In vitro maturation in the presence of Leukemia Inhibitory Factor modulates gene and miRNA expression in bovine oocytes and embryos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Members of the interleukin-6 (IL-6) family of cytokines are important for reproductive function that are mediated through changes in gene and miRNA expression. Herein, we characterized the expression of miR-21, miR-155, miR-34c and miR-146a in bovine oocytes and cumulus cells during in vitro maturation (IVM) with leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF), IL-6 and IL-11 or unsupplemented controls. LIF-exposed COCs showed higher expression of miR-21 and miR-155 in oocytes, whereas miR-146a expression was increased in oocytes matured with IL-6 and IL-11. In cumulus cells, miR-155 expression was elevated by all treatments while only LIF increased miR-21 expression. Based on these results, we next examined how LIF exposure during IVM affected oocyte competence, through IVF and the expression of specific genes in GV- and MII-oocytes, in 2- and 8-cell embryos, and in Day 8-blastocysts. LIF supplementation did not affect cleavage rate, blastocyst yield or several other developmental parameters, but did increase hatching rate. LIF suppressed DPPA3, ZAR1 and NPM2 expression in 2 cell- and/or 8-cell embryos. LIF increased the expression of KAT2A and HSPA1A in MII-oocytes, and that of HDAC1, KAT2A and HSP90AA1 and the BAX:BCL2L1 ratio in 2-cell embryos. In contrast, HDAC1, KAT2A and HSP90AA1 expression and BAX:BCL2L1 ratio was lower in 8-cell embryos derived from LIF oocytes. IVM with LIF also increased the expression of DNMT3A, HSPA1A and HSP90AA1 in blastocysts. In conclusion, supplementation with LIF during IVM was consistently associated with changes in the relative abundance of transcripts in mature bovine oocytes and in specific embryo developmental stages.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".