Back

Variation of female pronucleus reveal oocyte or embryo abnormality: An expert experience deep learning of non-dark box analysis

Yang, J.; Wang, Y.; Li, C.; Han, W.; Liu, W.; Xiong, S.; zhang, Q.; Tong, K.; Zhang, x.; Huang, G.

2021-12-17 genetics
10.1101/2021.12.17.473071 bioRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPronuclear assessment appears to have the ability to distinguish good and bad embryos in the zygote stage, but paradoxical results were obtained in clinical studies. This situation might be caused by the robust qualitative detection of the development of dynamic pronuclei. Here, we aim to establish a quantitative pronuclear measurement method by applying expert experience deep learning from large annotated datasets. MethodsConvinced handle-annotated 2PN images (13419) were used for deep learning then corresponded errors were recorded through handle check for subsequent parameters adjusting. We used 790 embryos with 52479 PN images from 155 patients for analysis the area of pronuclei and the pre-implantation genetic test results. Establishment of the exponential fitting equation and the key coefficient {beta} 1was extracted from the model for quantitative analysis for pronuclear(PN) annotation and automatic recognition. FindingsBased on the female original PN coefficient {beta}1, the chromosome-normal rate in the blastocyst with biggest PN area is much higher than that of the blastocyst with smallest PN area (58.06% vs. 45.16%, OR=1.68 [1.07-2.64]; P=0.031). After adjusting coefficient {beta}1 by the first three frames which high variance of outlier PN areas was removed, coefficient {beta}1 at 12 hours and at 14 hours post-insemination, similar but stronger evidence was obtained. All these discrepancies resulted from the female propositus in the PGT-SR subgroup and smaller chromosomal errors. Conclusion(s)The results suggest that detailed analysis of the images of embryos could improve our understanding of developmental biology. FundingNone

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Reproduction
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.1%
2
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 24%
6.9%
3
Frontiers in Genetics
230 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.4%
4
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
233 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.4%
5
Aquaculture
31 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
6
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 15%
5.6%
7
Biology of Reproduction
36 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.9%
8
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 24%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
9
Molecular Human Reproduction
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.4%
10
Genes
144 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.7%
11
Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports
30 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.7%
12
Heliyon
152 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
13
Applied Sciences
25 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.2%
14
Human Reproduction
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.2%
15
Cells
249 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
16
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
494 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.5%
17
European Journal of Human Genetics
58 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
18
Journal of Genetics and Genomics
38 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.0%
19
Genes to Cells
25 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
20
Computers in Biology and Medicine
128 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
21
Chromosoma
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
22
Journal of Pathology Informatics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%
23
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 38%
0.6%
24
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.6%
25
Experimental Cell Research
28 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%
26
Biology
45 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%