetics and reduces blastocyst formation. To gain additional insights into the effects of genome damage on embryo cleavage kinetics and development, the present study compared the occurrence of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) with the expression profile of genes involved in DNA repair and cell cycle control between early- and late-cleaving embryos. Porcine oocytes matured in vitro were activated, and then early-cleaving (before 24 h) and late-cleaving (between 24 and 48 h) embryos were identified and cultured separately. Developing embryos, on Days 3, 5, and 7, were used to evaluate the total cell number and presence of DSBs (by counting the number of immunofluorescent foci for phosphorylated histone H2A.x [H2AX139ph] and RAD51 proteins) and to quantify transcripts of genes involved in DNA repair and cell cycle control by quantitative RT-PCR. Early-cleaving embryos had fewer DSBs, lower transcript levels for genes encoding DNA repair and cell cycle checkpoint proteins, and more cells than late-cleaving embryos. Interestingly, at the blastocyst stage, embryos that developed from early- and late-cleaving groups had similar number of DSBs as well as transcript levels of genes induced by DNA damage. This indicates that only embryos with less DNA damage and/or superior capacity for DNA repair are able to progress to the blastocyst stage. Collectively, findings in this study revealed a negative correlation between the occurrence of DSBs and embryo cleavage kinetics and embryo developmental capacity to the blastocyst stage.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".