Embryonic development is a dynamic process in which embryo morphology may change immensely within several hours. Therefore, identifying and selecting embryos with the highest probability of developing and achieving a pregnancy is a major challenge. The timing of embryonic cleavage may serve as an additional indicator for the identification of quality embryos. The aim of this study was to characterize the cleavage timing of mouse embryos and to identify the stage that is most indicative of blastocyst formation. Mated mice (CB6F1) were sacrificed 20 h after hCG administration; putative zygotes were recovered and cultured (50 embryos in each 20-µL drop of M16) in a time-lapse system (EmbryoGuard; IMT, Ltd., Ness-Ziona, Israel) inside the incubator. The time-lapse system was programmed to take photos at half-hour intervals such that culture dishes were not removed from the incubator. The ‘shortest half’ statistical procedure of JMPIN (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC, USA) was utilized to evaluate the period during which at least 50% of the embryonic population cleaves within the shortest time frame. Captured images made it possible to search along the time axis for the densest 50% of cleavage observations. Developing embryos were categorized into 3 groups according to the time of cleavage after hCG administration: before, during, and after the ‘shortest half’ for each developmental stage. Two hundred thirty putative zygotes cleaved and created 2-cell-stage embryos, of which 55 arrested at various stages and 175 progressed to the blastocyst stage. During embryonic development, cleavage timing appeared to become less uniform and the ‘shortest half’ became longer for each successive cell division: Whereas the shortest period in which 50% of the 2-cell-stage embryos cleaved was a 2-h interval, cleavage into the 4-cell, 8-cell, and blastocyst stages took 2.5, 3.5, and 5 h, respectively. The ‘short half’ for the first cleavage appears to be a predictive time frame for subsequent embryonic development, because cleavage was closely synchronized with 80% of the embryos developing to the blastocyst stage. Note that only a small number of embryos were actually cleaving early, while the ‘shortest half’ consisted of 50% of the embryonic population. Moreover, late-cleaving embryos in the 2-cell stage expressed inferior developmental potential relative to those that cleaved within the ‘shortest half’ (see Table 1). In summary, 2-cell-stage embryos that cleaved within the ‘shortest half’ seemed to be better synchronized and consequently more competent than the rest of the embryonic population. Embryonic cleavage timing using the ‘shortest half’ parameter can be considered a biological indicator of embryo potential. It may be useful as an additional tool for selecting embryos for transfer and cryopreservation.
Table 1.
Cleavage timing distribution into the 2-cell stage according to the shortest half
Modeling Embryonic Cleavage Patterns
