Brief Communications

Nature 403, 500-501 (3 February 2000) | doi:10.1038/35000651

Reproductive biology: Mitochondria and the death of oocytes

Gloria I. Perez1, Alexander M. Trbovich1, Roger G. Gosden2 and Jonathan L. Tilly1

In females of many species, over half of the germ-cell (oocyte) population dies by apoptosis before birth1. For example, germ-cell numbers peak at 5–7times106 at week 20 of gestation in humans, but drop to less than 1times106 in the early neonatal period2, 3. Apparent germ-cell wastage occurs on a similar scale in female rodents, falling from 6.4times104 at day 17.5 of pregnancy to 1.9times104 shortly after birth4. Krakauer and Mira5 have interpreted this death of germ cells as a developmental solution to the accumulation of mutations in mitochondria, proposing that prenatal oocyte apoptosis effectively removes oocytes carrying mutant mitochondria. Here we test whether mitochondria can actually influence oocyte fate by microinjecting small numbers of mitochondria into mouse oocytes and find that this prevents these cells from undergoing apoptosis. We also show that a common mitochondrial DNA deletion occurs more frequently in unfertilized, as compared with fertilized, human oocytes.

We used oocytes from FVB female mice, because these oocytes undergo inherently high rates of apoptosis in vitro6. After being denuded of somatic (granulosa) cells, each oocyte was microinjected individually, either with buffer or with about 5times103 mitochondria purified from non-apoptotic follicular granulosa cells of female mice that had been primed 46 hours beforehand with a single injection of equine chorionic gonadotropin to promote granulosa-cell viability7. After culturing for 24 hours, 70% of the oocytes that had either not been microinjected or had been microinjected with buffer underwent apoptosis8, 9, whereas only 36% of the oocytes microinjected with mitochondria initiated apoptosis (Fig. 1). As a single mouse oocyte contains about 1times10 5 mitochondria10, these findings are striking, considering that the total mitochondrial pool per microinjected oocyte was only increased by some 5%.

Figure 1: Effect of microinjecting mitochondria on the occurrence of spontaneous apoptosis in murine oocytes incubated in vitro for 24 hours.
Figure 1 : Effect of microinjecting mitochondria on the occurrence of spontaneous
apoptosis in murine oocytes incubated in vitro for 24 hours. Unfortunately we are unable to provide accessible alternative text for this. If you require assistance to access this image, or to obtain a text description, please contact npg@nature.com

The magnitude of apoptosis was equivalent in oocytes not microinjected (control, CON) and those microinjected with buffer alone. However, microinjection of approximately 5times103 purified mitochondria (MITO) suppressed the activation of programmed cell death in cultured oocytes by 50%. The total number of oocytes used in each group is indicated over the respective bar (meanplusminuss.e.m., n=3 independent experiments; *P<0.05 ).

High resolution image and legend (12K)

We then used the polymerase chain reaction to assay for a common deletion of 4,977 base pairs in mitochondrial DNA in 72 human primordial follicles isolated from ovarian biopsies of women aged 20–49. Deletions were detected in 14 follicles (R.G.G. et al., unpublished results), although without the correlation with age reported in long-lived somatic cells11. In parallel studies, the frequency of deletions in human embryos was lower than in oocytes, suggesting that superior oocytes had been selected for fertilization (R.G.G. et al., unpublished results).

Although these two pieces of evidence support the hypothesis of Krakauer and Mira5, several issues remain unresolved. We agree that one function of prenatal germ-cell loss could be to remove oocytes with defective mitochondrial genomes; however, these oocytes probably represent a very small percentage of the total oocyte pool lost before birth, and thus additional functions for prenatal oocyte death need to be considered1.

The proposed mitochondrial mutations must also be defects carried forward from the previous generation(s), as it is implausible that so many oocytes could be lost prenatally as a result of mitochondrial DNA mutations accumulating between oogenesis and parturition. This may create a paradox, however, because Krakauer and Mira5 predict that the organism will arise from an oocyte free of mitochondrial DNA defects. In many animal species, the mitochondria present in all cells of the organism are derived from replication of the original maternal (oocyte-derived) mitochondria, implying that all cells in the newly developing embryo, including the germ line, would possess mitochondria free of DNA mutations.

Krakauer and Mira5 also do not account for the continued postnatal loss of oocytes in many species. The oocyte population in human females declines mainly as a result of the degeneration (atresia) of follicles housing each oocyte to about 3times105 at puberty, 2.5times10 4 at age 37, and 1times103 at menopause12. A similar situation occurs in postnatal rodent ovaries, although the number of follicles is proportionately smaller13.

The events responsible for the initiation of postnatal follicular atresia do not universally depend on the oocyte as the prime factor. Atresia is driven by oocyte apoptosis in the early (primordial, primary, preantral) stages of development6, 13, 14, but somatic granulosa cells of the follicle are the first to undergo apoptosis during atresia of follicles at later stages of development, including the point of preovulatory selection14. Krakauer and Mira5 do not explain how mutations in the mitochondrial DNA of an oocyte might trigger apoptosis in the surrounding granulosa cells as a means to remove that follicle from the ovulatory pathway, particularly in the light of the fact that gonadotropins prevent atresia of maturing follicles by direct action on the follicular somatic cells14.

Reply — Krakauer and Mira

Top

References

  1. Morita, Y. & Tilly, J. L. Dev. Biol. 213, 1–17 (1999). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
  2. Baker, T. G. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 158, 417–433 (1963). | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
  3. Forabosco, A. et al. Anat. Rec. 231, 201– 208 (1991). | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
  4. Beaumont, H. M. & Mandl, A. M. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 155, 557–579 ( 1961).
  5. Krakauer, D. C. & Mira, A. Nature 400, 125–126 (1999).  | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
  6. Morita, Y. et al. Mol. Endocrinol. 13, 841– 850 (1999). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
  7. Tilly, J. L. et al. Endocrinology 136, 232– 241 (1995). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
  8. Perez, G. I. et al. Nature Med. 3, 1228– 1232 (1997). | Article |
  9. Perez, G. I. et al. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 5, 414– 420 (1999). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
  10. Piko, L. & Matsumoto, L. Dev. Biol. 49, 1–10 (1976). | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
  11. Lee, H. C. et al. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1226, 37– 43 (1994). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
  12. Faddy, M. J. et al. Hum. Reprod. 7, 1342– 1346 (1992). | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
  13. Perez, G. I. et al. Nature Genet. 21, 200– 203 (1999).
  14. Tilly, J. L. & Robles, R. in Molecular Biology in Reproductive Medicine (ed. Fauser, B. C. J. M.) 79–101 (Parthenon, New York, 1999).
  1. Vincent Center for Reproductive Biology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, VBK137E-GYN, Boston, Massachusetts 02114, USA
  2. Centre for Reproduction, Growth and Development, University of Leeds, Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds LS2 9NS, UK

Correspondence to: Jonathan L. Tilly1 e-mail: Email: jtilly@partners.org

Extra navigation

.

natureproducts


ADVERTISEMENT