A study on methods for preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) on in vivo- and in vitro-produced equine embryos, with emphasis on embryonic sex determination.
Abstract: Two methods for preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) have been described for equine embryos: trophoblast cell biopsy (TCB) or blastocoele fluid aspiration (BFA). While TCB is widely applied for both in vivo- and in vitro-produced embryos, BFA has been mostly utilized for in vivo-produced embryos. Alternative methods for PGT, including analysis of cell-free DNA (CFD) in the medium where in vitro-produced embryos are cultured, have been reported in humans but not for equine embryos. In Experiment 1, in vivo- (n = 10) and in vitro-produced (n = 13) equine embryos were subjected to BFA, cultured for 24 h, then subjected to TCB, and cultured for additional 24 h. No detrimental effect on embryonic diameter or re-expansion rates was observed for either embryo group (P > 0.05). In Experiment 2, the concordance (i.e., agreement on detecting the same embryonic sex using two techniques) among BFA, TCB, and the whole embryo (Whole) was studied by detecting the sex-determining region Y (SRY) or testis-specific y-encoded protein 1 (TSPY) (Y-chromosome), and androgen receptor (AR; X-chromosome) genes using PCR. Overall, a higher concordance for detecting embryonic sex was observed among techniques for in vivo-produced embryos (67-100 %; n = 14 embryos) than for in vitro-produced embryos (31-92 %; n = 13 embryos). The concordance between sample types increased when utilizing TSPY (77-100 %) instead of SRY (31-100 %) as target gene. In Experiment 3, CFD analysis was performed on in vitro-produced embryos to determine embryonic sex via PCR (SRY [Y-chromosome] and amelogenin - AMEL [X- and Y-chromosomes]). Overall, CFD was detected in all medium samples, and the concordance between CFD sample and the whole embryo was 60 % when utilizing SRY and AMEL genes. In conclusion, equine embryos can be subjected to two biopsy procedures (24 h apart) without apparent detrimental effects on embryonic size. For in vivo-, but not for in vitro-produced equine embryos, BFA can be considered a potential alternative to TCB for PGT. Finally, CFD can be further explored as a non-invasive method for PGT in in vitro produced equine embryos.
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.
Overview
This study investigates various methods for preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) of equine embryos produced both in vivo and in vitro, focusing on determining the embryo’s sex.
The research compares traditional biopsy methods with less invasive techniques and explores the potential for non-invasive analysis of genetic material shed by embryos into their culture medium.
Background and Objectives
Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) is commonly used in equine reproduction to determine genetic traits, including sex, before embryo implantation.
Two primary PGT methods have been established for horse embryos:
Trophoblast Cell Biopsy (TCB) – extracting cells from the outer layer of the embryo (trophoblast).
Blastocoele Fluid Aspiration (BFA) – collecting fluid from the blastocoele cavity inside the embryo.
While TCB is used for embryos produced both in vivo (inside the mare) and in vitro (in the lab), BFA has mainly been applied to in vivo-produced embryos.
Newer, less invasive techniques such as analyzing cell-free DNA (CFD) released into the culture medium have been described in human PGT but have not yet been explored in horses.
The study aims to evaluate and compare these methods for accuracy and safety in equine embryos, particularly for sex determination.
Experiment 1: Effects of Sequential Biopsy Procedures
Objective: Assess if performing BFA followed by TCB 24 hours later impacts embryo development.
Method:
Embryos produced in vivo (n=10) and in vitro (n=13) were first subjected to BFA.
They were cultured for 24 hours, then underwent TCB.
Post-biopsy, embryos were cultured an additional 24 hours.
Results:
No significant changes in embryo size or ability to re-expand were observed following these procedures for either embryo group (p > 0.05).
This indicates that performing two biopsies one day apart does not harm embryo viability.
Experiment 2: Concordance of Sex Determination Among Techniques
Objective: Evaluate the agreement in sex determination results using BFA, TCB, and analysis of the whole embryo.
Method:
Performed PCR targeting sex-determining genes:
SRY and TSPY – genes on the Y chromosome indicating male sex.
Androgen receptor (AR) gene – present on the X chromosome.
Samples included those taken via BFA, TCB, and whole embryo lysates.
Analyzed concordance—the consistency of sex detection across methods.
Results:
In vivo-produced embryos showed higher concordance (67-100%) among methods compared to in vitro-produced embryos (31-92%).
The target gene influenced concordance:
TSPY yielded better agreement rates (77-100%) than SRY (31-100%), suggesting TSPY is more reliable for sexing in this context.
Experiment 3: Analysis of Cell-Free DNA (CFD) in Culture Medium
Objective: Test the feasibility of non-invasive sex determination using CFD present in the culture medium of in vitro-produced embryos.
Method:
Collected culture medium samples surrounding in vitro-produced embryos.
Performed PCR targeting SRY (Y chromosome) and amelogenin (AMEL, present on both X and Y chromosomes) genes.
Compared results to sex determination from the whole embryo.
Results:
CFD was detected in the culture medium of all embryos tested.
Concordance between CFD and whole embryo sex determination was 60% using these gene targets.
This indicates potential for a non-invasive PGT method, but accuracy needs improvement.
Conclusions and Implications
It is safe to perform two biopsy procedures (BFA followed by TCB) on equine embryos 24 hours apart without detrimental effects on embryo size or viability.
For in vivo-produced embryos, BFA can serve as a viable alternative to TCB for PGT, offering possibly less invasive sampling.
For in vitro-produced embryos, BFA showed lower concordance and may be less reliable, so TCB remains the preferred biopsy method currently.
Analysis of cell-free DNA from embryo culture medium represents a promising non-invasive approach for PGT in equine embryos, but accuracy remains below that of biopsy techniques and requires further refinement.
Overall, this research helps improve genetic testing strategies in equine reproduction, optimizing embryo handling to support breeding programs and reduce invasive interventions.
Cite This Article
APA
Ramírez-Agámez L, Castaneda C, Hernández-Avilés C, Grahn RA, Raudsepp T, Love CC.
(2024).
A study on methods for preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) on in vivo- and in vitro-produced equine embryos, with emphasis on embryonic sex determination.
Theriogenology, 227, 41-48.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2024.07.009
Equine Fertility Laboratory, Departments of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77843-4475, USA. Electronic address: luisa.ramirez.a@tamu.edu.
Castaneda, Caitlin
Departments of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, School of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77843-4475, USA.
Hernández-Avilés, Camilo
Equine Fertility Laboratory, Departments of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77843-4475, USA.
Grahn, Robert A
Veterinary Genetics Laboratory, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, CA, 95617-1102, USA.
Raudsepp, Terje
Departments of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, School of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77843-4475, USA.
Love, Charles C
Equine Fertility Laboratory, Departments of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77843-4475, USA.