88 MicroRNA profile of invitro bovine embryos cultured in the presence of amniotic extracellular vesicles shifts toward invivo-collected blastocysts

Abstract

The absence of maternal-embryo signals could be an important cause of the poor pregnancy rates of invitro-produced embryos, compared with those collected invivo. In the context of paracrine communication, co-culture of embryo with amniotic-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) improved their quality compared with control (CTR) (Perrini and Lange Consiglio 2018 Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 30, 658-671), and after cryopreservation, provided higher invitro embryo hatching and recipient pregnancy rate (Lange-Consiglio et al. 2019 Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 31, 155). After these results, the aim of this study was to evaluate microRNA (miRNA) profiling of invitro-produced blastocysts with or without EV supplementation, using invivo-produced blastocysts as CTR. Invitro embryos were produced based on our protocol (Perrini and Lange Consiglio 2018 Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 30, 658-671) with or without 100×106 EVsmL−1 in synthetic oviductal fluid with amino acids (SOFaa) on Day 5 post-fertilisation (Perrini and Lange Consiglio 2018 Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 30, 658-671). Grade 1 blastocysts (B7) were immediately snap frozen in liquid nitrogen for genomic study. These embryos were obtained from three replicates. Invivo embryos were obtained from three cows superovulated by Folltropin and inseminated by the same cryopreserved semen. After flushing, only B7 were snap frozen for genomic study. Samples for RNA isolation were obtained from 3 pools of 10 embryos each for each condition (vivo, vitro-CTR, and vitro+EVs). Total RNA was isolated by a NucleoSpin1 miRNA kit. Concentration and quality of RNA were determined by an Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer. Libraries were prepared using TruSeq Small RNA Library Preparation kits (Illumina). Differential expression analyses between samples were run with the Bioconductor edgeR package (false discovery rate<0.05). MicroRNA cluster analysis was performed with Genesis. The average quantity of total RNA extracted from each pool was 3.5ng. Our results show that the miRNAs identified were 1.74E5, 2.3E5, and 3.6E5 for vivo, vitro-CTR, and vitro+EVs, respectively. Principal component analysis calculated on differentially expressed miRNAs showed a separation of the three groups with a distinctive miRNA trait. The miRNAs differentially expressed among three comparisons (vivo vs. vitro-CTR, vivo vs. vitro+EVs, and vitro-CTR vs. vitro+EVs) were 20, 15, and 2, respectively. Principal component 1, which explains 62.4% of the variance, clearly separates invivo- and invitro-produced embryos even if EV addition seems to ameliorate the effect of invitro production, and this agrees with the embryo quality and pregnancy rate after EV supplementation (Perrini and Lange Consiglio 2018 Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 30, 658-671; Lange-Consiglio et al. 2019 Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 31, 155). Indeed, vitro-CTR and vitro+EVs embryos differ significantly for two miRNAs (miR-130a, miR-181b) that are found to be higher in our vitro-CTR embryos compared with vitro+EV ones. The miR-181b was also found to be higher in degenerate bovine embryos compared with good blastocysts (Kropp et al. 2014 Front. Genetics 24, 91). In conclusion, this is the first study reporting the complete miRNA profiling of invitro blastocysts compared with those obtained invivo. The addition of EVs during invitro production seems to influence the expression of specific miRNAs involved in the success of embryo implantation.