Human Reproduction Update, Vol.6, No.6 pp.564-577, 2000
© European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology 2000; all rights reserved
Long-term effects on offspring of exposure of oocytes and embryos to chemical and physical agents
1 South Australian Research and Development Institute, Turretfield Research Centre, Rosedale SA 5350, Australia 2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
To whom correspondence should be addressed at: S. K. Walker, South Australian Research and Development Institute, Turretfield Research Centre, Rosedale SA 5350. Tel: (61) 8 85 249017; Fax: (61) 8 85 249088; e-mail: walker.simon{at}saugov.sa.gov.au
Abstract
Central to this review is the knowledge that, in some livestock species, the environment in which fertilization and embryo development occurs influences not only preimplantation embryo development but also the phenotype of resulting offspring. This knowledge is based on in-vitro studies where the induced changes in the embryo can result in an array of developmental abnormalities after transfer including fetal overgrowth. Whilst such findings are of immediate relevance to assisted reproduction in the human, they also raise another equally important but less obvious issue. Can the in-vivo environments in which fertilization and embryo development normally occur be influenced by exogenous factors (either physical or chemical) in such a way that long-term development is adversely affected? In a global environment of increased use of synthetic chemicals and increased production of pollutants, it is an issue of growing relevance. This review examines technical information that is pertinent to these issues together with a brief assessment of some possible molecular mechanisms responsible for aberrant development. The review concludes with an assessment of the clinical significance of the findings.
Key words: assisted reproduction / drugs / embryo / pollutants / toxicants
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  Z. Rosenwaks and K. Bendikson Further evidence of the safety of assisted reproductive technologies PNAS, April 3, 2007; 104(14): 5709 - 5710. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Auroux The child of problems. Hum. Reprod., July 1, 2006; 21(7): 1943 - 1944. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Hiendleder, M. Wirtz, C. Mund, M. Klempt, H.-D. Reichenbach, M. Stojkovic, M. Weppert, H. Wenigerkind, M. Elmlinger, F. Lyko, et al. Tissue-Specific Effects of In Vitro Fertilization Procedures on Genomic Cytosine Methylation Levels in Overgrown and Normal Sized Bovine Fetuses Biol Reprod, July 1, 2006; 75(1): 17 - 23. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Z. Roth and P.J. Hansen Sphingosine 1-Phosphate Protects Bovine Oocytes from Heat Shock During Maturation Biol Reprod, December 1, 2004; 71(6): 2072 - 2078. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. P. Fleming, W. Y. Kwong, R. Porter, E. Ursell, I. Fesenko, A. Wilkins, D. J. Miller, A. J. Watkins, and J. J. Eckert The Embryo and Its Future Biol Reprod, October 1, 2004; 71(4): 1046 - 1054. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|