4.6 Article

Spermatozoa from infertile patients exhibit differences of DNA methylation associated with spermatogenesis-related processes: an array-based analysis

期刊

REPRODUCTIVE BIOMEDICINE ONLINE
卷 33, 期 6, 页码 709-719

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2016.09.001

关键词

age; assisted reproduction; DNA methylation; epigenetics; male infertility; spermatozoa

资金

  1. Gobierno de Espana, Spain [PS09/00330]
  2. Generalitat de Catalunya [SGR2014-524 2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The influence of aberrant sperm DNA methylation on the reproductive capacity of couples has been postulated as a cause of infertility. This study compared the DNA methylation of spermatozoa of 19 fertile donors and 42 infertile patients using the Illumina 450K array. Clustering analysis of methylation data arranged fertile and infertile patients into two groups. Bivariate clustering analysis identified a differential distribution of samples according to the characteristics of seminogram and age, suggesting a possible link between these parameters and specific methylation profiles. The study identified 696 differentially methylated cytosine-guanine dinucleotides (CpG) associated with 501 genes between fertile donors and infertile patients. Ontological enrichment analysis revealed 13 processes related to spermatogenesis. Data filtering identified a set of 17 differentially methylated genes, some of which had functions relating to spermatogenesis. A significant association was identified between RPS6KA2 hypermethylation and advanced age (P = 0.016); APCS hypermethylation and oligozoospermia (P = 0.041); JAM3/NCAPD3 hypermethylation and numerical chromosome sperm anomalies (P = 0.048); and ANK2 hypermethylation and lower pregnancy rate (P = 0.040). This description of a set of differentially methylated genes provides a framework for further investigation into the influence of such variation in male fertility in larger patient cohorts. (C) 2016 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据