Cellular mechanisms of monozygotic twinning: clues from assisted reproduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Monozygotic (MZ) twins are believed to arise from the fission of a single fertilized embryo at different stages. Monochorionic MZ twins, who share one chorion, originate from the splitting of the inner cell mass (ICM) within a single blastocyst. In the classic model for dichorionic MZ twins, the embryo splits before compaction, developing into two blastocysts. However, there are a growing number of ART cases where a single blastocyst transfer results in dichorionic MZ twins, indicating that embryo splitting may occur even after blastocyst formation. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: For monochorionic MZ twins, we conducted a comprehensive analysis of the cellular mechanisms involved in ICM splitting, drawing from both ART cases and animal experiments. In addition, we critically re-examine the classic early splitting model for dichorionic MZ twins. We explore cellular mechanisms leading to two separated blastocysts in ART, potentially causing dichorionic MZ twins. SEARCH METHODS: Relevant studies including research articles, reviews, and conference papers were searched in the PubMed database. Cases of MZ twins from IVF clinics were found by using combinations of terms including 'monozygotic twins' with 'IVF case report', 'ART', 'single embryo transfer', or 'dichorionic'. The papers retrieved were categorized based on the implicated mechanisms or as those with unexplained mechanisms. Animal experiments relating to MZ twins were found using 'mouse embryo monozygotic twins', 'mouse 8-shaped hatching', 'zebrafish janus mutant', and 'nine-banded armadillo embryo', along with literature collected through day-to-day reading. The search was limited to articles in English, with no restrictions on publication date or species. OUTCOMES: For monochorionic MZ twins, ART cases and mouse experiments demonstrate evidence that a looser ICM in blastocysts has an increased chance of ICM separation. Physical forces facilitated by blastocoel formation or 8-shaped hatching are exerted on the ICM, resulting in monochorionic MZ twins. For dichorionic MZ twins, the classic model resembles artificial cloning of mouse embryos in vitro, requiring strictly controlled splitting forces, re-joining prevention, and proper aggregation, which allows the formation of two separate human blastocysts under physiological circumstances. In contrast, ART procedures involving the transfer of a single blastocysts after atypical hatching or vitrified-warmed cycles might lead to blastocyst separation. Differences in morphology, molecular mechanisms, and timing across various animal model systems for MZ twinning can impede this research field. As discussed in future directions, recent developments of innovative in vitro models of human embryos may offer promising avenues for providing fundamental novel insights into the cellular mechanisms of MZ twinning during human embryogenesis. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: Twin pregnancies pose high risks to both the fetuses and the mother. While single embryo transfer is commonly employed to prevent dizygotic twin pregnancies in ART, it cannot prevent the occurrence of MZ twins. Drawing from our understanding of the cellular mechanisms underlying monochorionic and dichorionic MZ twinning, along with insights into the genetic mechanisms, could enable improved prediction, prevention, and even intervention strategies during ART procedures. REGISTRAITON NUMBER: N/A.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".