Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Mar 13;20(1):e20220076.
doi: 10.1590/1984-3143-AR2022-0076. eCollection 2023.

Differentially methylated regions identified in bovine embryos are not observed in adulthood

Affiliations

Differentially methylated regions identified in bovine embryos are not observed in adulthood

Luna Nascimento Vargas et al. Anim Reprod. .

Abstract

The establishment of epigenetic marks during the reprogramming window is susceptible to environmental influences, and stimuli during this critical stage can cause altered DNA methylation in offspring. In a previous study, we found that low levels of sulphur and cobalt (low S/Co) in the diet offered to oocyte donors altered the DNA methylome of bovine embryos. However, due to the extensive epigenetic reprogramming that occurs during embryogenesis, we hypothesized that the different methylation regions (DMRs) identified in the blastocysts may not maintain in adulthood. Here, we aimed to characterize DMRs previously identified in embryos, in the blood and sperm of adult progenies of two groups of heifers (low S/Co and control). We used six bulls and characterized the DNA methylation levels of KDM2A, KDM5A, KMT2D, and DOT1L genes. Our results showed that all DMRs analysed in both groups and tissues were hypermethylated unlike that noticed in the embryonic methylome profiles. These results suggest that embryo DMRs were reprogrammed during the final stages of de novo methylation during embryogenesis or later in development. Therefore, due to the highly dynamic epigenetic state during early embryonic development, we suggest that is essential to validate the DMRs found in embryos in adult individuals.

Keywords: DMRs; cattle; epigenetics; methylome; reprogramming.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest: The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Representation of the KDM2A, KDM5A, KMT2D, and DOT1L gene structures, GC content, and CpG island prediction. Green bars represent the input sequence; below, blue lines represent introns, blue arrows represent exons, and orange arrows represent primer positions. The GC content and CpG islands are predicted for each gene. The graphs were generated using Geneious v2020.0.5 (Biomatters, Auckland, New Zealand).
Figure 2
Figure 2. DNA methylation profile of KDM2A gene in blood and sperm for control and low S/Co groups. (A) Blood samples, (B) Sperm samples, and (C) Comparative analysis of methylation by CpG sites between control and low S/Co in blood and sperm. Each line represents an individual DNA clone, and each circle represents a CpG dinucleotide. Black circles represent methylated cytosines and white circles represent unmethylated cytosines. The DNA methylation percentage for each animal (Bull 1, Bull 2, Bull 3, Bull 4, Bull 5, and Bull 6) is represented as mean ± standard deviation of the mean. Differences in DNA methylation among animals within the same group are shown by letters a and b (p < 0.05). (*) represents significant difference in the mean values for methylation of individual CpGs using Fisher's exact test (p<0.05). (n) represents the number of sequenced alleles of each sample.
Figure 5
Figure 5. DNA methylation profile of DOT1L gene in blood and sperm for control and low S/Co groups. (A) Blood samples, (B) Sperm samples, and (C) Comparative analysis of methylation by CpG sites between control and low S/Co in blood and sperm. Each line represents an individual DNA clone, and each circle represents a CpG dinucleotide. Black circles represent methylated cytosines and white circles represent unmethylated cytosines. The DNA methylation percentage for each animal (Bull 1, Bull 2, Bull 3, Bull 4, Bull 5, and Bull 6) is represented as mean ± standard deviation of the mean. Differences in DNA methylation among animals within the same group are shown by letters a and b (p < 0.05). (*) represents significant difference in the mean values for methylation of individual CpGs using Fisher's exact test (p<0.05). (n) represents the number of sequenced alleles of each sample.
Figure 4
Figure 4. DNA methylation profile of KMT2D gene in blood and sperm for control and low S/Co groups. (A) Blood samples, (B) Sperm samples, and (C) Comparative analysis of methylation by CpG sites between control and low S/Co in blood and sperm. Each line represents an individual DNA clone, and each circle represents a CpG dinucleotide. Black circles represent methylated cytosines and white circles represent unmethylated cytosines. The DNA methylation percentage for each animal (Bull 1, Bull 2, Bull 3, Bull 4, Bull 5, and Bull 6) is represented as mean ± standard deviation of the mean. Differences in DNA methylation among animals within the same group are shown by letters a and b (p < 0.05). (n) represents the number of sequenced alleles of each sample.
Figure 3
Figure 3. DNA methylation profile of KDM5A gene in blood and sperm for control and low S/Co groups. (A) Blood samples, (B) Sperm samples, and (C) Comparative analysis of methylation by CpG sites between control and low S/Co in blood and sperm. Each line represents an individual DNA clone, and each circle represents a CpG dinucleotide. Black circles represent methylated cytosines and white circles represent unmethylated cytosines. The DNA methylation percentage for each animal (Bull 1, Bull 2, Bull 3, Bull 4, Bull 5, and Bull 6) is represented as mean ± standard deviation of the mean. Differences in DNA methylation among animals within the same group are shown by letters a and b (p < 0.05). (*) represents significant difference in the mean values for methylation of individual CpGs using Fisher's exact test (p<0.05). (n) represents the number of sequenced alleles of each sample.
Figure 6
Figure 6. Percentage of methylation in KDM2A, KDM5A, KMT2D, and DOT1L genes (A) Comparison of DNA methylation levels between control and low S/Co groups for blood and sperm samples. (B) Comparison of DNA methylation levels in blood and sperm samples in the control and low S/Co groups, respectively. Numbers represent significant differences in the mean values for methylation using the Mann-Whitney test (p ≤ 0.05)

References

    1. Almeida DL, Pavanello A, Saavedra LP, Pereira TS, Castro-Prado MAA, Mathias PCF. Environmental monitoring and the developmental origins of health and disease. J Dev Orig Health Dis. 2019;10(6):608–615. doi: 10.1017/S2040174419000151. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Canovas S, Ross PJ, Kelsey G, Coy P. DNA Methylation in Embryo Development: Epigenetic Impact of ART (Assisted Reproductive Technologies) BioEssays. 2017;39(11):1700106. doi: 10.1002/bies.201700106. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Capra E, Lazzari B, Turri F, Cremonesi P, Portela AMR, Ajmone-Marsan P, Stella A, Pizzi F. Epigenetic analysis of high and low motile sperm populations reveals methylation variation in satellite regions within the pericentromeric position and in genes functionally related to sperm DNA organization and maintenance in Bos taurus. BMC Genomics. 2019;20(1):940. doi: 10.1186/s12864-019-6317-6. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Carlin G, Chaumontet C, Blachier F, Barbillon P, Darcel N, Blais A, Delteil C, Guillin FM, Blat S, van der Beek EM, Kodde A, Tome D, Davila AM. Maternal high-protein diet during pregnancy modifies rat offspring body weight and insulin signalling but not macronutrient preference in adulthood. Nutrients. 2019;11(1):96. doi: 10.3390/nu11010096. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Carvalho JO, Michalczechen‐Lacerda VA, Sartori R, Rodrigues FC, Bravim O, Franco MM, Dode MA. The methylation patterns of the IGF2 and IGF2R genes in bovine spermatozoa are not affected by flow‐cytometric sex sorting. Mol Reprod Dev. 2012;79(2):77–84. doi: 10.1002/mrd.21410. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources