In vitro versus In vivo: Development-, Apoptosis-, andImplantation-Related Gene Expression in Mouse Blastocyst
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: While mammalian embryos can adapt to their environments, their sensitivity overshadows their adaptability in suboptimal in vitro conditions. Therefore, the environment in which the gametes are fertilized or to which the embryo is exposed can greatly affect the quality of the embryo and consequently its implantation potential. Objectives: Since providing an optimal culture condition needs a deep understanding of the environmental effects, and regarding the fact that normal morphology fails to be a reliable indicator of natural embryo development, the current study aimed at comparing in vivo- and in vitro-derived blastocysts at the molecular level. Materials and Methods: In vivo and in vitro mouse blastocysts were obtained by flushing the uterine horns and in vitro fertilization/culture, respectively. Normal blastocysts of both groups were evaluated in terms of hatching rate and expression of three lineage-differentiation-, apoptosis-, and implantation-related genes. Results: The hatching rate was lower in In vitro fertilization (IVF)-produced blastocysts in comparison with that of the in vivo counterparts. More importantly, the study results indicated significant changes in the expression levels of eight out of ten selected genes, especially Mmp-9 (about -10.7-fold). The expression of Mmp-9 in trophoblast cells is required for successful implantation and trophoblast invasion. Conclusions: The current study, in addition to confirming that the altered gene expression pattern of in vitro-produced embryos resulted in normal morphology, provided a possible reason for lower implantation rate of in vitro-produced blastocysts regarding the Mmp-9 expression.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".