MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596390096 · doi:10.1093/biolreprod/83.s1.248

Comparative Gene Expression Profiling of In Vivo-Derived Expanded and Hatched Porcine Blastocyst-Stage Embryos.

2010· article· en· W2596390096 on OpenAlexaff
Chi Zhou, Stephen Tsoi, Susan Novak, Jason R. Grant, Walter T. Dixon, G. R. Foxcroft, Michael K. Dyck

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of Reproduction · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyBlastocystEmbryoGene expression profilingMicroarrayMicroarray analysis techniquesInner cell massGeneGene expressionAndrologyGeneticsEmbryogenesisEmbryonic stem cellTranscriptomeCell biologyMolecular biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the pre-implantation period of embryonic development, the mammalian embryo exhibits dramatic changes and many key events take place. The developmental stage at which porcine embryos are most commonly manipulated is the blastocyst, and the quality of the embryos used is critical to the success of reproductive technologies such as embryo transfer. Despite the importance of this critical period, our ability to determine early embryonic quality based on morphological criteria is limited. As an alternative, characterization of the gene expression profile of the early porcine embryo could identify gene markers of embryonic quality. The objective of this study was to perform comparative gene expression profiling analysis of in vivo-derived expanded and hatched porcine blastocysts using two-colored microarray (Pig-Oligo Array, USDA Pig Genome Consortium). Microarray data were interpreted using WebArray and DAVID functional annotation tools. The microarray results identified 1783 genes that were commonly expressed in both expanded and hatched porcine blastocysts. A further 148 genes were differentially expressed (p<0.05) and in comparison to expanded blastocysts, 35 genes were down-regulated and 113 genes were up-regulated after hatching. Many of the differentially expressed genes are related to important molecular mechanisms, such as macromolecule metabolism and energy related pathways. A total of 14 genes of interest (LDHA, LDHB, SLC16A7 (previously known as MCT2), BSG, SLC2A1, SLC2A3, SLC2A5, POU5F1 (previously known as OCT4), ACTB, GAPDH, GRB2, SETX, SPG7, and YWHAZ) were selected from the gene list generated by the microarray analysis, and their expressions were verified using SYBR Green-based real-time PCR. For the genes tested, the real-time PCR results were consistent with the microarray results. The differences detected in the gene expression profiles between in vivo-derived expanded and hatched porcine blastocysts increases our understanding of the molecular mechanisms involved in the hatching process and identifies potential candidate gene markers of porcine embryo quality. This research was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) and is a part of the activities of the EmbryoGENE NSERC Strategic Research Network. (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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology of ReproductionSame topicMolecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207