小鼠胚胎玻璃化冷冻对子代发育影响的初步研究
|
摘要
第一部分研究玻璃化冷冻对小鼠胚胎体内外发育潜能的影响
目的：
观察新鲜6～8-细胞胚胎和玻璃化冷冻复苏6～8-细胞胚胎在囊胚形成率、囊胚孵出率及妊娠率、小鼠出生率的差异，初步探讨玻璃化冷冻对胚胎体内外发育潜能的影响。
方法：
共取性成熟期雌鼠(大于6～7周龄)200只。同笼雌鼠于见阴栓后20小时脱颈处死，取2-细胞胚胎。取胚后36小时左右观察胚胎，将6～8细胞胚胎分为两组，一组新鲜胚胎进行移植(新鲜移植组)，一组进行玻璃化冷冻(玻璃化冷冻组)2周后复苏移植。
两组各取50枚移植前胚胎，体外培养48～72小时，观察两组胚胎体外培养发育至囊胚、及囊胚孵出的情况。
复苏后的6～8-细胞胚胎经1～3 h培养，选择外形正常的胚胎移植于假孕63～67 h的受体母鼠的两侧子宫中，每侧8枚。新鲜移植组为新鲜6～8-细胞胚胎移植。妊娠17～20 d自然分娩后记录产仔数。对两组妊娠率、小鼠出生率进行比较。
结果：
1．新鲜移植组和玻璃化冷冻组胚胎一般情况观察：新鲜移植组共获823枚6～8细胞优质胚胎。玻璃化冷冻组共获1156枚6～8细胞优质胚胎，冷冻1143枚胚胎，复苏后存活胚胎为864枚。复苏成活率为75.59％。
2．新鲜移植组和玻璃化冷冻组胚胎囊胚形成率、囊胚孵出率的比较：两组各取50枚移植前胚胎，体外培养观察，新鲜移植组形成囊胚46枚，囊胚形成率为92％；孵出囊胚42枚，囊胚孵出率为84％。玻璃化冷冻组形成囊胚45枚，囊胚形成率为90％；孵出囊胚43枚，囊胚孵出率为86％。两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。
3．新鲜移植组和玻璃化冷冻组妊娠率的比较：新鲜移植组移植假孕鼠47只，妊娠23只，妊娠率为48.93％；玻璃化冷冻组移植假孕鼠51只，妊娠24只，妊娠率为47.06％。两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。
4．新鲜移植组和玻璃化冷冻组仔鼠出生率的比较：新鲜移植组共移植胚胎752枚，分娩子代99只，出生率为13.16％；玻璃化冷冻组共移植胚胎816枚，分娩子代103只，出生率为12.62％。两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。
结论：
玻璃化冷冻复苏后，成活胚胎囊胚形成率、囊胚孵出率及移植后的妊娠率，仔鼠出生率，与新鲜胚胎相比无明显差异。说明玻璃化冷冻对胚胎体内外发育潜能无明显影响。
第二部分研究玻璃化冷冻对子代一般发育情况的影响
目的：
对新鲜移植组和玻璃化冷冻组子代小鼠的生理发育、运动协调功能、器官畸形发病率进行观察，进一步探讨胚胎玻璃化冷冻对子代发育的影响。
方法：
1．仔鼠出生当天定为出生后0d。记录新生小鼠体重，仔鼠耳廓分离、上下牙萌出、张耳、睁眼、睾丸下降、阴道开口、全身绒毛、全身白毛等生理发育指标；平面翻正、前肢悬挂、爬行、空中翻正等神经反射和运动协调功能指标。
2．两组均于出生后第3天，第7天，第14天，第21天，第28天，第60天分别取雌雄小鼠各6只，脱颈处死，解剖后观察各器官发育情况。
3．两组均于上述时间段分别取小鼠子宫、卵巢、睾丸，4％多聚甲醛固定，石蜡包埋，行HE染色。进一步观察小鼠生殖器官发育过程中的形态学变化，每个时间段雌雄小鼠各6只。
结果：
1．生长发育：两组新生仔鼠平均体重分别为1.42±0.26g，1.39±0.38g。两组小鼠生理发育和运动协调指标测试结果提示两组小鼠发育无明显异常。
2．大体解剖：玻璃化冷冻组共出生103只仔鼠，其中雄鼠58只。有一只子代解剖后可见雄性生殖器官发育正常，但副中肾管无完全退化，呈白色羊角样。该鼠染色体分析为40，XY。故认为是雄性畸形，畸变原因未知。余器官未见明显畸形。新鲜移植组共出生99只仔鼠，其中雄鼠56只，各器官均未见明显畸形。
3．生殖器官形态学观察：两组小鼠在上述相应时期，子宫、卵巢、睾丸发育中均未见明显形态学异常。
结论：
玻璃化冷冻不影响小鼠的生理及运动协调能力的发育。但对出现的小鼠生殖管道畸形的原因，需要进一步研究。
第三部分研究玻璃化冷冻对雌性子代子宫发育的影响
目的：
通过比较两组子代子宫发育过程中，Wnt4、Wnt5a、Wnt7a、β-catinin、Hoxa10基因的表达，进一步研究玻璃化冷冻复苏过程对雌性小鼠子宫形态和功能的影响。
方法：
1．两组均于生后第3天，第7天，第14天，第21天，第28天，第60天取雌性小鼠各6只，分别取其子宫。取其中3只，左侧子宫固定行免疫组化，右侧行PCR，另3只欲行Western-blot。
2．用于免疫组化的子宫固定，石蜡包埋，水平横切面切成4μm切片，行Wnt4、Wnt5a、Wnt7a、β-catinin、Hoxa10基因蛋白免疫组化染色。
3．两组上述不同时间段的小鼠子宫，PCR及Western-blot进一步研究Wnt4、Wnt5a、Wnt7a、β-catinin、Hoxa10基因、蛋白在子代子宫发育过程中的表达变化。
结果：
1．免疫组化结果：
Wnt4表达仅限于腔上皮和邻近子宫腺体之间的基质。Wnt5a在基质内呈强表达，在腔上皮和腺上皮内弱表达。Wnt7a在腔上皮和腺上皮内表达。β-catenin在子宫内膜上皮及基质内均有表达。Hoxa10主要在基质及子宫肌层内表达。对Wnt4、Wnt5a、Wnt7a、β-catenin和Hoxa10在两组相应时期的免疫反应性进行统计学分析，两组相应时期的平均密度值无明显差异(P＞0.05)。
2．RT-PCR结果
RT-PCR结果显示：Wnt4、Wnt5a、Wnt7a、Hoxa10、β-catenin在两组子代子宫发育过程中均有表达，在上述相应时期表达无明显差异(P＞0.05)。
3．Western-blot结果
Western-blot结果显示：Wnt4、Wnt5a、Wnt7a、Hoxa10、β-catenin在两组子代子宫发育过程中均有表达，在上述相应时期表达无明显差异(P＞0.05)。
结论：玻璃化冷冻不影响出生后小鼠子代子宫的发育和功能。
PartⅠThe study of embryos developmental capacity of vitrifiedmouse 8-cell embryos in vivo or in vitro
Objective:
To observe blastocyst formation rate, blastocyst hatching rate and pregnancy rate, birthrate in mice of vitrified 8-cell embryos, compared with fresh 8-cell embryos. And toevaluate the impact of vitrification on embryos developmental ability in vitro and in vivo
Methods:
A total of 200 females mice (more than 6～7 weeks) were used in this experiment. Thefemale were sacrified by cervical dislocation after 20h of the presence of vaginal plug. 2-cell embryos were obtained, and to observe embryonic development after 36h of culture. 6to 8- cell embryos were divided into two groups, one group was fresh-embryo group (freshembryo transferred), and the other group was vitrified-embryo group (vitrified embryoswere storage for 2 weeks in liquid nitrogen, then thawed and transferred).
50 pre-transferring embryos were cultured 48～72 hours in vitro in each group. Thenumbers of blastocysts and hatching blastocyst was recorded .After 1～3 h of culture fromthawing, the morphological normal 6 to 8 - cell embryo were selected to transfer to uterus of pseudopregnant mouse, 8 for each side uterus. Fresh-embryo group transferred fresh 6 to8 - cell embryos. Recorded the number of live pups after 17～20 d of pregnancy by naturaldelivery. To compare pregnancy rate, birth rate in mice between two groups.
Results:
1. Embryos observation in fresh-embryo group and vitrified-embryo group: A total of 823high-quality 6 to 8-cell embryos were obtained in fresh-embryo group. And a total of 11566 to 8-cell embryos were obtained in vitrified-embryo group, 1143 embryos underwentvitrification and 864 embryos were survival after thawing. Survival rate was 75.59%.
2. The comparison of blastocyst formation rate, blastocyst hatching rate betweenfresh-embryo group and vitrified-embryo group: 50 pre-transferring embryos were culturedin vitro in each group. In fresh-embryo group, the number of blastocyst and hatchingblastocyst were 46, 42. Blastocyst formation rate and blastocyst hatching rate were 92%,84%. In vitrified-embryo group, the number of blastocyst and hatching blastocyst were 45,43. Blastocyst formation rate and blastocyst hatching rate were 90%, 86%. There was nosignificant difference between two groups (P＞0.05).
3.The comparison of the pregnancy rate between fresh-embryo group andvitrified-embryo group: In fresh-embryo group, pseudopregnancy mice were 47, 23 ofpregnancy, the pregnancy rate was 48.93%; in vitrified-embryo group, pseudopregnancymice were 51, 24 of pregnancy, the pregnancy rate was 47.06%. There was no significantdifference in two groups (P＞0.05).
4. The comparison of the birth rate between fresh-embryo group and vitrified-embryogroup: In fresh-embryo group, a total of 752 embryos were transferred. 99 offspring bybirth, the birth rate was 13.16%; In vitrified-embryo group, a total of 816 embryos weretransferred. 103 offspring birth, the birth rate was 12.62%. There was no significantdifference in two groups (P＞0.05).
Conclution:
In vitrified-thawing survival embryos, the resulting blastocyst formation rate, blastocyst hatching rate and pregnancy rate, birth rate in mice were no significantdifference comparing with the fresh-embryo groups. Analysis revealed that the process ofvitrification had less impact on the embryos developmental ability in vitro and in vito.
PartⅡThe study of the effect of vitrification on the developmentof offspring in mice
Objective:
The aim of this part was to investigate the indicators of physiological development,movement coordination function, the incidence of organ abnormalities in fresh-embryogroup and vitrified-embryo group, and to provide further evidence for the effect ofvitrification on the development of offspring in mice.
Methods:
1. The day of mice birth was considered to be 0 postnatal day. Recorded the indicators ofphysiological development such as weight, ear unfolding, upper and lower teeth eruption,eye opening, drop in testis, vaginal opening, pinna detachment; movement coordinationfunction such as flat righting, forelimb hanging test, crawling, air righting of newborn mice.
2. The mice were sacrified by cervical dislocation on postnatal days (PNDs) 3, 7, 14, 21,28, 60 in two groups to observe the development of all organs after anatoming. 6 femaleand 6 male for each phase in each group.
3. In the above-mentioned time period, mouse uterus, testis, ovary were taken from 6female and 6 male in each group, fixed and paraffin-embedded, HE staining, and to observethe morphological changes in reproductive organs of mice between two groups.
Results:
1. Growth and development:
The average weight of newborn in two groups was 1.42±0.26g, 1.39±0.38grespectively. The mice physical development and movement coordinationfunction test results were considered that the two groups had no significant differencein mice, which suggest the vitrification had less impact in the physiological development ofmice.
2. The development of organ:
A total of 103 new-born mice were obtained in vitrified- embryo group, 58 were males.One offspring of mouse can be seen that the normal development of male reproductive tract(MRT) and the non-degraded female reproductive tract (FRT) were both present in thisgroup.The malformed FRT was shown white selenastrum-like. The abnormal mousechromosome was 40, XY. Therefore we thought it was a male malformation. The reasonsof malformation were unknown. There were no obvious abnormalities in other organ ofother mice. A total of 99 pups were born in fresh - embryo group. 56 males, there was noobvious deformity in all organ.
3. Morphological observation:
No obvious morphological difference in appearance was found in the correspondingperiod in the development of genital organ between vitrification group and fresh group.
Conclution:
Vitrification does not affect the physiological development and movementcoordination function of mouse. But the reasons of the abnormal reproductive tract of themice, required further study.
PartⅢThe study of the impact of vitrification in thedevelopment of the uterus of offspring in mice
Objective:
In this experiment, we compared the expression of Wnt4, Wnt5a, Wnt7a,β-catinin,Hoxa10 in the developing uterus in two groups. And to further study the impact ofvitrifying preimplantation embryos on morphology and function of uterus of offspring inmice.
Methods:
1. Uteri were obtained from 6 different female mice on each postnatal days (PND) 3, 7,14, 21, 28, and 60 in two groups. 3 mice were taken from them, the left uterus forimmunohistochemistry, the right uterus for PCR; another 3 mice for Western-blot.
2. Tissues for immunohistochemistry were fixed and then processed and embedded inparaffin and sectioned at 4μm, The expression of mouse Wnt4, Wnt5a, Wnt7a, beta-catinin,Hoxa10 in the uterus were evaluated firstly by immunohistochemistry.
3. Reverse transcription (RT)-PCR and Western-blot were performed to determinechanges in gene expression in the uterus of above-mentioned time period in two groups.
Results:
1. Results of immunohistochemistry:
Wnt4 expression was restricted to the stroma between the luminal epithelium andadjacent uterine glands. Wnt5a expression was abundant throughout the stroma, in addition,low but detectable levels of Wnt5a expression were observed in luminal and glandularepithelium. Wnt7a was expressed exclusively in luminal epithelium and in glandularepithelium.β-catenin was expressed in luminal epithelium and the stroma. Hoxa10 wasexpressed in the stroma and smooth muscle layer.Statistic analysis of the Wnt4, Wnt5a,Wnt7a,β-catenin and Hoxa10 immunoreactivity was performed on the correspondingstage between two groups, and the average abundance in each group was no significant difference(P＞0.05).
2. Results of RT-PCR:
To further assess whether vitrification affects expression of genes during development,the different stage expression was determined by RT-PCR. No difference was apparentbetween two groups in the levels of expression of the development of uterus in mice (P＞0.05).
3. Results of western-blot:
This was confirmed by western-blot on different days of postnatal. Densitometricanalysis was performed on all samples, and the average levels of Wnt4, Wnt5a and Wnt7aHoxa10,β-catenin protein were no difference in statistic between two groups (P＞0.05).
Conelution:
These results were a first indication that vitrifying preimplantation embryos did notaffect the development and function of uterus of offsprings in mice.
目的：
观察新鲜6～8-细胞胚胎和玻璃化冷冻复苏6～8-细胞胚胎在囊胚形成率、囊胚孵出率及妊娠率、小鼠出生率的差异，初步探讨玻璃化冷冻对胚胎体内外发育潜能的影响。
方法：
共取性成熟期雌鼠(大于6～7周龄)200只。同笼雌鼠于见阴栓后20小时脱颈处死，取2-细胞胚胎。取胚后36小时左右观察胚胎，将6～8细胞胚胎分为两组，一组新鲜胚胎进行移植(新鲜移植组)，一组进行玻璃化冷冻(玻璃化冷冻组)2周后复苏移植。
两组各取50枚移植前胚胎，体外培养48～72小时，观察两组胚胎体外培养发育至囊胚、及囊胚孵出的情况。
复苏后的6～8-细胞胚胎经1～3 h培养，选择外形正常的胚胎移植于假孕63～67 h的受体母鼠的两侧子宫中，每侧8枚。新鲜移植组为新鲜6～8-细胞胚胎移植。妊娠17～20 d自然分娩后记录产仔数。对两组妊娠率、小鼠出生率进行比较。
结果：
1．新鲜移植组和玻璃化冷冻组胚胎一般情况观察：新鲜移植组共获823枚6～8细胞优质胚胎。玻璃化冷冻组共获1156枚6～8细胞优质胚胎，冷冻1143枚胚胎，复苏后存活胚胎为864枚。复苏成活率为75.59％。
2．新鲜移植组和玻璃化冷冻组胚胎囊胚形成率、囊胚孵出率的比较：两组各取50枚移植前胚胎，体外培养观察，新鲜移植组形成囊胚46枚，囊胚形成率为92％；孵出囊胚42枚，囊胚孵出率为84％。玻璃化冷冻组形成囊胚45枚，囊胚形成率为90％；孵出囊胚43枚，囊胚孵出率为86％。两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。
3．新鲜移植组和玻璃化冷冻组妊娠率的比较：新鲜移植组移植假孕鼠47只，妊娠23只，妊娠率为48.93％；玻璃化冷冻组移植假孕鼠51只，妊娠24只，妊娠率为47.06％。两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。
4．新鲜移植组和玻璃化冷冻组仔鼠出生率的比较：新鲜移植组共移植胚胎752枚，分娩子代99只，出生率为13.16％；玻璃化冷冻组共移植胚胎816枚，分娩子代103只，出生率为12.62％。两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。
结论：
玻璃化冷冻复苏后，成活胚胎囊胚形成率、囊胚孵出率及移植后的妊娠率，仔鼠出生率，与新鲜胚胎相比无明显差异。说明玻璃化冷冻对胚胎体内外发育潜能无明显影响。
第二部分研究玻璃化冷冻对子代一般发育情况的影响
目的：
对新鲜移植组和玻璃化冷冻组子代小鼠的生理发育、运动协调功能、器官畸形发病率进行观察，进一步探讨胚胎玻璃化冷冻对子代发育的影响。
方法：
1．仔鼠出生当天定为出生后0d。记录新生小鼠体重，仔鼠耳廓分离、上下牙萌出、张耳、睁眼、睾丸下降、阴道开口、全身绒毛、全身白毛等生理发育指标；平面翻正、前肢悬挂、爬行、空中翻正等神经反射和运动协调功能指标。
2．两组均于出生后第3天，第7天，第14天，第21天，第28天，第60天分别取雌雄小鼠各6只，脱颈处死，解剖后观察各器官发育情况。
3．两组均于上述时间段分别取小鼠子宫、卵巢、睾丸，4％多聚甲醛固定，石蜡包埋，行HE染色。进一步观察小鼠生殖器官发育过程中的形态学变化，每个时间段雌雄小鼠各6只。
结果：
1．生长发育：两组新生仔鼠平均体重分别为1.42±0.26g，1.39±0.38g。两组小鼠生理发育和运动协调指标测试结果提示两组小鼠发育无明显异常。
2．大体解剖：玻璃化冷冻组共出生103只仔鼠，其中雄鼠58只。有一只子代解剖后可见雄性生殖器官发育正常，但副中肾管无完全退化，呈白色羊角样。该鼠染色体分析为40，XY。故认为是雄性畸形，畸变原因未知。余器官未见明显畸形。新鲜移植组共出生99只仔鼠，其中雄鼠56只，各器官均未见明显畸形。
3．生殖器官形态学观察：两组小鼠在上述相应时期，子宫、卵巢、睾丸发育中均未见明显形态学异常。
结论：
玻璃化冷冻不影响小鼠的生理及运动协调能力的发育。但对出现的小鼠生殖管道畸形的原因，需要进一步研究。
第三部分研究玻璃化冷冻对雌性子代子宫发育的影响
目的：
通过比较两组子代子宫发育过程中，Wnt4、Wnt5a、Wnt7a、β-catinin、Hoxa10基因的表达，进一步研究玻璃化冷冻复苏过程对雌性小鼠子宫形态和功能的影响。
方法：
1．两组均于生后第3天，第7天，第14天，第21天，第28天，第60天取雌性小鼠各6只，分别取其子宫。取其中3只，左侧子宫固定行免疫组化，右侧行PCR，另3只欲行Western-blot。
2．用于免疫组化的子宫固定，石蜡包埋，水平横切面切成4μm切片，行Wnt4、Wnt5a、Wnt7a、β-catinin、Hoxa10基因蛋白免疫组化染色。
3．两组上述不同时间段的小鼠子宫，PCR及Western-blot进一步研究Wnt4、Wnt5a、Wnt7a、β-catinin、Hoxa10基因、蛋白在子代子宫发育过程中的表达变化。
结果：
1．免疫组化结果：
Wnt4表达仅限于腔上皮和邻近子宫腺体之间的基质。Wnt5a在基质内呈强表达，在腔上皮和腺上皮内弱表达。Wnt7a在腔上皮和腺上皮内表达。β-catenin在子宫内膜上皮及基质内均有表达。Hoxa10主要在基质及子宫肌层内表达。对Wnt4、Wnt5a、Wnt7a、β-catenin和Hoxa10在两组相应时期的免疫反应性进行统计学分析，两组相应时期的平均密度值无明显差异(P＞0.05)。
2．RT-PCR结果
RT-PCR结果显示：Wnt4、Wnt5a、Wnt7a、Hoxa10、β-catenin在两组子代子宫发育过程中均有表达，在上述相应时期表达无明显差异(P＞0.05)。
3．Western-blot结果
Western-blot结果显示：Wnt4、Wnt5a、Wnt7a、Hoxa10、β-catenin在两组子代子宫发育过程中均有表达，在上述相应时期表达无明显差异(P＞0.05)。
结论：玻璃化冷冻不影响出生后小鼠子代子宫的发育和功能。
PartⅠThe study of embryos developmental capacity of vitrifiedmouse 8-cell embryos in vivo or in vitro
Objective:
To observe blastocyst formation rate, blastocyst hatching rate and pregnancy rate, birthrate in mice of vitrified 8-cell embryos, compared with fresh 8-cell embryos. And toevaluate the impact of vitrification on embryos developmental ability in vitro and in vivo
Methods:
A total of 200 females mice (more than 6～7 weeks) were used in this experiment. Thefemale were sacrified by cervical dislocation after 20h of the presence of vaginal plug. 2-cell embryos were obtained, and to observe embryonic development after 36h of culture. 6to 8- cell embryos were divided into two groups, one group was fresh-embryo group (freshembryo transferred), and the other group was vitrified-embryo group (vitrified embryoswere storage for 2 weeks in liquid nitrogen, then thawed and transferred).
50 pre-transferring embryos were cultured 48～72 hours in vitro in each group. Thenumbers of blastocysts and hatching blastocyst was recorded .After 1～3 h of culture fromthawing, the morphological normal 6 to 8 - cell embryo were selected to transfer to uterus of pseudopregnant mouse, 8 for each side uterus. Fresh-embryo group transferred fresh 6 to8 - cell embryos. Recorded the number of live pups after 17～20 d of pregnancy by naturaldelivery. To compare pregnancy rate, birth rate in mice between two groups.
Results:
1. Embryos observation in fresh-embryo group and vitrified-embryo group: A total of 823high-quality 6 to 8-cell embryos were obtained in fresh-embryo group. And a total of 11566 to 8-cell embryos were obtained in vitrified-embryo group, 1143 embryos underwentvitrification and 864 embryos were survival after thawing. Survival rate was 75.59%.
2. The comparison of blastocyst formation rate, blastocyst hatching rate betweenfresh-embryo group and vitrified-embryo group: 50 pre-transferring embryos were culturedin vitro in each group. In fresh-embryo group, the number of blastocyst and hatchingblastocyst were 46, 42. Blastocyst formation rate and blastocyst hatching rate were 92%,84%. In vitrified-embryo group, the number of blastocyst and hatching blastocyst were 45,43. Blastocyst formation rate and blastocyst hatching rate were 90%, 86%. There was nosignificant difference between two groups (P＞0.05).
3.The comparison of the pregnancy rate between fresh-embryo group andvitrified-embryo group: In fresh-embryo group, pseudopregnancy mice were 47, 23 ofpregnancy, the pregnancy rate was 48.93%; in vitrified-embryo group, pseudopregnancymice were 51, 24 of pregnancy, the pregnancy rate was 47.06%. There was no significantdifference in two groups (P＞0.05).
4. The comparison of the birth rate between fresh-embryo group and vitrified-embryogroup: In fresh-embryo group, a total of 752 embryos were transferred. 99 offspring bybirth, the birth rate was 13.16%; In vitrified-embryo group, a total of 816 embryos weretransferred. 103 offspring birth, the birth rate was 12.62%. There was no significantdifference in two groups (P＞0.05).
Conclution:
In vitrified-thawing survival embryos, the resulting blastocyst formation rate, blastocyst hatching rate and pregnancy rate, birth rate in mice were no significantdifference comparing with the fresh-embryo groups. Analysis revealed that the process ofvitrification had less impact on the embryos developmental ability in vitro and in vito.
PartⅡThe study of the effect of vitrification on the developmentof offspring in mice
Objective:
The aim of this part was to investigate the indicators of physiological development,movement coordination function, the incidence of organ abnormalities in fresh-embryogroup and vitrified-embryo group, and to provide further evidence for the effect ofvitrification on the development of offspring in mice.
Methods:
1. The day of mice birth was considered to be 0 postnatal day. Recorded the indicators ofphysiological development such as weight, ear unfolding, upper and lower teeth eruption,eye opening, drop in testis, vaginal opening, pinna detachment; movement coordinationfunction such as flat righting, forelimb hanging test, crawling, air righting of newborn mice.
2. The mice were sacrified by cervical dislocation on postnatal days (PNDs) 3, 7, 14, 21,28, 60 in two groups to observe the development of all organs after anatoming. 6 femaleand 6 male for each phase in each group.
3. In the above-mentioned time period, mouse uterus, testis, ovary were taken from 6female and 6 male in each group, fixed and paraffin-embedded, HE staining, and to observethe morphological changes in reproductive organs of mice between two groups.
Results:
1. Growth and development:
The average weight of newborn in two groups was 1.42±0.26g, 1.39±0.38grespectively. The mice physical development and movement coordinationfunction test results were considered that the two groups had no significant differencein mice, which suggest the vitrification had less impact in the physiological development ofmice.
2. The development of organ:
A total of 103 new-born mice were obtained in vitrified- embryo group, 58 were males.One offspring of mouse can be seen that the normal development of male reproductive tract(MRT) and the non-degraded female reproductive tract (FRT) were both present in thisgroup.The malformed FRT was shown white selenastrum-like. The abnormal mousechromosome was 40, XY. Therefore we thought it was a male malformation. The reasonsof malformation were unknown. There were no obvious abnormalities in other organ ofother mice. A total of 99 pups were born in fresh - embryo group. 56 males, there was noobvious deformity in all organ.
3. Morphological observation:
No obvious morphological difference in appearance was found in the correspondingperiod in the development of genital organ between vitrification group and fresh group.
Conclution:
Vitrification does not affect the physiological development and movementcoordination function of mouse. But the reasons of the abnormal reproductive tract of themice, required further study.
PartⅢThe study of the impact of vitrification in thedevelopment of the uterus of offspring in mice
Objective:
In this experiment, we compared the expression of Wnt4, Wnt5a, Wnt7a,β-catinin,Hoxa10 in the developing uterus in two groups. And to further study the impact ofvitrifying preimplantation embryos on morphology and function of uterus of offspring inmice.
Methods:
1. Uteri were obtained from 6 different female mice on each postnatal days (PND) 3, 7,14, 21, 28, and 60 in two groups. 3 mice were taken from them, the left uterus forimmunohistochemistry, the right uterus for PCR; another 3 mice for Western-blot.
2. Tissues for immunohistochemistry were fixed and then processed and embedded inparaffin and sectioned at 4μm, The expression of mouse Wnt4, Wnt5a, Wnt7a, beta-catinin,Hoxa10 in the uterus were evaluated firstly by immunohistochemistry.
3. Reverse transcription (RT)-PCR and Western-blot were performed to determinechanges in gene expression in the uterus of above-mentioned time period in two groups.
Results:
1. Results of immunohistochemistry:
Wnt4 expression was restricted to the stroma between the luminal epithelium andadjacent uterine glands. Wnt5a expression was abundant throughout the stroma, in addition,low but detectable levels of Wnt5a expression were observed in luminal and glandularepithelium. Wnt7a was expressed exclusively in luminal epithelium and in glandularepithelium.β-catenin was expressed in luminal epithelium and the stroma. Hoxa10 wasexpressed in the stroma and smooth muscle layer.Statistic analysis of the Wnt4, Wnt5a,Wnt7a,β-catenin and Hoxa10 immunoreactivity was performed on the correspondingstage between two groups, and the average abundance in each group was no significant difference(P＞0.05).
2. Results of RT-PCR:
To further assess whether vitrification affects expression of genes during development,the different stage expression was determined by RT-PCR. No difference was apparentbetween two groups in the levels of expression of the development of uterus in mice (P＞0.05).
3. Results of western-blot:
This was confirmed by western-blot on different days of postnatal. Densitometricanalysis was performed on all samples, and the average levels of Wnt4, Wnt5a and Wnt7aHoxa10,β-catenin protein were no difference in statistic between two groups (P＞0.05).
Conelution:
These results were a first indication that vitrifying preimplantation embryos did notaffect the development and function of uterus of offsprings in mice.
引文
[1] Vajta G, Holm P, Kuwayama M, et al. Open Pulled Straw (OPS) vitrification: a new way to reduce cryoinjuries of bovine ova and embryos. Mo l Reprod Dev. 1998, 51(1):53-58.
[2] Atabay EC, Takahashi Y, Katagiri S, et al. Vitrification of bovine oocytes and its application to intergeneric somatic cell nucleus transfer. Theriogenology, 2004, 61(1):15-23.
[3] Trounson A, Mohr L. Human pregnancy following cryopreservation, thawing and transfer of an eight-cell embryo. Nature, 1983, 305: 707-709.
[4] Teramoto SU, chiyanma K, Aono F, et al. The efficacy of selected single embryo transfer (SET) with vitrification. Fertil Steril, 2004, 82 [Suppl2]: S207.
[5] Papanikolaou EG, Camus M, Kolibianakis EM, et al. Single embryo transfer:comparation of cleavage stage embryo transfer with blastocyst stage embryo transfer.Hum Reprod, 2005, 20[Suppl1]: 144.
[6] Veleva Z, Vilska S, Hyden-Granskog C, et al. SET is effective in older women. Hum Reprod, 2005, 20[Suppll]:144.
[7] Yokota Y, Sato S, Yokota M, et al. Birth of a healthy baby following vitrification of human blastocysts. Fertil Steril, 2001, 75(5): 1027-1029.
[8] Imam DV, Helmy S. Successful pregnancies and deliveries after a simple vitrification protocol for 3 human embryos. Fertil Steril, 2001, 76(2): 400-402.
[9] Huang CC, Lee TH, Chen SU, et al. Successful pregnancy following blastocyst cryo-preservation using super-cooling ultra-rapid vit-rification. Hum Reprod, 2005, 20(1):122-128.
[10]Balaban B, Urman B, Ata B, et al. A randomized controlled study of human Day 3 embryo cryopreservation by slow freezing or vitrification: vitrification is associated with higher survival, metabolism and blastocyst formation. Hum Reprod, 2008, 23(9):1976-1982.
[ 11 ] Loutradi KE, Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, et al. Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Fertil Steril. 2008, 90(l):l86-193.
[12] Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, Tarlatzis BC. Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: which one is better? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Mar 7. [Epub ahead of print]
[13]Li Y, Chen ZJ, Yang HJ, et al. Comparison of vitrification and slow-freezing of human day 3 cleavage stage embryos: post-vitrification development and pregnancy outcomes.Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2007, 42(11):753-755.
[14]Dhali A, Anchamparuthy VM, Butler SP, et al. Gene expression and development of mouse zygotes following droplet vitrification. Theriogenology, 2007, 68(9): 1292-1298.
[15]Boonkusol D, Gal AB, Bodo S, et al. Gene expression profiles and in vitro development following vitrification of pronuclear and 8-cell stage mouse embryos.Mol Reprod Dev. 2006, 73(6):700-708.
[16]Kader A, Agarwal A, Abdelrazik H, et al. Evaluation of post-thaw DNA integrity of mouse blastocysts after ultrarapid and slow freezing. Fertil Steril. 2008 Sep 5. [Epub ahead of print]
[17]Aytoz A, Van den Abbeel E, Bonduelle M, et al. Obstetric outcome of pregnancies after the transfer of cryopreserved and fresh embryos obtained by conventional in-vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod, 1999, 14: 2619-2624.
[18]Wennerholm UB, Hamberger L, Nilsson L, et al. Obstetric and perinatal outcome of children conceived from cryopreserved embryos. Hum Reprod, 1997, 12: 1819-1825.
[ 19] Wennerholm UB. Cryopreservation of embryos and oocytes: obstetric outcome and health in children. Hum Reprod, 2000, 15(Suppl 5): 18-25.
[20] Rama Raju GA, Jaya Prakash G, Murali Krishna K, et al. Neonatal outcome after vitrified day 3 embryo transfers: a preliminary study. Fertil Steril. 2008 Aug 8. [Epub ahead of print]
[21]Belva F, Henriet S, Van den AE, et al. Neonatal outcome of 937 children born after transfer of cryopreserved embryos obtained by ICSI and IVF and comparison with outcome data of fresh ICSI and IVF cycles. Hum Reprod. 2008 Jul 14. [Epub ahead of print]
[22] Dulioust E, Toyama K, Busnel MC, et al. Long-term effects of embryo freezing in mice.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995, 92(2):589-593.
[23]Cunha GR. Stromal induction and specification of morphogenesis and cyto differen-tiation of the epithelia of the Mullerian ducts and urogenital sinus during development of the uterus and vagina in mice. J. Exp. Zool, 1976,196: 361 -370.
[24]Dyche WJ. A comparative study of the differentiation and involution of the Mullerian duct and Wolffian duct in the male and female fetal mouse. J Morphol, 1979, 162(2):175-209.
[25]Kobayashi A, Behringer RR.Developmental genetics of the female reproductive tract in mammals. Nat Rev Genet., 2003, 4(12): 969-980.
[26] Yin Y, Ma L. Development of the mammalian female reproductive tract. J Biochem.2005, 137(6): 677-683.
[27] Miller C, Pavlova A, Sassoon DA. Differential expression patterns of Wnt genes in the murine female reproductive tract during development and the estrous cycle. Mech Dev.,1998, 76(1-2): 91-99.
[28]Philibert P, Biason-Lauber A, Rouzier R, et al. Identification and functional analysis of a new WNT4 gene mutation among 28 adolescent girls with primary amenorrhea and mullerian duct abnormalities: a French collaborative study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab.,2008, 93(3): 895-900.
[29] Orvis GD, Behringer RR. Cellular mechanisms of M(?)llerian duct formation in the mouse. Dev Biol, 2007, 306(2): 493-504.
[30]Vai Vainio S, Heikkila M, Kispert A, et al. Female development in mammals is regulated by Wnt-4 signaling. Nature, 1999, 397:405-409.
[31]Lyu J, Joo CK. Wnt-7a up-regulates matrix metalloproteinase-12 expression and promotes cell proliferation in corneal epithelial cells during wound healing. J. Biol.Chem., 2005, 280: 21653-21660.
[32]Carta L, Sassoon D. Wnt7a is a suppressor of cell death in the female reproductive tract and is required for postnatal and estrogen-mediated growth. Biol Reprod., 2004 ,71(2): 444-454.
[33]Mericskay M, Kitajewski J, Sassoon D. Wnt5a is required for proper epithelial-mesenchymal interactions in the uterus. Development. 2004, 131(9): 2061-2072.
[34] Yang Y, Topol L, Lee H, et al. Wnt5a and Wnt5b exhibit distinct activities in coordi-nating chondrocyte proliferation and differentiation. Dev. 2003, 130: 1003- 1015.
[35]Kuhl M, Sheldahl LC, Park M, et al The Wnt/Ca2+ pathway: A new vertebrate Wnt signaling pathway takes shape. Trends Genet., 2000, 16: 279-283.
[36]Veeman MT, Axelrod JD, Moon RT. A second canon. Functions and mechanisms of β-catenin-independent Wnt signaling. Dev. Cell, 2003, 5: 367-377.
[37]Brisken C, Heineman A, Chavarria T, et al. Essential function of Wnt-4 in mammary gland development downstream of progesterone signaling. Genes Dev., 2000, 14(6):650- 654
[38]Yamaguchi TP, Bradley A, McMahon AP, et al. A Wnt5a pathway underlies out-growth of multiple structures in the vertebrate embryo. Development, 1999,126,1211-1223.
[39]Deutscher E, Hung-Chang Yao H. Essential roles of mesenchyme-derived beta-catenin in mouse M(?)llerian duct morphogenesis. Dev Biol, 2007, 307(2):227-236.
[40] Carson DD, Bagchi I, Dey SK, et al. Embryo implantation. Dev Biol, 2000, 223: 217-237.
[41] Gray CA, Taylor KM, Ramsey WS, et al. Endometrial glands are required for pre-mplantation conceptus elongation and survival. Biol Reprod, 2001, 64: 1608- 1613
[42]Vitiello D, Pinard R, Taylor HS. Gene expression profiling reveals putative HOXA10 downstream targets in the periimplantation mouse uterus. Reprod Sci. 2008 ,15(5):529-535.
[43]Bei Xu, Dirk Geerts, Kun Qian, et al. Myeloid ecotropic viral integration site 1 (MEIS) 1 involvement in embryonic implantation. Hum Reprod. 2008, 23(6): 1394-1406.
[44] Hu J, Gray CA, Spencer TE. Gene expression profiling of neonatal mouse uterine development. Biol Reprod., 2004, 70(6): 1870-1876.
[1] Valdez CA, Abas Mazni O, Takahashi Y, et al. Successful cryopreservation of mouse blastocysts using a new vitrification solution. J Reprod Fertil, 1992, 96: 793-802.
[2] Picketing SJ, Braude PR, Cant A, et al. Transient cooling to room temperature can cause irreversible disruption of the meiotic spindle in the human oocyte. Fertil Steril, 1990, 54: 102-108.
[3] Stachecki JJ, Cohen J, Willadsen SM. Cryopreservation of unfertilized mouse oocytes: the effect of replacing sodium with choline in the freezing medium. Cryobiology, 1998, 37: 346-354.
[4] Mukaida T, Wada S, Takahashi K, et al. Vitrification of human embryos based on the assessment of suitable condition for 8-cell mouse embryos. Hum Reprod, 1998, 13: 2874-2879.
[5] Haw JM, Jone GM. Terminology associated with vitrification and other cryopreservation procedures for oocytes and embryos. Hum Reprod Update, 2003, 9: 583-605.
[6] Steer CV, Mills CL, Tan SL. et al. The cumulative embryo score: a predictive embryo scoring technique to select the optimal number of embryos to transfer in an in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer programme. Hum Reprod. 1992, 7(1): 117-119.
[7] 王俊霞，朱桂金，魏玉兰．应用胚胎玻璃化冷冻技术获得临床妊娠及分娩一例．中华妇产科杂志，2004，39(2)：143．
[8] Rall WF, Fahy GM. Ice-free cryopreservation of mouse embryos at -196 degrees C by vitrification. Nature. 1985, 313(6003): 573-575.
[9] Loutradi KE, Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, et al. Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2008, 90(1): 186-193.
[10] Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, Tarlatzis BC. Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: which one is better? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2009.Mar 7. [Epub ahead of print]
[11]Ali J, Shelton JN. Design of vitrification solutions for the cryopreser- vation of embryos. J Reprod Fertil, 1993, 99(2): 471-417.
[12]Chi HJ, Koo JJ, Kim MY, et al. Cryopreservation of human embryos using ethylene glycol in controlled slow freezing.Reprod, 2002, 17: 2146-2151.
[13]Kasai M, Hamguchi Y, Zhu SE, et al High survival of rabbit morulae after vitrification in an ethylene glycol based solution by a simple method. Biol Reprod ,1992, 46: 1042-1048.
[14]Zhu GJ, Jin L, Zhang HW, et al. Vitrification of human cleaved embryos in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2005, 40(10): 682-684.
[15]Martino A, Songsasen N, Leibo SP. Development into blastocysts of bovine oocytes cryopreserved by ultrarapid cooling. Biol Reprod, 1996, 54: 1059-1069.
[16] Zhou GB, Hou YP, Jin F, et al. Vitrification of mouse embryos at various stages by open-pulled straw (OPS) method. Anim Biotechnol. 2005, 16(2): 153-163.
[17]Desai N, Blackmon H, Szeptycki J, et al. Cryoloop vitrification of human day 3 cleavage-stage embryos: post-vitrification development, pregnancy outcomes and live births. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007, 14(2): 208-213.
[18]Vanderzwalmen P, Bertin DC, Standaert et al. Vitrification of human blastocysts with the Hemi-Straw carrier: application of assisted hatching after thawing. Hum Reprod,2003,18: 1504-1511.
[19]Dhali A, Anchamparuthy VM, Butler SP, et al. Gene expression and development of mouse zygotes following droplet vitrification. Theriogenology, 2007, 68(9):1292-1298.
[20] Gottumukkala A, Gomedhikam J, Kota M, et al. Neonatal outcome after vitrified day 3 embryo transfers: a preliminary study. Fertil Steril, 2008, Aug 8. [Epub ahead of print]
[21]Hartshorne GM, Wick K, Elder K, et al. Effect of cell number at freezing upon survival and viability of cleaving embryos generated from stimulated IVF cycles. Hum Rcprod,1990,5:857-861.
[22] Boonkusol D, Gal AB, Bodo S, et al. Gene expression profiles and in vitro development following vitrification of pronuclear and 8-cell stage mouse embryos.Mol Reprod Dev., 2006, 73(6): 700-708.
[23]Dhali A, Anchamparuthy VM, Butler SP, et al. Gene expression and development of mouse zygotes following droplet vitrification. Theriogenology. 2007, 68(9): 1292-1298.
[1] 朱桂金，靳镭，章汉旺，等．玻璃化冷冻人早期胚胎的效果观察[J]．中华妇产科杂志，2005，40(10)：682-685．
[2] Takahashi K, Mukaida T, Goto T, et al. Perinatal outcome of blastocyst transfer with vitrification using cryoloop: a 4-year follow-up study. Fertil Steril., 2005, 84(1): 88-92.
[3] Liebermann J, Tucker MJ, Graham JR, et al. Blastocyst development after vitrification of multipronuclear zygotes using the Flexipet denuding pipette. Reprod Biomed Online, 2002, 4(2): 146-150.
[4] 姬艳丽，佘素贞，豆正东等，昆明种小鼠正常行为发育指标探讨[J]．安徽医科大学学报，2002，37(6)：429-431．
[5] Park SY, Kim EY, Cui XS, et al. Increase in DNA fragmentation and apoptosis-related gene expression in frozen-thawed bovine blastocysts. Zygote., 2006,14(2):125-131.
[6] Kader A, Agarwal A, Abdelrazik H, et al. Evaluation of post-thaw DNA integrity of mouse blastocysts after ultrarapid and slow freezing. Fertil Steril. 2008 Sep 5. [Epub ahead of print]
[7] Mamo S, Bodo S, Kobolak J, et al. Gene expression profiles of vitrified in vivo derived 8-cell stage mouse embryos detected by high density oligonucleotide microarrays. Mol Reprod Dev. 2006,73(11):1380-1392.
[8] Gottumukkala Achyuta Rama Raju, Gomedhikam Jaya Prakash, Kota Murali Krishna,et al. Neonatal outcome after vitrified day 3 embryo transfers: a preliminary study.Fertil Steril. 2008 Aug 8: [Epub ahead of print]
[9] Rama Raju GA, Haranath GB, Krishna KM, et al.Vitrification of human 8-cell embryos, a modified protocol for better pregnancy rates. Reprod Biomed Online.2005, 11(4): 434-437.
[10] Mukaida T, Nakamura S, Tomiyama T, et al Vitrification of human blastocysts using cryoloops: clinical outcome of 223 cycles. Hum Reprod. 2003, 18(2):384-391.
[11] Kumasako Y, Otsu E, Utsunomiya T, et al. The efficacy of the transfer of twice frozen-thawed embryos with the vitrification method. Fertil Steril. 2008 Feb 22.[Epub ahead of print]
[12] Hiraoka K, Hiraoka K, Kinutani M, et al. Successful dizygotic twin pregnancy after recryopreservation by vitrification of human expanded blastocysts developed from frozen cleaved embryos on day 6: a case report. J Reprod Med. 2006, 51(3): 213-216.
[13] Dulioust E, Toyama K, Busnel MC, et al. Long-term effects of embryo freezing in mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995, 17; 92(2): 589-593.
[14] Koopman P, Gubbay J, Vivian N, et al. Male development of chromosomally female mice transgenic for Sry. Nature, 1991, 351:117-121.
[15] Cate RL, Mattaliano RJ, Hession C, et al Isolation of the bovine and human genes for Mullerian inhibiting substance and expression of the human gene in animal cells.Cell, 1986,45:685-698.
[16] Caple B. Sex in the 90's: SRY and the switch to the male pathway. Mammalian Sex determination, 1998, 60: 497-523.
[17] Behringer RR, Finegold MJ, Cate RL. Mullerian- inhibiting substance function during mammalian sexual development. Cell, 1994, 79: 415-425.
[18] Mishina Y, Rey R, Finegold MJ, et al. Genetic analysis of the Mullerian- inhibiting substance signal transduction pathway in mammalian sexual differentiation. Genes Dev., 1996, 10: 2577-2587.
[19] Imbeaud S, Faure E, Lamarre I, et al. Insensitivity to anti-mullerian hormone due to a mutation in the human anti-mullerian hormone receptor. Nat. Genet., 1995, 11, 382-388.
[20] Imbeaud S, Belville C, Messika-Zeitoun L, et al. A 27 base-pair deletion of the antimullerian type Ⅱ receptor gene is the most common cause of the persistent mullerian duct syndrome. Hum. Mol. Genet., 1996, 5: 1269-1277.
[21] Swain A, Narvaez V, Burgoyne P, et al. Daxl antagonizes Sry action in mammalian sex determination. Nature, 1998, 391:761-767.
[22] Kim Y, Kobayashi A, Sekido R, et al. Fgf9 and Wnt4 act as antagonistic signals to regulate mammalian sex determination.PLoS Biol. 2006, 4(6): 1000-1009.
[23] 诸定寿，黄秀琴．小鼠生后卵巢发育的形态学与组织化学研究[J]．首都医学院学报，1994，15(1)：26-29．
[24] 张健，高富椂，支会英．小鼠生精细胞增殖与凋亡的年龄变化．[J]．动物学报，2001，47(2)：209．
[1] Kobayashi A, Behringer RR. Developmental genetics of the female reproductive tract in mammals. Nat Rev Genet, 2003, 4(12): 969-980.
[2] Bartol FF, Wiley AA, Floyd JG, et al. Uterine differentiation as a foundation for subsequent fertility. J Reprod Fertil Suppl, 1999, 53:284-300.
[3] Gray CA, Bartol FF, Tarleton BJ, et al. Developmental biology of uterine glands. Biol Reprod, 2001, 65:1311-1323.
[4] Iguchi T, Sato T. Endocrine disruption and developmental abnormalities of female reproduction. Am Zool, 2000, 40: 402- 411.
[5] Benson GV, Lim H, Paria BC, et al. Mechanisms of reduced fertility in Hoxa-10 mutant mice: uterine homeosis and loss of maternal Hoxa-10 expression.Development, 1996, 122: 2687-2696.
[6] Gendron RL, Paradis H, Hsieh-Li HM, et al. Abnormal uterine stromal and glandular function associated with maternal reproductive defects in Hoxa-11 null mice. Biol Reprod, 1997, 56:1097-1105.
[7] Miller C, Sassoon DA. Wnt-7a maintains appropriate uterine patterning during the development of the mouse female reproductive tract. Development, 1998, 125: 3201-3211.
[8] Rama Raju GA, Jaya Prakash G, Murali Krishna K, et al. Neonatal outcome after vitrified day 3 embryo transfers: a preliminary study. Fertil Steril. 2008 Aug 8. [Epub ahead of print]
[9] Takahashi K, Mukida T, Goto T, et al. Perinatal outcome of blastocyst transfer with vitrification using cryoloop: a 4-year follow-up study. Fertil Steril, 2005, 84: 88-92.
[10] Liebermann J, Tucker MJ. Comparison of vitrification and conventional cryopreser-vation of day 5 and day 6 blastocysts during clinical application. Fertil Steril, 2006,86: 20-63.
[11] Koopman P, Gubbay J, Vivian N, et al. Male development of chromosomally female mice transgenic for Sry. Nature, 1991,351: 117-121.
[12] Cate RL, Mattaliano RJ, Hession C, et al. Isolation of the bovine and human genes for Mullerian inhibiting substance and expression of the human gene in animal cells.Cell, 1986,45:685-698.
[13] Swain A, Narvaez V, Burgoyne P, et al. Daxl antagonizes Sry action in mammalian sex determination. Nature, 1998, 391:761-767.
[14] Jianbo Hu, C. Allison Gray, Thomas E. et al. Gene Expression Profiling of Neonatal Mouse Uterine Development. Biology of reproduction, 2004, 70: 1870-1876.
[15] Miller C, Pavlova A, Sassoon DA. Differential expression patterns of Wnt genes in the murine female reproductive tract during development and the estrous cycle. Mech Dev., 1998, 76(1-2): 91-99.
[16] Philibert P, Biason-Lauber A, Rouzier R, et al. Identification and functional analysis of a new WNT4 gene mutation among 28 adolescent girls with primary amenorrhea and mullerian duct abnormalities: a French collaborative study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab., 2008, 93(3): 895-900.
[17] Parr BA, McMahon AP. Sexually dimorphic development of the mammalian reproductive tract requires Wnt-7a. Nature, 1998, 395: 707-710.
[18] Heikkila M, Peltoketo H, Vainio S. Wnts and the female reproductive system. J Exp Zool., 2001, 290(6): 616-623.
[19] Kuhl M, Sheldahl LC, ParkM, et al. The Wnt/Ca2+ pathway: A new vertebrate Wnt signaling pathway takes shape. Trends Genet, 2000, 16: 279-283.
[20] Veeman MT, Axelrod JD, Moon RT. A second canon. Functions and mechanisms of β-catenin-independent Wnt signaling. Dev. Cell, 2003, 5: 367-377.
[21] Brisken C, Heineman A, Chavarria T, et al. Essential function of Wnt-4 in mammary gland development downstream of progesterone signaling. Genes Dev., 2000, 14(6):650-654.
[22] Mericskay M, Kitajewski J, Sassoon D. Wnt5a is required for proper epithelial-mesenchymal interactions in the uterus. Development, 2004, 131(9): 2061-2072.
[23] Deutscher E, Hung-Chang, Yao H.Essential roles of mesenchyme-derived beta-catenin in mouse M(?)llerian duct morphogenesis. Dev Biol., 2007, 307(2): 227-236.
[24] Hossain A, Saunders GF. Synergistic cooperation between the beta-catenin signaling pathway and steroidogenic factor 1 in the activation of the Mullerian inhibiting substance type Ⅱ receptor. J. Biol. Chem., 2003, 278: 26511-26516.
[25] Hu J, Gray CA, Spencer TE. Gene expression profiling of neonatal mouse uterine development. Biol Reprod., 2004, 70(6): 1870-1876.
[26] Guo B, Tian Z, Han BC, et al. Expression and Hormonal Regulation of Hoxa10 in Canine Uterus During the Peri-implantation Period. Reprod Domest Anim., 2008 Oct 30. [Epub ahead of print]
[27] Gray CA, Taylor KM, Ramsey WS, et al. Endometrial glands are required for pre-implantation conceptus elongation and survival. Biol Reprod, 2001, 64:1608-1613.
[28] Vitiello D, Pinard R, Taylor HS. Gene expression profiling reveals putative HOXA10 downstream targets in the periimplantation mouse uterus. Reprod Sci. 2008, 15(5): 529-535.
[1] Kobayashi A, Behringer RR. Developmental genetics of the female reproductive tract in mammals. Nat Rev Genet, 2003,4(12): 969-980.
[2] A Okadal, T Sato, Y Ohta, et al. Effect of diethylstilbestrol on cell proliferation and expression of epidermal growth factor in the developing female rat reproductive tract. J Endocrinol, 2001, 170(3): 539-554.
[3] Miyamoto N, Yoshida M, Kuratani S, et al. Defects of urogenital development in mice lacking Emx2. Development, 1997, 124(9): 1653-1664.
[4] Du H, Taylor HS. Molecular regulation of Mullerian development by Hox genes. Ann N Y Acad Sci., 2004, 1034: 152-165.
[5] Kobayashi A, Shawlot W, Kania A, et al. Requirement of Liml for female reproductive tract development. Development, 2004, 131(3): 539-549.
[6] Treisman J, Harris E, Desplan C. The paired box encodes a second DNA-binding domain in the paired homeo domain protein. Genes Dev., 1991, 5: 594-604.
[7] Torres M, Gomez-Pardo E, Gruss P. Pax2 contributes to inner ear patterning and optic nerve trajectory .Development, 1996, 122: 3381-3391.
[8] Urbanek P, Fetka I, Meisler MH, et al. Cooperation of Pax2 and Pax5 in midbrain and cerebellum development. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 1997, 94: 5703-5708.
[9] Wu H, Chen Y, Liang J, et al. Hypomefhylation-linked activation of PAX2 mediates tamoxifen-stimulated endometrial carcinogenesis. Nature, 2005, 438(7070): 981-987.
[10] Miyamoto N, Yoshida M, Kuratani S, et al. Defects of urogenital development in mice lacking Emx2. Development, 1997, 124: 1653-1664.
[11] Vainio S, Heikkila M, Kispert A, et al. Female development in mammals is regulated by Wnt-4 signalling. Nature, 1999, 397: 405-409.
[12] Heikkila M, Peltoketo H, Vainio S. Wnts and the female reproductive system. J Exp Zool, 2001, 290(6): 616-623.
[13] Biason-Lauber A, Konrad D, Navratil F, et al. A WNT4 mutation associated with Mullerian-duct regression and virilization in a 46, XX woman. N Engl J Med, 2004,351(8):792-798.
[14] Tsang TE, Shawlot W, Kinder SJ, et al. Liml activity is required for intermediate esoderm differentiation in the mouse embryo. Dev. Biol, 2000, 223: 77-90.
[15] Crisponi L, Deiana M, Loi A, et al. The putative forkhead transcription factor FOXL2 is mutated in blepharophimosis/ptosis/epicanthus inversus syndrome. Nat. Genet.,2001,27: 159-166.
[ 16] Swain A, Narvaez V, Burgoyne P, et al. Daxl antagonizes Sry action in mammalian sex determination. Nature, 1998, 391:761-767.
[17] Dolle P, Izpisua-Belmonte JC, Brown JM, et al. HOX-4 genes and the morphogenesis of mammalian genitalia. Genes Dev., 1991, 5: 1767-1767.
[18] Taylor HS, Vanden Heuvel GB, Igarashi P. A conserved Hox axis in the mouse and human female reproductive system, late establishment and persistent adult expression of the Hoxa cluster genes. Biol. Reprod, 1997, 57: 1338-4135.
[19] Benson GV, Lim H, Paria BC, et al. Mechanisms of reduced fertility in Hoxa-10 mutant mice, uterine homeosis and loss of maternal Hoxa-10 expression.Development, 1996, 122: 2687-2696.
[20] Warot X, Fromental-Ramain C, Fraulob V, et al. Gene dosage-dependent effects of the Hoxa-13 and Hoxd-13 mutations on morphogenesis of the terminal parts of the digestive and urogenital tracts. Development, 1997, 124: 4781-4791.
[21] Zhao Y, Potter SS. Functional specificity of the Hoxal3 homeobox. Development,2001,128:3197-3207.
[22] Miller C, Sassoon DA. Wnt-7a maintains appropriate uterine patterning during the development of the mouse female reproductive tract. Development, 1998, 125:3201-3211.
[23] Mericskay M, Kitajewski J, Sassoon D. Wnt5a is required for proper epithelial-mesenchymal interactions in the uterus. Development, 2004,131: 2061-2072.
[24] Gray CA, Bartol FF, Tarleton BJ, et al. Developmental biology of uterine glands. Biol.Reprod., 2001, 65: 1311-1323.
[25] Bartol FF, Wiley AA, Floyd JG, et al. Uterine differentiation as a foundation for subsequent fertility. J. Reprod. Fertil. Suppl. , 1999, 54: 287-302.
[26] Zhu LJ, Bagchi MK, Bagchi IC. Attenuation of calcitonin gene expression in pregnant rat uterus leads to a block in embryonic implantation. Endocrinology, 1998,139:330-339.
[27] Chen JR., Cheng JG, Shatzer T, et al. Leukemia inhibitory factor can substitute for nidatory estrogen and is essential to inducing a receptive uterus for implantation but is not essential for subsequent embryogenesis. Endocrinology, 2000, 141: 4365-4372.
[28] Zhou HE, Zhang X, Nothnick WB. Disruption of the TIMP-1 gene product is associated with accelerated endometrial gland formation during early postnatal uterine development. Biol. Reprod., 2004, 71: 534-539.
[29] Kheradmand F, Rishi K, Werb Z. Signaling through the EGF receptor controls lung morphogenesis in part by regulating MT1-MMP-mediated activation of gelatinase A/MMP2. J. Cell Sci, 2002,115: 839-848.
[30] Simian M, Hirai Y, Navre M, et al. The interplay of matrix metalloproteinases,morphogens and growth factors is necessary for branching of mammary epithelial cells. Development, 2001, 128: 3117-3131.
[31] Hu J, Zhang X, Nothnick WB, et al. Matrix metalloproteinases and their tissue inhibitors in the developing neonatal mouse uterus. Biol. Reprod, 2004, 71:1598-1604.
[32] Hulboy DL, Rudolph LA, Matrisian LM. Matrix metalloproteinases as mediators of reproductive function. Mol Hum.Reprod. 1997, 3:27-45.
[33] Jones JI, Clemmons DR. Insulin-like growth factors and their binding proteins,biological actions. Endocr. Rev., 1995, 16: 3-34.
[34] Gu Y, Branham WS, Sheehan DM, et al. Tissue-specific expression of messenger ribonucleic acids for insulin-like growth factors and insulin-like growth factor-binding proteins during perinatal development of the rat uterus. Biol. Reprod.,1999,60: 1172-1182.
[35] Baker J, Hardy MP, Zhou J, et al. Effects of an Igfl gene null mutation on mouse reproduction. Mol. Endocrinol, 1996, 10: 903-918.
[36] Taylor KM, Chen C, Gray CA, et al. Expression of messenger ribonucleic acids for fibroblast growth factors 7 and 10, hepatocyte growth factor, and insulin-like growth factors and their receptors in the neonatal ovine uterus. Biol. Reprod., 2001, 64: 1236-1246.
[37] Taylor KM, Gray CA, Joyce MM, et al. Neonatal ovine uterine development involves alterations in expression of receptors for estrogen, progesterone, and prolactin. Biol.Reprod. , 2000, 63: 1192-1204.
[38] Carpenter KD, Gray CA, Noel S, et al. Prolactin regulation of neonatal ovine uterine gland morphogenesis. Endocrinology, 2003, 144: 110-120.
[39] Schwertfeger KL, Hunter S, Heasley LE, et al. Prolactin stimulates activation of c-jun N-terminal kinase (JNK). Mol. Endocrinol, 2000, 14: 1592-1602.
[40] Gubbay O, Critchley HO, Bowen JM, et al. Prolactin induces ERK phosphorylation in epithelial and CD56(+) natural killer cells of the human endometrium. J. Clin.Endocrinol. Metab., 2002, 87: 2329-2335.
[41] Bartol FF, Wiley AA, Coleman DA, et al Ovine uterine morphogenesis, effects of age and progestin administration and withdrawal on neonatal endometrial development and DNA synthesis. J. Anim. Sci, 1988, 66: 3000-3009.
[42] Allison GC, Bartol FF, Taylor KM, et al. Ovine uterine gland knock-out model,effects of gland ablation on the estrous cycle. Biol. Reprod., 2000, 62: 448-456.
[43] Bartol FF, Wiley AA, Spencer TE, et al. Progestin Exposure from birth, Epitenetic induction of a unique adult uterine phenotype in sheep-a glandless endometrium. Biol.Reprod, 1997,56: 133.
[44] Tarleton BJ, Wiley AA, Bartol FF Endometrial development and adenogenesis in the neonatal pig, effects of estradiol valerate and the antiestrogen ICI 182,780. Biol.Reprod, 1999,61:253-263.
[45] Lubahn DB, Moyer JS, Golding TS, et al. Alteration of reproductive function but not prenatal sexual development after insertional disruption of the mouse estrogen receptor gene. Proc. Natl Acad Sci. USA, 1993, 90: 11162-11166.
[1] De Neubourg DD, Mangelschots K, Van Royen E, et al.Impact of patients' choice for single embryo transfer of a top quality embryo versus double transfer in the first IVF/ICSI cycle. Hum Reprod, 2002, 17: 2621-2625.
[2] Van Landuyt L, Verheyen G, Tournaye H, et al.New Belgian embryo transfer policy leads to sharp decrease in multiple pregnancy rate. Reprod Biomed Online, 2006, 13: 765-771.
[3] Whittingham DG, Leibo SP, Mazur P. Survival of mouse embryos frozen to -196℃. Science, 1972, 178: 411-414.
[4] Rall WF, Fahy GM. Ice-free cryopreservation of mouse embryos at -196 degrees C by vitrification. Nature, 1985, 313(6003): 573-575.
[5] Ali J, Shelton JN. Design of vitrification solutions for the cryopreservation of embryos. J Reprod Fertil. 1993, 99(2): 471-477.
[6] Mukaida T, Wada S, Takahashi K, et al. Vitrification of human embryos based on the assessment of suitable condition for 8-cell mouse embryos. Hum Reprod, 1998, 13: 2874-2879.
[7] 王俊霞，朱桂金，魏玉兰．应用胚胎玻璃化冷冻技术获得临床妊娠及分娩一例．中华妇产科杂志，2004，39(1)：143．
[8] Balaban B, Urman B, Ata B, et al. A randomized controlled study of human Day 3 embryo cryopreservation by slow freezing or vitrification: vitrification is associated with higher survival, metabolism and blastocyst formation. Hum Reprod. 2008, 23(9):1976- 1982.
[9] Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, Tarlatzis BC. Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: which one is better? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2009.
[10] Li Y, Chen ZJ, Yang HJ, et al.Comparison of vitrification and slow-freezing of human day 3 cleavage stage embryos: post-vitrification development and pregnancy outcomes. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi, 2007, 42(11): 753-755.
[11] Loutradi KE, Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, et al.Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril, 2008, 90(1): 186-193.
[12] Chi-Gu KIM, Hwanyul YONG, Gene LEE, et al. Effect of Polyvinylpyrrolidone Concentration of Cryoprotectant on Mouse Embryo Development and Production of Pups.Journal of Reproduction and Development [J].2008, J Reprod Dev., 2008,54(4): 250-253.
[13] Ishimori H, Takahashi Y, Kanagawa H. Viability of vitrified mouse embryos using various cryoprotectant mixtures. Theriogenology, 1992, 37:481-487.
[14] Nakagate N. Production of normal young following transfer of mouse embryos obtained by in vitro fertilization between cryopreserved gametes. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility, 1993, 99: 77-80.
[15] Nakao K, Nakagate N, Katsuki M. Simple and efficient vitrification procedure for cryopreservation of mouse embryos. Experimental Animals, 1997, 46, 231-234.
[16] 王俊霞，朱桂金，魏玉兰．人卵裂期胚胎玻璃化冷冻成功妊娠一例[J]．生殖医学杂志，2003，12(6)：362-363．
[17] Choi DH, Chung HM,Lim JM, et al. Pregnancy and delivery of healthy infants developed of vitrified blastocysts in an IVF-ET programme[J]. Fertil Steril, 2000, 74(4): 838-839.
[18] Kasai M, Hamguchi Y, Zhu SE, et al. High survival of rabbit morulae after vitrification in an ethylene glycol based solution by a simple method. Biol Reprod ,1992, 46: 1042-1048.
[19] Ohta N, Nohara M, Kojimahara T, et al. Ultrarapid freezing of human embryos by vitrification method - a case of delivery. Japanese Journal of Fertility and Sterility ,1996, 41, 276-279.
[20] Rama Raju GA, Haranath GB, Krishna KM, et al. Vitrification of human 8-cell embryos, a modified protocol for better pregnancy rates. Reprod Biomed Online.2005, 11(4):434-437.
[21] Dhali A, Anchamparuthy VM, Butler SP, et al. Gene expression and development of mouse zygotes following droplet vitrification. Theriogenology, 2007, 68(9): 1292-1298.
[22] Mukaida T, Nakamura S, Tomiyama T, et al. Vitrification of human blastocysts using cryoloops: clinical outcome of 223 cycles. Hum Reprod. , 2003, 18(2):384-391.
[23] Saki G, Rahim F, Moradi L. The study of developmental capacity of vitrified mouse blastocysts in different straws after transfer to mouse pseudo pregnant., Pak J Biol Sci, 2008, 11(14): 1809-1814.
[24] Isachenko V, Selman H , Isachenko E, et al. Modified vitrification of human pronuclear oocytes:efficacy and effect on ultrastructure. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 2003, 7:211-216.
[25] Van den Abbeel E, Camus M, Van Waesberghe L, et al. A randomized comparison of the cryopreservation of one-cell human embryos with a slow controlled- rate cooling procedure or a rapid cooling procedure by direct plunging into liquid nitrogen.Human Reproduction, 1997, 12: 1554-1560.
[26] Saito H, Ishida GM, Kaneko T et al. Application of vitrification to human embryo freezing.Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation, 2000, 49:145- 149.
[27] Liebermann J, Tucker MJ. Comparison of vitrification and conventional cryopreser-vation of day 5 and day 6 blastocysts during clinical application. Fertil Steril. 2006,86(l):20-26.
[28] Hiraoka K, Fuchiwaki M, Hiraoka K, et al.Vitrified human day-7 blastocyst transfer:11 cases. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008, 17(5):689-694.
[29] Zhu GJ, Jin L, Zhang HW, Li YF, Wei YL, Hu J. Vitrification of human cleaved embryos in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi.2005,40(10):682-684.
[30] Kader A, Agarwal A, Abdelrazik H, et al.Evaluation of post-thaw DNA integrity of mouse blastocysts after ultrarapid and slow freezing. Fertil Steril. 2008 Sep 5. [Epub ahead of print]
[31] Park SY, Kim EY, Cui XS, et al. Increase in DNA fragmentation and apoptosis-related gene expression in frozen-thawed bovine blastocysts. Zygote. 2006,14(2): 125-131.
[32] Mamo S, Bodo S, Kobolak J, et al. Gene expression profiles of vitrified in vivo derived 8-cell stage mouse embryos detected by high density oligonucleotide microarrays. Mol Reprod Dev. 2006, 73(11): 1380-1392.
[33] Boonkusol D, Gal AB, Bodo S, et al. Gene expression profiles and in vitro development following vitrification of pronuclear and 8-cell stage mouse embryos.Mol Reprod Dev. 2006, 73(6):700-708.
[34] Gottumukkala Achyuta Rama Raju, Gomedhikam Jaya Prakash, Kota Murali Krishna,et al. Neonatal outcome after vitrified day 3 embryo transfers: a preliminary study.Fertil Steril. 2008, Aug 8. [Epub ahead of print]
[35] Kumasako Y, Otsu E, Utsunomiya T, et al. The efficacy of the transfer of twice frozen-thawed embryos with the vitrification method. Fertil Steril. 2009, 91(2):383-386.
[36] Hiraoka K, Hiraoka K, Kinutani M, et al. Successful dizygotic twin pregnancy after recryopreservation by vitrification of human expanded blastocysts developed from frozen cleaved embryos on day 6: a case report. J Reprod Med. 2006, 51 (3):213-216.
[37] Bielanski A, Nadin-Davis S, Sapp T, et al. Viral con tam ination of embryos cryopreserved in liquid nitrogen [J]. Cryobiology, 2000, 40(2): 110-116.
[2] Atabay EC, Takahashi Y, Katagiri S, et al. Vitrification of bovine oocytes and its application to intergeneric somatic cell nucleus transfer. Theriogenology, 2004, 61(1):15-23.
[3] Trounson A, Mohr L. Human pregnancy following cryopreservation, thawing and transfer of an eight-cell embryo. Nature, 1983, 305: 707-709.
[4] Teramoto SU, chiyanma K, Aono F, et al. The efficacy of selected single embryo transfer (SET) with vitrification. Fertil Steril, 2004, 82 [Suppl2]: S207.
[5] Papanikolaou EG, Camus M, Kolibianakis EM, et al. Single embryo transfer:comparation of cleavage stage embryo transfer with blastocyst stage embryo transfer.Hum Reprod, 2005, 20[Suppl1]: 144.
[6] Veleva Z, Vilska S, Hyden-Granskog C, et al. SET is effective in older women. Hum Reprod, 2005, 20[Suppll]:144.
[7] Yokota Y, Sato S, Yokota M, et al. Birth of a healthy baby following vitrification of human blastocysts. Fertil Steril, 2001, 75(5): 1027-1029.
[8] Imam DV, Helmy S. Successful pregnancies and deliveries after a simple vitrification protocol for 3 human embryos. Fertil Steril, 2001, 76(2): 400-402.
[9] Huang CC, Lee TH, Chen SU, et al. Successful pregnancy following blastocyst cryo-preservation using super-cooling ultra-rapid vit-rification. Hum Reprod, 2005, 20(1):122-128.
[10]Balaban B, Urman B, Ata B, et al. A randomized controlled study of human Day 3 embryo cryopreservation by slow freezing or vitrification: vitrification is associated with higher survival, metabolism and blastocyst formation. Hum Reprod, 2008, 23(9):1976-1982.
[ 11 ] Loutradi KE, Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, et al. Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Fertil Steril. 2008, 90(l):l86-193.
[12] Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, Tarlatzis BC. Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: which one is better? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Mar 7. [Epub ahead of print]
[13]Li Y, Chen ZJ, Yang HJ, et al. Comparison of vitrification and slow-freezing of human day 3 cleavage stage embryos: post-vitrification development and pregnancy outcomes.Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2007, 42(11):753-755.
[14]Dhali A, Anchamparuthy VM, Butler SP, et al. Gene expression and development of mouse zygotes following droplet vitrification. Theriogenology, 2007, 68(9): 1292-1298.
[15]Boonkusol D, Gal AB, Bodo S, et al. Gene expression profiles and in vitro development following vitrification of pronuclear and 8-cell stage mouse embryos.Mol Reprod Dev. 2006, 73(6):700-708.
[16]Kader A, Agarwal A, Abdelrazik H, et al. Evaluation of post-thaw DNA integrity of mouse blastocysts after ultrarapid and slow freezing. Fertil Steril. 2008 Sep 5. [Epub ahead of print]
[17]Aytoz A, Van den Abbeel E, Bonduelle M, et al. Obstetric outcome of pregnancies after the transfer of cryopreserved and fresh embryos obtained by conventional in-vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod, 1999, 14: 2619-2624.
[18]Wennerholm UB, Hamberger L, Nilsson L, et al. Obstetric and perinatal outcome of children conceived from cryopreserved embryos. Hum Reprod, 1997, 12: 1819-1825.
[ 19] Wennerholm UB. Cryopreservation of embryos and oocytes: obstetric outcome and health in children. Hum Reprod, 2000, 15(Suppl 5): 18-25.
[20] Rama Raju GA, Jaya Prakash G, Murali Krishna K, et al. Neonatal outcome after vitrified day 3 embryo transfers: a preliminary study. Fertil Steril. 2008 Aug 8. [Epub ahead of print]
[21]Belva F, Henriet S, Van den AE, et al. Neonatal outcome of 937 children born after transfer of cryopreserved embryos obtained by ICSI and IVF and comparison with outcome data of fresh ICSI and IVF cycles. Hum Reprod. 2008 Jul 14. [Epub ahead of print]
[22] Dulioust E, Toyama K, Busnel MC, et al. Long-term effects of embryo freezing in mice.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995, 92(2):589-593.
[23]Cunha GR. Stromal induction and specification of morphogenesis and cyto differen-tiation of the epithelia of the Mullerian ducts and urogenital sinus during development of the uterus and vagina in mice. J. Exp. Zool, 1976,196: 361 -370.
[24]Dyche WJ. A comparative study of the differentiation and involution of the Mullerian duct and Wolffian duct in the male and female fetal mouse. J Morphol, 1979, 162(2):175-209.
[25]Kobayashi A, Behringer RR.Developmental genetics of the female reproductive tract in mammals. Nat Rev Genet., 2003, 4(12): 969-980.
[26] Yin Y, Ma L. Development of the mammalian female reproductive tract. J Biochem.2005, 137(6): 677-683.
[27] Miller C, Pavlova A, Sassoon DA. Differential expression patterns of Wnt genes in the murine female reproductive tract during development and the estrous cycle. Mech Dev.,1998, 76(1-2): 91-99.
[28]Philibert P, Biason-Lauber A, Rouzier R, et al. Identification and functional analysis of a new WNT4 gene mutation among 28 adolescent girls with primary amenorrhea and mullerian duct abnormalities: a French collaborative study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab.,2008, 93(3): 895-900.
[29] Orvis GD, Behringer RR. Cellular mechanisms of M(?)llerian duct formation in the mouse. Dev Biol, 2007, 306(2): 493-504.
[30]Vai Vainio S, Heikkila M, Kispert A, et al. Female development in mammals is regulated by Wnt-4 signaling. Nature, 1999, 397:405-409.
[31]Lyu J, Joo CK. Wnt-7a up-regulates matrix metalloproteinase-12 expression and promotes cell proliferation in corneal epithelial cells during wound healing. J. Biol.Chem., 2005, 280: 21653-21660.
[32]Carta L, Sassoon D. Wnt7a is a suppressor of cell death in the female reproductive tract and is required for postnatal and estrogen-mediated growth. Biol Reprod., 2004 ,71(2): 444-454.
[33]Mericskay M, Kitajewski J, Sassoon D. Wnt5a is required for proper epithelial-mesenchymal interactions in the uterus. Development. 2004, 131(9): 2061-2072.
[34] Yang Y, Topol L, Lee H, et al. Wnt5a and Wnt5b exhibit distinct activities in coordi-nating chondrocyte proliferation and differentiation. Dev. 2003, 130: 1003- 1015.
[35]Kuhl M, Sheldahl LC, Park M, et al The Wnt/Ca2+ pathway: A new vertebrate Wnt signaling pathway takes shape. Trends Genet., 2000, 16: 279-283.
[36]Veeman MT, Axelrod JD, Moon RT. A second canon. Functions and mechanisms of β-catenin-independent Wnt signaling. Dev. Cell, 2003, 5: 367-377.
[37]Brisken C, Heineman A, Chavarria T, et al. Essential function of Wnt-4 in mammary gland development downstream of progesterone signaling. Genes Dev., 2000, 14(6):650- 654
[38]Yamaguchi TP, Bradley A, McMahon AP, et al. A Wnt5a pathway underlies out-growth of multiple structures in the vertebrate embryo. Development, 1999,126,1211-1223.
[39]Deutscher E, Hung-Chang Yao H. Essential roles of mesenchyme-derived beta-catenin in mouse M(?)llerian duct morphogenesis. Dev Biol, 2007, 307(2):227-236.
[40] Carson DD, Bagchi I, Dey SK, et al. Embryo implantation. Dev Biol, 2000, 223: 217-237.
[41] Gray CA, Taylor KM, Ramsey WS, et al. Endometrial glands are required for pre-mplantation conceptus elongation and survival. Biol Reprod, 2001, 64: 1608- 1613
[42]Vitiello D, Pinard R, Taylor HS. Gene expression profiling reveals putative HOXA10 downstream targets in the periimplantation mouse uterus. Reprod Sci. 2008 ,15(5):529-535.
[43]Bei Xu, Dirk Geerts, Kun Qian, et al. Myeloid ecotropic viral integration site 1 (MEIS) 1 involvement in embryonic implantation. Hum Reprod. 2008, 23(6): 1394-1406.
[44] Hu J, Gray CA, Spencer TE. Gene expression profiling of neonatal mouse uterine development. Biol Reprod., 2004, 70(6): 1870-1876.
[1] Valdez CA, Abas Mazni O, Takahashi Y, et al. Successful cryopreservation of mouse blastocysts using a new vitrification solution. J Reprod Fertil, 1992, 96: 793-802.
[2] Picketing SJ, Braude PR, Cant A, et al. Transient cooling to room temperature can cause irreversible disruption of the meiotic spindle in the human oocyte. Fertil Steril, 1990, 54: 102-108.
[3] Stachecki JJ, Cohen J, Willadsen SM. Cryopreservation of unfertilized mouse oocytes: the effect of replacing sodium with choline in the freezing medium. Cryobiology, 1998, 37: 346-354.
[4] Mukaida T, Wada S, Takahashi K, et al. Vitrification of human embryos based on the assessment of suitable condition for 8-cell mouse embryos. Hum Reprod, 1998, 13: 2874-2879.
[5] Haw JM, Jone GM. Terminology associated with vitrification and other cryopreservation procedures for oocytes and embryos. Hum Reprod Update, 2003, 9: 583-605.
[6] Steer CV, Mills CL, Tan SL. et al. The cumulative embryo score: a predictive embryo scoring technique to select the optimal number of embryos to transfer in an in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer programme. Hum Reprod. 1992, 7(1): 117-119.
[7] 王俊霞，朱桂金，魏玉兰．应用胚胎玻璃化冷冻技术获得临床妊娠及分娩一例．中华妇产科杂志，2004，39(2)：143．
[8] Rall WF, Fahy GM. Ice-free cryopreservation of mouse embryos at -196 degrees C by vitrification. Nature. 1985, 313(6003): 573-575.
[9] Loutradi KE, Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, et al. Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2008, 90(1): 186-193.
[10] Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, Tarlatzis BC. Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: which one is better? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2009.Mar 7. [Epub ahead of print]
[11]Ali J, Shelton JN. Design of vitrification solutions for the cryopreser- vation of embryos. J Reprod Fertil, 1993, 99(2): 471-417.
[12]Chi HJ, Koo JJ, Kim MY, et al. Cryopreservation of human embryos using ethylene glycol in controlled slow freezing.Reprod, 2002, 17: 2146-2151.
[13]Kasai M, Hamguchi Y, Zhu SE, et al High survival of rabbit morulae after vitrification in an ethylene glycol based solution by a simple method. Biol Reprod ,1992, 46: 1042-1048.
[14]Zhu GJ, Jin L, Zhang HW, et al. Vitrification of human cleaved embryos in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2005, 40(10): 682-684.
[15]Martino A, Songsasen N, Leibo SP. Development into blastocysts of bovine oocytes cryopreserved by ultrarapid cooling. Biol Reprod, 1996, 54: 1059-1069.
[16] Zhou GB, Hou YP, Jin F, et al. Vitrification of mouse embryos at various stages by open-pulled straw (OPS) method. Anim Biotechnol. 2005, 16(2): 153-163.
[17]Desai N, Blackmon H, Szeptycki J, et al. Cryoloop vitrification of human day 3 cleavage-stage embryos: post-vitrification development, pregnancy outcomes and live births. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007, 14(2): 208-213.
[18]Vanderzwalmen P, Bertin DC, Standaert et al. Vitrification of human blastocysts with the Hemi-Straw carrier: application of assisted hatching after thawing. Hum Reprod,2003,18: 1504-1511.
[19]Dhali A, Anchamparuthy VM, Butler SP, et al. Gene expression and development of mouse zygotes following droplet vitrification. Theriogenology, 2007, 68(9):1292-1298.
[20] Gottumukkala A, Gomedhikam J, Kota M, et al. Neonatal outcome after vitrified day 3 embryo transfers: a preliminary study. Fertil Steril, 2008, Aug 8. [Epub ahead of print]
[21]Hartshorne GM, Wick K, Elder K, et al. Effect of cell number at freezing upon survival and viability of cleaving embryos generated from stimulated IVF cycles. Hum Rcprod,1990,5:857-861.
[22] Boonkusol D, Gal AB, Bodo S, et al. Gene expression profiles and in vitro development following vitrification of pronuclear and 8-cell stage mouse embryos.Mol Reprod Dev., 2006, 73(6): 700-708.
[23]Dhali A, Anchamparuthy VM, Butler SP, et al. Gene expression and development of mouse zygotes following droplet vitrification. Theriogenology. 2007, 68(9): 1292-1298.
[1] 朱桂金，靳镭，章汉旺，等．玻璃化冷冻人早期胚胎的效果观察[J]．中华妇产科杂志，2005，40(10)：682-685．
[2] Takahashi K, Mukaida T, Goto T, et al. Perinatal outcome of blastocyst transfer with vitrification using cryoloop: a 4-year follow-up study. Fertil Steril., 2005, 84(1): 88-92.
[3] Liebermann J, Tucker MJ, Graham JR, et al. Blastocyst development after vitrification of multipronuclear zygotes using the Flexipet denuding pipette. Reprod Biomed Online, 2002, 4(2): 146-150.
[4] 姬艳丽，佘素贞，豆正东等，昆明种小鼠正常行为发育指标探讨[J]．安徽医科大学学报，2002，37(6)：429-431．
[5] Park SY, Kim EY, Cui XS, et al. Increase in DNA fragmentation and apoptosis-related gene expression in frozen-thawed bovine blastocysts. Zygote., 2006,14(2):125-131.
[6] Kader A, Agarwal A, Abdelrazik H, et al. Evaluation of post-thaw DNA integrity of mouse blastocysts after ultrarapid and slow freezing. Fertil Steril. 2008 Sep 5. [Epub ahead of print]
[7] Mamo S, Bodo S, Kobolak J, et al. Gene expression profiles of vitrified in vivo derived 8-cell stage mouse embryos detected by high density oligonucleotide microarrays. Mol Reprod Dev. 2006,73(11):1380-1392.
[8] Gottumukkala Achyuta Rama Raju, Gomedhikam Jaya Prakash, Kota Murali Krishna,et al. Neonatal outcome after vitrified day 3 embryo transfers: a preliminary study.Fertil Steril. 2008 Aug 8: [Epub ahead of print]
[9] Rama Raju GA, Haranath GB, Krishna KM, et al.Vitrification of human 8-cell embryos, a modified protocol for better pregnancy rates. Reprod Biomed Online.2005, 11(4): 434-437.
[10] Mukaida T, Nakamura S, Tomiyama T, et al Vitrification of human blastocysts using cryoloops: clinical outcome of 223 cycles. Hum Reprod. 2003, 18(2):384-391.
[11] Kumasako Y, Otsu E, Utsunomiya T, et al. The efficacy of the transfer of twice frozen-thawed embryos with the vitrification method. Fertil Steril. 2008 Feb 22.[Epub ahead of print]
[12] Hiraoka K, Hiraoka K, Kinutani M, et al. Successful dizygotic twin pregnancy after recryopreservation by vitrification of human expanded blastocysts developed from frozen cleaved embryos on day 6: a case report. J Reprod Med. 2006, 51(3): 213-216.
[13] Dulioust E, Toyama K, Busnel MC, et al. Long-term effects of embryo freezing in mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995, 17; 92(2): 589-593.
[14] Koopman P, Gubbay J, Vivian N, et al. Male development of chromosomally female mice transgenic for Sry. Nature, 1991, 351:117-121.
[15] Cate RL, Mattaliano RJ, Hession C, et al Isolation of the bovine and human genes for Mullerian inhibiting substance and expression of the human gene in animal cells.Cell, 1986,45:685-698.
[16] Caple B. Sex in the 90's: SRY and the switch to the male pathway. Mammalian Sex determination, 1998, 60: 497-523.
[17] Behringer RR, Finegold MJ, Cate RL. Mullerian- inhibiting substance function during mammalian sexual development. Cell, 1994, 79: 415-425.
[18] Mishina Y, Rey R, Finegold MJ, et al. Genetic analysis of the Mullerian- inhibiting substance signal transduction pathway in mammalian sexual differentiation. Genes Dev., 1996, 10: 2577-2587.
[19] Imbeaud S, Faure E, Lamarre I, et al. Insensitivity to anti-mullerian hormone due to a mutation in the human anti-mullerian hormone receptor. Nat. Genet., 1995, 11, 382-388.
[20] Imbeaud S, Belville C, Messika-Zeitoun L, et al. A 27 base-pair deletion of the antimullerian type Ⅱ receptor gene is the most common cause of the persistent mullerian duct syndrome. Hum. Mol. Genet., 1996, 5: 1269-1277.
[21] Swain A, Narvaez V, Burgoyne P, et al. Daxl antagonizes Sry action in mammalian sex determination. Nature, 1998, 391:761-767.
[22] Kim Y, Kobayashi A, Sekido R, et al. Fgf9 and Wnt4 act as antagonistic signals to regulate mammalian sex determination.PLoS Biol. 2006, 4(6): 1000-1009.
[23] 诸定寿，黄秀琴．小鼠生后卵巢发育的形态学与组织化学研究[J]．首都医学院学报，1994，15(1)：26-29．
[24] 张健，高富椂，支会英．小鼠生精细胞增殖与凋亡的年龄变化．[J]．动物学报，2001，47(2)：209．
[1] Kobayashi A, Behringer RR. Developmental genetics of the female reproductive tract in mammals. Nat Rev Genet, 2003, 4(12): 969-980.
[2] Bartol FF, Wiley AA, Floyd JG, et al. Uterine differentiation as a foundation for subsequent fertility. J Reprod Fertil Suppl, 1999, 53:284-300.
[3] Gray CA, Bartol FF, Tarleton BJ, et al. Developmental biology of uterine glands. Biol Reprod, 2001, 65:1311-1323.
[4] Iguchi T, Sato T. Endocrine disruption and developmental abnormalities of female reproduction. Am Zool, 2000, 40: 402- 411.
[5] Benson GV, Lim H, Paria BC, et al. Mechanisms of reduced fertility in Hoxa-10 mutant mice: uterine homeosis and loss of maternal Hoxa-10 expression.Development, 1996, 122: 2687-2696.
[6] Gendron RL, Paradis H, Hsieh-Li HM, et al. Abnormal uterine stromal and glandular function associated with maternal reproductive defects in Hoxa-11 null mice. Biol Reprod, 1997, 56:1097-1105.
[7] Miller C, Sassoon DA. Wnt-7a maintains appropriate uterine patterning during the development of the mouse female reproductive tract. Development, 1998, 125: 3201-3211.
[8] Rama Raju GA, Jaya Prakash G, Murali Krishna K, et al. Neonatal outcome after vitrified day 3 embryo transfers: a preliminary study. Fertil Steril. 2008 Aug 8. [Epub ahead of print]
[9] Takahashi K, Mukida T, Goto T, et al. Perinatal outcome of blastocyst transfer with vitrification using cryoloop: a 4-year follow-up study. Fertil Steril, 2005, 84: 88-92.
[10] Liebermann J, Tucker MJ. Comparison of vitrification and conventional cryopreser-vation of day 5 and day 6 blastocysts during clinical application. Fertil Steril, 2006,86: 20-63.
[11] Koopman P, Gubbay J, Vivian N, et al. Male development of chromosomally female mice transgenic for Sry. Nature, 1991,351: 117-121.
[12] Cate RL, Mattaliano RJ, Hession C, et al. Isolation of the bovine and human genes for Mullerian inhibiting substance and expression of the human gene in animal cells.Cell, 1986,45:685-698.
[13] Swain A, Narvaez V, Burgoyne P, et al. Daxl antagonizes Sry action in mammalian sex determination. Nature, 1998, 391:761-767.
[14] Jianbo Hu, C. Allison Gray, Thomas E. et al. Gene Expression Profiling of Neonatal Mouse Uterine Development. Biology of reproduction, 2004, 70: 1870-1876.
[15] Miller C, Pavlova A, Sassoon DA. Differential expression patterns of Wnt genes in the murine female reproductive tract during development and the estrous cycle. Mech Dev., 1998, 76(1-2): 91-99.
[16] Philibert P, Biason-Lauber A, Rouzier R, et al. Identification and functional analysis of a new WNT4 gene mutation among 28 adolescent girls with primary amenorrhea and mullerian duct abnormalities: a French collaborative study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab., 2008, 93(3): 895-900.
[17] Parr BA, McMahon AP. Sexually dimorphic development of the mammalian reproductive tract requires Wnt-7a. Nature, 1998, 395: 707-710.
[18] Heikkila M, Peltoketo H, Vainio S. Wnts and the female reproductive system. J Exp Zool., 2001, 290(6): 616-623.
[19] Kuhl M, Sheldahl LC, ParkM, et al. The Wnt/Ca2+ pathway: A new vertebrate Wnt signaling pathway takes shape. Trends Genet, 2000, 16: 279-283.
[20] Veeman MT, Axelrod JD, Moon RT. A second canon. Functions and mechanisms of β-catenin-independent Wnt signaling. Dev. Cell, 2003, 5: 367-377.
[21] Brisken C, Heineman A, Chavarria T, et al. Essential function of Wnt-4 in mammary gland development downstream of progesterone signaling. Genes Dev., 2000, 14(6):650-654.
[22] Mericskay M, Kitajewski J, Sassoon D. Wnt5a is required for proper epithelial-mesenchymal interactions in the uterus. Development, 2004, 131(9): 2061-2072.
[23] Deutscher E, Hung-Chang, Yao H.Essential roles of mesenchyme-derived beta-catenin in mouse M(?)llerian duct morphogenesis. Dev Biol., 2007, 307(2): 227-236.
[24] Hossain A, Saunders GF. Synergistic cooperation between the beta-catenin signaling pathway and steroidogenic factor 1 in the activation of the Mullerian inhibiting substance type Ⅱ receptor. J. Biol. Chem., 2003, 278: 26511-26516.
[25] Hu J, Gray CA, Spencer TE. Gene expression profiling of neonatal mouse uterine development. Biol Reprod., 2004, 70(6): 1870-1876.
[26] Guo B, Tian Z, Han BC, et al. Expression and Hormonal Regulation of Hoxa10 in Canine Uterus During the Peri-implantation Period. Reprod Domest Anim., 2008 Oct 30. [Epub ahead of print]
[27] Gray CA, Taylor KM, Ramsey WS, et al. Endometrial glands are required for pre-implantation conceptus elongation and survival. Biol Reprod, 2001, 64:1608-1613.
[28] Vitiello D, Pinard R, Taylor HS. Gene expression profiling reveals putative HOXA10 downstream targets in the periimplantation mouse uterus. Reprod Sci. 2008, 15(5): 529-535.
[1] Kobayashi A, Behringer RR. Developmental genetics of the female reproductive tract in mammals. Nat Rev Genet, 2003,4(12): 969-980.
[2] A Okadal, T Sato, Y Ohta, et al. Effect of diethylstilbestrol on cell proliferation and expression of epidermal growth factor in the developing female rat reproductive tract. J Endocrinol, 2001, 170(3): 539-554.
[3] Miyamoto N, Yoshida M, Kuratani S, et al. Defects of urogenital development in mice lacking Emx2. Development, 1997, 124(9): 1653-1664.
[4] Du H, Taylor HS. Molecular regulation of Mullerian development by Hox genes. Ann N Y Acad Sci., 2004, 1034: 152-165.
[5] Kobayashi A, Shawlot W, Kania A, et al. Requirement of Liml for female reproductive tract development. Development, 2004, 131(3): 539-549.
[6] Treisman J, Harris E, Desplan C. The paired box encodes a second DNA-binding domain in the paired homeo domain protein. Genes Dev., 1991, 5: 594-604.
[7] Torres M, Gomez-Pardo E, Gruss P. Pax2 contributes to inner ear patterning and optic nerve trajectory .Development, 1996, 122: 3381-3391.
[8] Urbanek P, Fetka I, Meisler MH, et al. Cooperation of Pax2 and Pax5 in midbrain and cerebellum development. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 1997, 94: 5703-5708.
[9] Wu H, Chen Y, Liang J, et al. Hypomefhylation-linked activation of PAX2 mediates tamoxifen-stimulated endometrial carcinogenesis. Nature, 2005, 438(7070): 981-987.
[10] Miyamoto N, Yoshida M, Kuratani S, et al. Defects of urogenital development in mice lacking Emx2. Development, 1997, 124: 1653-1664.
[11] Vainio S, Heikkila M, Kispert A, et al. Female development in mammals is regulated by Wnt-4 signalling. Nature, 1999, 397: 405-409.
[12] Heikkila M, Peltoketo H, Vainio S. Wnts and the female reproductive system. J Exp Zool, 2001, 290(6): 616-623.
[13] Biason-Lauber A, Konrad D, Navratil F, et al. A WNT4 mutation associated with Mullerian-duct regression and virilization in a 46, XX woman. N Engl J Med, 2004,351(8):792-798.
[14] Tsang TE, Shawlot W, Kinder SJ, et al. Liml activity is required for intermediate esoderm differentiation in the mouse embryo. Dev. Biol, 2000, 223: 77-90.
[15] Crisponi L, Deiana M, Loi A, et al. The putative forkhead transcription factor FOXL2 is mutated in blepharophimosis/ptosis/epicanthus inversus syndrome. Nat. Genet.,2001,27: 159-166.
[ 16] Swain A, Narvaez V, Burgoyne P, et al. Daxl antagonizes Sry action in mammalian sex determination. Nature, 1998, 391:761-767.
[17] Dolle P, Izpisua-Belmonte JC, Brown JM, et al. HOX-4 genes and the morphogenesis of mammalian genitalia. Genes Dev., 1991, 5: 1767-1767.
[18] Taylor HS, Vanden Heuvel GB, Igarashi P. A conserved Hox axis in the mouse and human female reproductive system, late establishment and persistent adult expression of the Hoxa cluster genes. Biol. Reprod, 1997, 57: 1338-4135.
[19] Benson GV, Lim H, Paria BC, et al. Mechanisms of reduced fertility in Hoxa-10 mutant mice, uterine homeosis and loss of maternal Hoxa-10 expression.Development, 1996, 122: 2687-2696.
[20] Warot X, Fromental-Ramain C, Fraulob V, et al. Gene dosage-dependent effects of the Hoxa-13 and Hoxd-13 mutations on morphogenesis of the terminal parts of the digestive and urogenital tracts. Development, 1997, 124: 4781-4791.
[21] Zhao Y, Potter SS. Functional specificity of the Hoxal3 homeobox. Development,2001,128:3197-3207.
[22] Miller C, Sassoon DA. Wnt-7a maintains appropriate uterine patterning during the development of the mouse female reproductive tract. Development, 1998, 125:3201-3211.
[23] Mericskay M, Kitajewski J, Sassoon D. Wnt5a is required for proper epithelial-mesenchymal interactions in the uterus. Development, 2004,131: 2061-2072.
[24] Gray CA, Bartol FF, Tarleton BJ, et al. Developmental biology of uterine glands. Biol.Reprod., 2001, 65: 1311-1323.
[25] Bartol FF, Wiley AA, Floyd JG, et al. Uterine differentiation as a foundation for subsequent fertility. J. Reprod. Fertil. Suppl. , 1999, 54: 287-302.
[26] Zhu LJ, Bagchi MK, Bagchi IC. Attenuation of calcitonin gene expression in pregnant rat uterus leads to a block in embryonic implantation. Endocrinology, 1998,139:330-339.
[27] Chen JR., Cheng JG, Shatzer T, et al. Leukemia inhibitory factor can substitute for nidatory estrogen and is essential to inducing a receptive uterus for implantation but is not essential for subsequent embryogenesis. Endocrinology, 2000, 141: 4365-4372.
[28] Zhou HE, Zhang X, Nothnick WB. Disruption of the TIMP-1 gene product is associated with accelerated endometrial gland formation during early postnatal uterine development. Biol. Reprod., 2004, 71: 534-539.
[29] Kheradmand F, Rishi K, Werb Z. Signaling through the EGF receptor controls lung morphogenesis in part by regulating MT1-MMP-mediated activation of gelatinase A/MMP2. J. Cell Sci, 2002,115: 839-848.
[30] Simian M, Hirai Y, Navre M, et al. The interplay of matrix metalloproteinases,morphogens and growth factors is necessary for branching of mammary epithelial cells. Development, 2001, 128: 3117-3131.
[31] Hu J, Zhang X, Nothnick WB, et al. Matrix metalloproteinases and their tissue inhibitors in the developing neonatal mouse uterus. Biol. Reprod, 2004, 71:1598-1604.
[32] Hulboy DL, Rudolph LA, Matrisian LM. Matrix metalloproteinases as mediators of reproductive function. Mol Hum.Reprod. 1997, 3:27-45.
[33] Jones JI, Clemmons DR. Insulin-like growth factors and their binding proteins,biological actions. Endocr. Rev., 1995, 16: 3-34.
[34] Gu Y, Branham WS, Sheehan DM, et al. Tissue-specific expression of messenger ribonucleic acids for insulin-like growth factors and insulin-like growth factor-binding proteins during perinatal development of the rat uterus. Biol. Reprod.,1999,60: 1172-1182.
[35] Baker J, Hardy MP, Zhou J, et al. Effects of an Igfl gene null mutation on mouse reproduction. Mol. Endocrinol, 1996, 10: 903-918.
[36] Taylor KM, Chen C, Gray CA, et al. Expression of messenger ribonucleic acids for fibroblast growth factors 7 and 10, hepatocyte growth factor, and insulin-like growth factors and their receptors in the neonatal ovine uterus. Biol. Reprod., 2001, 64: 1236-1246.
[37] Taylor KM, Gray CA, Joyce MM, et al. Neonatal ovine uterine development involves alterations in expression of receptors for estrogen, progesterone, and prolactin. Biol.Reprod. , 2000, 63: 1192-1204.
[38] Carpenter KD, Gray CA, Noel S, et al. Prolactin regulation of neonatal ovine uterine gland morphogenesis. Endocrinology, 2003, 144: 110-120.
[39] Schwertfeger KL, Hunter S, Heasley LE, et al. Prolactin stimulates activation of c-jun N-terminal kinase (JNK). Mol. Endocrinol, 2000, 14: 1592-1602.
[40] Gubbay O, Critchley HO, Bowen JM, et al. Prolactin induces ERK phosphorylation in epithelial and CD56(+) natural killer cells of the human endometrium. J. Clin.Endocrinol. Metab., 2002, 87: 2329-2335.
[41] Bartol FF, Wiley AA, Coleman DA, et al Ovine uterine morphogenesis, effects of age and progestin administration and withdrawal on neonatal endometrial development and DNA synthesis. J. Anim. Sci, 1988, 66: 3000-3009.
[42] Allison GC, Bartol FF, Taylor KM, et al. Ovine uterine gland knock-out model,effects of gland ablation on the estrous cycle. Biol. Reprod., 2000, 62: 448-456.
[43] Bartol FF, Wiley AA, Spencer TE, et al. Progestin Exposure from birth, Epitenetic induction of a unique adult uterine phenotype in sheep-a glandless endometrium. Biol.Reprod, 1997,56: 133.
[44] Tarleton BJ, Wiley AA, Bartol FF Endometrial development and adenogenesis in the neonatal pig, effects of estradiol valerate and the antiestrogen ICI 182,780. Biol.Reprod, 1999,61:253-263.
[45] Lubahn DB, Moyer JS, Golding TS, et al. Alteration of reproductive function but not prenatal sexual development after insertional disruption of the mouse estrogen receptor gene. Proc. Natl Acad Sci. USA, 1993, 90: 11162-11166.
[1] De Neubourg DD, Mangelschots K, Van Royen E, et al.Impact of patients' choice for single embryo transfer of a top quality embryo versus double transfer in the first IVF/ICSI cycle. Hum Reprod, 2002, 17: 2621-2625.
[2] Van Landuyt L, Verheyen G, Tournaye H, et al.New Belgian embryo transfer policy leads to sharp decrease in multiple pregnancy rate. Reprod Biomed Online, 2006, 13: 765-771.
[3] Whittingham DG, Leibo SP, Mazur P. Survival of mouse embryos frozen to -196℃. Science, 1972, 178: 411-414.
[4] Rall WF, Fahy GM. Ice-free cryopreservation of mouse embryos at -196 degrees C by vitrification. Nature, 1985, 313(6003): 573-575.
[5] Ali J, Shelton JN. Design of vitrification solutions for the cryopreservation of embryos. J Reprod Fertil. 1993, 99(2): 471-477.
[6] Mukaida T, Wada S, Takahashi K, et al. Vitrification of human embryos based on the assessment of suitable condition for 8-cell mouse embryos. Hum Reprod, 1998, 13: 2874-2879.
[7] 王俊霞，朱桂金，魏玉兰．应用胚胎玻璃化冷冻技术获得临床妊娠及分娩一例．中华妇产科杂志，2004，39(1)：143．
[8] Balaban B, Urman B, Ata B, et al. A randomized controlled study of human Day 3 embryo cryopreservation by slow freezing or vitrification: vitrification is associated with higher survival, metabolism and blastocyst formation. Hum Reprod. 2008, 23(9):1976- 1982.
[9] Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, Tarlatzis BC. Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: which one is better? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2009.
[10] Li Y, Chen ZJ, Yang HJ, et al.Comparison of vitrification and slow-freezing of human day 3 cleavage stage embryos: post-vitrification development and pregnancy outcomes. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi, 2007, 42(11): 753-755.
[11] Loutradi KE, Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, et al.Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril, 2008, 90(1): 186-193.
[12] Chi-Gu KIM, Hwanyul YONG, Gene LEE, et al. Effect of Polyvinylpyrrolidone Concentration of Cryoprotectant on Mouse Embryo Development and Production of Pups.Journal of Reproduction and Development [J].2008, J Reprod Dev., 2008,54(4): 250-253.
[13] Ishimori H, Takahashi Y, Kanagawa H. Viability of vitrified mouse embryos using various cryoprotectant mixtures. Theriogenology, 1992, 37:481-487.
[14] Nakagate N. Production of normal young following transfer of mouse embryos obtained by in vitro fertilization between cryopreserved gametes. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility, 1993, 99: 77-80.
[15] Nakao K, Nakagate N, Katsuki M. Simple and efficient vitrification procedure for cryopreservation of mouse embryos. Experimental Animals, 1997, 46, 231-234.
[16] 王俊霞，朱桂金，魏玉兰．人卵裂期胚胎玻璃化冷冻成功妊娠一例[J]．生殖医学杂志，2003，12(6)：362-363．
[17] Choi DH, Chung HM,Lim JM, et al. Pregnancy and delivery of healthy infants developed of vitrified blastocysts in an IVF-ET programme[J]. Fertil Steril, 2000, 74(4): 838-839.
[18] Kasai M, Hamguchi Y, Zhu SE, et al. High survival of rabbit morulae after vitrification in an ethylene glycol based solution by a simple method. Biol Reprod ,1992, 46: 1042-1048.
[19] Ohta N, Nohara M, Kojimahara T, et al. Ultrarapid freezing of human embryos by vitrification method - a case of delivery. Japanese Journal of Fertility and Sterility ,1996, 41, 276-279.
[20] Rama Raju GA, Haranath GB, Krishna KM, et al. Vitrification of human 8-cell embryos, a modified protocol for better pregnancy rates. Reprod Biomed Online.2005, 11(4):434-437.
[21] Dhali A, Anchamparuthy VM, Butler SP, et al. Gene expression and development of mouse zygotes following droplet vitrification. Theriogenology, 2007, 68(9): 1292-1298.
[22] Mukaida T, Nakamura S, Tomiyama T, et al. Vitrification of human blastocysts using cryoloops: clinical outcome of 223 cycles. Hum Reprod. , 2003, 18(2):384-391.
[23] Saki G, Rahim F, Moradi L. The study of developmental capacity of vitrified mouse blastocysts in different straws after transfer to mouse pseudo pregnant., Pak J Biol Sci, 2008, 11(14): 1809-1814.
[24] Isachenko V, Selman H , Isachenko E, et al. Modified vitrification of human pronuclear oocytes:efficacy and effect on ultrastructure. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 2003, 7:211-216.
[25] Van den Abbeel E, Camus M, Van Waesberghe L, et al. A randomized comparison of the cryopreservation of one-cell human embryos with a slow controlled- rate cooling procedure or a rapid cooling procedure by direct plunging into liquid nitrogen.Human Reproduction, 1997, 12: 1554-1560.
[26] Saito H, Ishida GM, Kaneko T et al. Application of vitrification to human embryo freezing.Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation, 2000, 49:145- 149.
[27] Liebermann J, Tucker MJ. Comparison of vitrification and conventional cryopreser-vation of day 5 and day 6 blastocysts during clinical application. Fertil Steril. 2006,86(l):20-26.
[28] Hiraoka K, Fuchiwaki M, Hiraoka K, et al.Vitrified human day-7 blastocyst transfer:11 cases. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008, 17(5):689-694.
[29] Zhu GJ, Jin L, Zhang HW, Li YF, Wei YL, Hu J. Vitrification of human cleaved embryos in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi.2005,40(10):682-684.
[30] Kader A, Agarwal A, Abdelrazik H, et al.Evaluation of post-thaw DNA integrity of mouse blastocysts after ultrarapid and slow freezing. Fertil Steril. 2008 Sep 5. [Epub ahead of print]
[31] Park SY, Kim EY, Cui XS, et al. Increase in DNA fragmentation and apoptosis-related gene expression in frozen-thawed bovine blastocysts. Zygote. 2006,14(2): 125-131.
[32] Mamo S, Bodo S, Kobolak J, et al. Gene expression profiles of vitrified in vivo derived 8-cell stage mouse embryos detected by high density oligonucleotide microarrays. Mol Reprod Dev. 2006, 73(11): 1380-1392.
[33] Boonkusol D, Gal AB, Bodo S, et al. Gene expression profiles and in vitro development following vitrification of pronuclear and 8-cell stage mouse embryos.Mol Reprod Dev. 2006, 73(6):700-708.
[34] Gottumukkala Achyuta Rama Raju, Gomedhikam Jaya Prakash, Kota Murali Krishna,et al. Neonatal outcome after vitrified day 3 embryo transfers: a preliminary study.Fertil Steril. 2008, Aug 8. [Epub ahead of print]
[35] Kumasako Y, Otsu E, Utsunomiya T, et al. The efficacy of the transfer of twice frozen-thawed embryos with the vitrification method. Fertil Steril. 2009, 91(2):383-386.
[36] Hiraoka K, Hiraoka K, Kinutani M, et al. Successful dizygotic twin pregnancy after recryopreservation by vitrification of human expanded blastocysts developed from frozen cleaved embryos on day 6: a case report. J Reprod Med. 2006, 51 (3):213-216.
[37] Bielanski A, Nadin-Davis S, Sapp T, et al. Viral con tam ination of embryos cryopreserved in liquid nitrogen [J]. Cryobiology, 2000, 40(2): 110-116.