Skip to main content
Wiley Open Access Collection logoLink to Wiley Open Access Collection
. 2025 Nov 10;48(1):e70087. doi: 10.1002/bies.70087

Protein Kinase C Regulates Meiosis in Mammalian Oocytes

Jaroslav Kalous 1,, Fatima J Berro 1, Lucie Nemcova 2
PMCID: PMC12822854  PMID: 41208434

ABSTRACT

The protein kinase C (PKC) family comprises enzyme kinases that regulate cell survival, metabolism, and proliferation. PKC isotypes (PKCs) phosphorylate specific downstream substrates, thereby controlling critical steps in both mitotic and meiotic cell division. Throughout the cell cycle, PKCs orchestrate essential processes, such as chromosome segregation, recombination, and cell cycle progression. In vertebrates, PKCs play essential roles in oogenesis and the early stages of embryo development. Disruption of PKC signaling in mammalian oocytes can lead to errors in chromosome segregation and induce meiotic arrest. Therefore, investigating PKC function in meiosis is crucial for advancing fundamental biological research and for developing new approaches to infertility treatment.

Keywords: early embryo, meiosis, oocytes, protein kinase C, spindle


Protein kinase C (PKC) participates in the regulation of mammalian oocyte meiosis. PKC is involved in meiosis resumption in prophase I and in the stabilization of meiosis I and meiosis II spindles. PKC stimulates the maturation‐promoting factor during fertilization and stabilizes the mitotic spindle during early embryo development.

graphic file with name BIES-48-e70087-g002.jpg

1. Introduction

Protein kinases C (PKCs) are phospholipid‐dependent serine/threonine kinases belonging to the AGC family of protein kinases [1]. PKCs, as crucial mediators in numerous signaling cascades, convert extracellular signals into intracellular responses [2]. PKCs regulate various cellular processes, such as proliferation, cell cycle progression, differentiation, apoptosis, and processes that may contribute to tumor formation and metastatic cancer cells dissemination [3, 4, 5]. In mammals, the protein kinase C (PKC) family comprises at least 12 isotypes, which are classified into three groups based on structural domains and activation mechanisms: conventional PKCs (cPKCs; α, β1, βII, γ), novel PKCs (nPKCs; δ, ε, η, θ, μ), and atypical PKCs (aPKCs; ζ, ι, λ) [6].

Like many kinases, PKCs are regulated by phosphorylation. In contrast to most kinases, these phosphorylations occur shortly after biosynthesis of PKCs [7, 8]. Newly synthesized PKCs are matured by phosphorylation at three conserved regions: the activation loop by the phosphoinositide‐dependent kinase PDK‐1 [9, 10] and two sites on the C‐tail region [8]. In most protein kinase C (PKC) isotypes, phosphorylation of the C‐tail sites relies on both the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 2 (mTORC2) [11] and the intrinsic catalytic activity of PKCs [12]. Phosphorylations of PKCs are constitutive and serve as a priming event that enables catalytic activation in response to cellular signaling [8, 13]

Phosphorylated PKC remains inactive and its activation depends on the intracellular second messengers such as diacylglycerol (DAG), calcium ions (Ca2⁺), and negatively charged phospholipids [14]. Specifically, cPKCs require both DAG and elevated intracellular Ca2⁺ levels in the presence of negatively charged acidic phospholipids [15]. Similarly, nPKCs also require both DAG and acidic phospholipids, however, they are thought to function independently of Ca2⁺ [16, 17]. However, aPKCs are activated only by acidic phospholipids, such as phosphatidylinositol(3,4,5)‐trisphosphate and phosphatidic acid, as well as by other lipids including ceramide and sphingosine‐1‐phosphate [18, 19, 20].

Upon activation, PKC isotypes are selectively translocated from cytoplasm to specific intracellular sites, including plasma membrane [21], nuclear membrane [22], endoplasmic reticulum [23], Golgi [24], mitochondria [25], and cytoskeletal components [26], where each isotype interacts with its anchoring protein, receptor for activated C kinase (RACK), and elicits different biological effects. Individual PKC isotypes target specific serine/threonine residues on specific protein substrates. Known PKC substrates include membrane‐associated myristoylated alanine‐rich C‐kinase substrate (MARCKS), receptor for activated C kinase (RACK), dynamin, the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), mitogen‐activated protein kinase 5 (MEK5), cyclin‐dependent kinase 1 (CDK1), and cyclin B, among others [16, 27, 28, 29].

This review focuses on the role of PKCs in regulating oocyte meiosis and early embryo development.

2. PKC Regulates Cell Cycle Progression

In both mitosis and meiosis, the transition from the G2 phase to the M phase is driven by CDK1, the catalytic subunit of the M‐phase‐promoting factor (MPF) [30, 31, 32]. The MPF complex, which is composed of CDK1 and its regulatory subunit cyclin B, remains inactive until CDK1 is phosphorylated at Thr161 by a CDK‐inactivating kinase (CAK) and dephosphorylated at Thr14/Tyr15 by Cdc25 phosphatase [33, 34]. This phosphatase plays a key role in regulating cell division by removing inhibitory phosphorylation of CDK1, thereby activating it [35].

Other kinases that contribute to cell cycle regulation include Polo‐like kinase 1 (Plk1), mitogen‐activated protein kinase (MAPK), protein kinase B (PKB), Aurora kinases, CDK1‐activating kinases, and PKCs [36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42]. PKCs regulate multiple processes crucial for cell cycle progression, such as chromosome segregation, recombination, and differentiation, by phosphorylating specific target proteins [43]. The precise role of PKCs in cell cycle regulation varies across cell types and is context‐dependent. Depending on the timing of activation and the PKC isotypes involved, PKCs can either promote or inhibit the G1/S and G2/M transitions [4, 44]. They can suppress MPF activation by either inducing the CDK inhibitor p21 WAF1/CIP1, which blocks CDK1 activity, or by downregulating Cdc25 phosphatase, thereby preventing CDK1 dephosphorylation and activation [45]. On the other hand, PKCβ promotes progression through both the G1/S and G2/M transitions [46], and PKCδ stimulates the cell cycle of the mouse early embryo by phosphorylating and activating Cdc25B phosphatase [47].

3. Meiotic Arrest and Resumption of Meiosis

Meiosis is essential for both oogenesis and spermatogenesis. In mammalian oocytes, meiosis is initiated in the ovary during fetal development but is not completed until fertilization occurs in adulthood. Oocytes undergo two distinct meiotic arrests. The first meiotic arrest occurs in the ovary, where fully grown oocytes arrest at the diplotene stage of prophase I of the first meiotic division, allowing subsequent oocyte growth. The second arrest occurs at the metaphase II (MII) stage of the second meiotic division, when mature eggs await fertilization [48]. The first meiotic arrest is primarily maintained by high levels of cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP), produced by the surrounding follicular cells. This keeps the oocyte dormant until hormonal signals trigger maturation [49, 50]. Upon release from prophase I, the fully grown oocyte must progress through two consecutive M phases without an intervening S phase.

In the preovulatory follicle, meiotic re‐entry is marked by germinal vesicle breakdown (GVBD), followed by microtubule assembly around the chromosomes and the formation of a bipolar spindle at metaphase I (MI) [51]. After extrusion of the first polar body and completion of meiosis, the oocyte arrests again at MII. Meiosis II resolves only upon gamete fusion at fertilization [52, 53]. Release from the first meiotic arrest and resumption of meiosis require the activation of MPF [30, 54, 55]. The Cdc25B phosphatase plays a key role in regulating the re‑initiation of meiosis by removing the inhibitory effect of CDK1 [56]. Alterations in CDK1 activity and/or cyclin B1 levels have the potential to disrupt meiotic progression [57, 58, 59].

4. PKC Affects Intercellular Communication in Cumulus‐Enclosed Ooocytes

In the mammalian ovary, the oocytes and the surrounding cumulus and granulosa cells are interdependent, playing essential roles in follicular development and oocyte ovulation. Within the follicle, cumulus and granulosa cells communicate closely via intercellular channels called gap junctions, which allow the passage of nutrients, ions, and inhibitory signals from somatic cells to the oocytes. This exchange supports the metabolic needs of growing mouse oocytes and maintains meiotic arrest [60, 61]. Studies in rat oocytes have shown that gap junction communication is modulated by various factors that regulate the expression and phosphorylation status of connexin 43 (Cx43), a key protein involved in gap junction structure [62].

Phosphorylation of Cx43 is associated with the closure of gap junctions, which may be sufficient to trigger oocyte meiotic resumption by blocking the passage of inhibitory signals to the oocyte [63]. Several kinases, including protein kinase A (PKA), PKC, glycogen synthase kinase 3 (GSK3), and MAPK, have been shown to phosphorylate Cx43 in mice and rat oocytes [64, 65].

In vivo, LH‐induced phosphorylation of Cx43 in cumulus cells results in decreased levels of cAMP and cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) in oocytes. This decline initiates GVBD and meiotic resumption in mouse oocytes [63, 64, 66]. PKC signaling has been identified as the main pathway mediating the betacellulin‐induced phosphorylation of Cx43 at Ser368 in human granulosa cells [67]. In FSH‐stimulated mouse cumulus‐enclosed oocytes, the PKC epsilon (PKCε) isotype phosphorylates Cx43, thereby ceasing the transfer of key molecules through gap junctions before meiosis resumption [68].

5. PKC Participates in Meiosis Regulation

In mouse oocytes, PKC isotypes influence nearly every stage of meiosis by participating in signaling pathways that regulate meiotic resumption and progression, oocyte maturation, chromosome dynamics, formation of a bipolar spindle at MI and MII, completion of meiosis II, oocyte activation at fertilization and initiation of the first mitotic division [69, 70, 71, 72, 73]. In mouse GV oocytes, pPKC localizes throughout the entire GV and after GVBD, pPKC is distributed around chromosomes. During MI and MII, pPKC localizes on the entire meiotic spindle [74].

The spatiotemporal distribution of individual PKC isotypes plays a key role in regulating meiotic resumption. Upon activation, PKC isotypes exhibit distinct localization patterns supporting the idea that each isotype plays a specific role at different stages of oocyte development [69, 75].

The expression of conventional PKCs (α, β, γ), novel PKCs (δ, ε, μ), and atypical PKCs (λ, ζ) has been detected in rat eggs [76]. In mice, PKCα, γ, δ, ζ, and ε isotypes are present in the cumulus cells surrounding oocytes, while PKCα, γ, δ, and ζ have been confirmed in zona pellucida‐free oocytes [77]. These findings suggest that PKC isotypes may play different roles depending on whether oocytes are enclosed by cumulus cells or not. Specifically, activated PKC is essential for resuming meiosis in cumulus‐enclosed mouse oocytes. The effect of PKC activators and inhibitors on oocyte maturation in vitro depends on the presence of cumulus cells [78]. Activation of PKC in bovine cumulus‐enclosed oocytes has been shown to accelerate GVBD [79]. In contrast, in cumulus‐free mouse oocytes, active PKC inhibits the resumption of meiosis [75, 77, 80]. Although depletion of PKCβI does not impair resumption of meiosis in mouse oocytes, the PKCβI overexpression delays GVBD by modulating CDK1 activity and cyclin B1 levels [69]. In mouse oocytes, just before GVBD, all conventional PKC isotypes, except PKCγ, relocate from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, and this translocation is essential for GVBD induction [71, 75, 80, 81]. Targeted antibody‐mediated inhibition of PKCα and PKCβII within the nucleus significantly reduces the GVBD rate in mouse oocytes [71]. As PKCβI colocalizes with lamin A/C on the nuclear envelope of mouse oocytes, it can be assumed that the translocated PKCs participate in the phosphorylation of nuclear membrane lamins, which are key structural components of the nuclear envelope in oocytes [71]. PKCβI‐mediated lamin phosphorylation may contribute to germinal vesicle disassembly during meiosis reinitiation in mice [81] (see Table 1).

TABLE 1.

Role of PKC in meiosis.

Role of PKC Reference
PKCβI regulates Cyclin B1 level and CDK1 activity during G2/M transition [69]
PKCβI is involved in the nuclear envelope disintegration [81]
PKCδ is essential for MI‐to‐MII transition [70]
PKCβI is required for MI and MII spindle organization [69]
PKCδ and PKCζ stabilize MII spindle [73, 82]

It has been suggested that PKC plays distinct roles in oocytes and the surrounding follicular somatic compartment by regulating MAPK phosphorylation. In the absence of cumulus cells, PKC activation in rat and mouse cumulus‐free oocytes induces downregulation of MAPK phosphorylation and inhibits resumption of meiosis [83, 84]. By contrast, when cumulus cells are present, PKC activation within the cumulus cells of mouse cumulus‐enclosed oocytes enhances MAPK phosphorylation and induces GVBD [29].

During gonadotropin‐induced meiotic maturation in porcine and mouse oocytes, EGFR activity in the ovarian follicle, specifically in mural granulosa and cumulus cells, is essential for oocyte maturation, cumulus expansion, and ovulation [85, 86]. In porcine granulosa cells, EGFR signaling activates the MAPK pathway, promoting the retraction of transzonal projections during meiotic resumption and enhancing fertilization potential [87]. In follicle‐stimulating hormone (FSH)‐treated porcine cumulus‐enclosed oocytes, PKC signaling activates EGFR, contributing to FSH‐induced meiotic resumption [88]. In porcine cumulus cells, MAPK activation occurs through PKC‐dependent EGFR transactivation [89]. In mouse cumulus‐enclosed oocytes, inhibition of two novel isotypes, PKCδ and PKCθ, blocks FSH‐induced oocyte maturation in vitro. This blockade can be partially reversed by amphiregulin, confirming the involvement of PKCδ and PKCθ in the EGF signaling axis [90].

6. PKC Contributes to Meiotic Spindle Integrity

PKC isotypes play a crucial role in meiosis by participating in signaling pathways that regulate its progression. Studies on mouse oocytes revealed that these factors contribute to oocyte maturation, chromosome dynamics, and the formation of a bipolar spindle during meiosis I and II. PKCs also play a role in the completion of meiosis II and the initiation of the first mitotic division following mouse oocyte activation at fertilization [69, 70, 91, 92]. PKC activity is tightly regulated to ensure the proper timing of meiotic transitions. Dysregulated PKC signaling in mouse oocytes can lead to errors in chromosome segregation and induce meiotic arrest [43, 69]. During MI and MII, phosphorylated PKC isotypes predominantly localize at the spindle poles (see Figure 1).

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Localization of PKC isotypes on the meiotic spindle. Phosphorylated PKCμ, PKCβ, and PKCδ are localized at the spindle poles during meiotic metaphase I and metaphase II. Phosphorylated PKCζ is concentrated specifically on the metaphase II spindle poles. PKCδ is also found on metaphase II chromosomes and spindle microtubules. PKC, protein kinase C.

Following GVBD, PKCβI is evenly distributed in the cytoplasm and becomes phosphorylated in metaphase. Phosphorylated PKCβI (pPKCβI) then accumulates at spindle poles and subsequently localizes to the midbody during telophase in mouse oocytes [69]. Depleting PKCβI in mouse oocytes using siRNA results in defective spindle formation, spindle checkpoint activation, MI arrest, and failure of first polar body extrusion. Additionally, PKCβI knockdown also results in abnormal spindle morphology, chromosome misalignment, and meiotic arrest at MI [69]. PKCα localizes to the meiotic spindle of mouse oocytes during MII [93], and PKCδ binds to the spindle during the MI‐to‐MII transition, aligning with chromosomes at MII [94].

During both the MI‐ and MII‐stages, phosphorylated PKCδ (pPKCδ) accumulates at the spindle poles of mouse oocytes and co‐localizes with pericentrin and γ‐tubulin in the MTOCs, thereby supporting spindle organization [72]. The loss of regulatory control over PKCδ impairs the MI‐to‐MII transition, resulting in the premature meiotic exit in mouse oocytes [70].

In mammalian oocytes, which form acentrosomal spindles, phosphorylated PKCζ (pPKCζ) assembles into a ring at each spindle pole. This suggests that PKCζ may play a role in stabilizing the barrel‐shaped spindle in the absence of centrioles of mouse oocytes [82]. In fertilization‐competent eggs, arrested at MII, pPKCζ remains associated with the spindle until telophase II. When pPKCζ is inhibited, spindle microtubules are disrupted and chromosome misalignment occurs. These findings highlight the essential role of PKCζ in spindle stability in mouse eggs [73]. PKCζ may regulate spindle stability by phosphorylating MTOC components and/or spindle‐associated MAP kinases in mouse oocytes [73].

Knockdown of protein kinase D1 (PKD1; formerly PKCμ) does not interfere with meiotic resumption in mouse oocytes, however, PKD1 contributes to oocyte maturation by regulating both spindle organization and actin filament distribution [95]. Phosphorylated PKD1 localizes to spindle poles and may influence cytoskeletal dynamics, as a loss of PKD1 function induces cytoskeletal defects during meiosis [95].

7. Importance of PKC in Fertilization‐Competent Eggs

It has been suggested that fertilization‐competent eggs, arrested at the meiotic MII stage exhibit distinct localization patterns of individual PKC isotypes. Immunostaining with a PKC antibody, capable of detecting both phosphorylated and non‐phosphorylated PKC isotypes, revealed the presence of PKCα, PKCγ, PKCδ, and PKCζ in the cytoplasm and on the MII spindle of fertilization‐competent eggs [73].

FRET analysis suggests that PKCζ and PKCδ may interact with α‐tubulin within the meiotic spindle of mouse eggs. Furthermore, PKCζ and PKCδ are in close molecular proximity to α‐tubulin, suggesting a potential functional interaction [73, 82]. These findings indicate a possible involvement of PKCζ and PKCδ in the stability and organization of the meiotic spindle. In mouse eggs, phosphorylated PKCζ (p‐PKCζ) accumulates at the ends of the acentrosomal spindle, while total PKCζ is distributed along the entire spindle apparatus [96]. The inhibition of p‐PKCζ appears to rapidly disrupt the meiotic spindle, highlighting its specific role in spindle stability. However, inhibition of other active PKC isotypes in mouse eggs does not result in spindle disassembly, suggesting that these isotypes may contribute to distinct aspects of the egg‐to‐zygote transition [82, 97]. Furthermore, p‐PKCδ colocalizes with p‐PKCζ at the spindle poles, indicating a potential role for p‐PKCδ in stabilizing MII‐spindle in mouse eggs [72]. It has been proposed that siRNA‐mediated silencing of PKCδ disrupts the spindle apparatus in mouse eggs, thereby confirming the role of PKCδ in spindle positioning and organization [72]. However, it is important to note that PKCδ knockout mice exhibit no apparent decline in viability and fertility, suggesting that compensatory pathways may be involved in maintaining MII‐spindle integrity [98]. In summary, the presented findings identify PKCζ and PKCδ as significant regulators of MII spindle stability, while other PKC isotypes appear to have distinct functions during fertilization and the egg‐to‐zygote transition.

8. Role of PKC in Fertilization

Fertilization induces a series of structural and biochemical changes within the egg as a single sperm cell penetrates and initiates zygote formation. This critical developmental step relies on a series of signal transduction events initiated by sperm penetration. As illustrated in Table 2, PKC signaling plays a key role in regulating critical egg activation processes during mammalian fertilization (see Table 2).

TABLE 2.

PKC regulates fertilization of MII eggs.

Role of PKC Reference
Activation of PKC is essential for the transition of the mouse egg into the zygote [99]
PKC regulates distribution of endoplasmic reticulum in bovine activated eggs [100]
PKCβ regulates nuclear function and cortical granules exocytosis in porcine MII eggs [101]
In fertilized mouse oocytes, PKCα and PKCβ1 are involved in oocyte activation [75, 93]
During fertilization of mouse oocytes, PKCδ phosphorylates the Cdc25B Ser96 residue [27, 102]
Depletion of PKCδ disrupts fertilization and early embryonic development in mice [94]
PKCδ modulates MPF activity in one‐cell stage mouse embryos [103]

During fertilization, the exocytosis of cortical granules is a process primarily mediated by PKC, essential for ensuring monospermic fertilization and proper early embryonic development. In unfertilized eggs, cortical granules are associated with serine proteases. Upon fertilization, cortical granules release their contents into the perivitelline space through a calcium‐dependent process known as the cortical reaction. This reaction modifies the oocyte's zona pellucida, the glycoprotein envelope, thereby blocking further sperm binding and penetration, and thus ensuring monospermic fertilization and proper development of the early embryo [104].

In mouse eggs, fertilization induces the translocation of conventional PKC isotypes (PKCα, β, and γ) to the plasma membrane, positioning them optimally for participation in cortical granule exocytosis [73, 76, 101]. As documented in rat eggs, translocation of PKC to the egg cortex is enabled by RACK1, a scaffolding protein that binds cytoplasmic PKC upon egg activation. Then RACK1 shuttles the PKC to the egg cortex, and PKC is recruited to the egg plasma membrane to be activated. Subsequently, PKC is ready to phosphorylate MARCKS proteins, which interact with the actin cytoskeleton and can crosslink actin filaments into a network at the cell cortex [105, 106]. Following the phosphorylation of MARCKS by PKC, the actin network may undergo disassembly [107]. Disassembly of the actin network in the cortex has been shown to result in the release of cortical granules from the cortical actin network, thereby enabling them to reach the plasma membrane for exocytosis [101, 107, 108] (see Figure 2).

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

The role of PKC in inducing cortical reaction. (1) The sperm moves toward the egg. (2) The sperm penetrates the zona pellucida (ZP) and the plasma membranes of the sperm and egg fuse, activating the egg. (3) Upon egg activation, the receptor for activated C kinase 1 (RACK1) recruits protein kinase C (PKC) in the cytoplasm. This complex then moves to the plasma membrane, where PKC interacts with and phosphorylates myristoylated alanine‐rich C‐kinase substrate (MARCKS). (4) Active MARCKS induces changes in the actin cytoskeleton, enabling cortical granules (CG) to reach the plasma membrane. (5) CG fuse with the plasma membrane and the CG content is released into the perivitelline space (PVS) by exocytosis in a process known as the cortical reaction. (6) The cortical reaction induces biochemical changes in the ZP to establish a polyspermy block.

After fertilization of mouse eggs, PKCα, β, and γ isotypes are translocated from the cytosol to the plasma membrane. At this point, these conventional PKCs may interact with DAG and phospholipids to become activated [91, 109]. Similarly, in PMA‐activated MII human eggs, conventional PKCα, β1, and γ isotypes are translocated to the plasma membrane [110]. These data suggest that conventional PKC isotypes, which initiate the cortical reaction in the egg cortex at fertilization, persist on the egg membrane after fertilization and contribute to the egg‐to‐zygote transition.

9. PKC Regulates Early Embryo Development

The initial phase of embryo development is started by the fertilization of MII‐stage oocytes. This phase involves critical processes such as zygote division, the maternal‐to‐zygotic transition, blastocyst formation, and cell fate determination. Representatives of all three categories of PKCs—conventional: PKCα and PKCγ, atypical: PKCζ and PKCλ, and novel: PKCμ and PKCδ—are present in unfertilized mouse eggs and in the developing mouse embryos up to the eight‐cell stage [80, 111, 112].

After fertilization, different PKC isotypes have been observed to localize in various regions, such as the cortex, spindle, polar body contractile ring, and female pronucleus [75, 82, 113]. The distinct localization of various PKC isotypes during the post‐fertilization development of the zygote and preimplantation embryo suggests that they may play different roles in converting the fertilized egg into a zygote. Due to the diverse functions of the different PKC isotypes, it is predicted that some isotypes will exhibit distinct subcellular localizations at critical stages of early development [82, 99] (see Table 3).

TABLE 3.

Role of PKC during early embryo development.

Role of PKC Reference
PKC activation induces pronucleus formation in rat fertilized eggs [116]
PKCδ supports the first cell cycle of mouse embryos by phosphorylating Cdc25B phosphatase [102]
Inhibition of PKCδ prevents development of bovine embryos [117]
PKCδ promotes mouse blastocyst implantation [94, 118]
PKC signaling regulates tight junction membrane assembly in the pre‐implantation mouse embryo [119]
Ezrin phosphorylated by PKC promotes embryonic attachment in mice [120]
PKCι isotype phosphorylates ezrin, which is important in eight‐cell mouse embryo compaction [121]

In fertilized mouse eggs, both PKCζ and p‐PKCζ remain associated with the spindle from MII to anaphase II, and they associate with midzone microtubules during anaphase II and telophase II, suggesting that PKCζ plays a role in spindle stability [73]. Following the fertilization of mouse and rat eggs, PKC plays an important role in the initial stages of egg activation, and PKC activity is essential for transforming the egg into a zygote [114, 115]. Pronucleus formation in fertilized rat eggs may be promoted by PKC activation and MAPK dephosphorylation [116]. However, prolonged PKC activation using PMA has been shown to block cleavage in the early mouse embryo [80]. The regulatory role of PKC family members in early embryo development has been the subject of detailed studies (see Table 3).

In mouse eggs, following fertilization, the conventional PKCα, β, and γ isotypes translocate from the cytosol to the plasma membrane. In this environment, they can interact with DAG and phospholipids, undergo activation, and thereby contribute to egg activation [73, 91, 109]. Similarly, PKCα, β1, and γ isotypes are translocated to the plasma membrane in PMA‐activated MII human eggs [110].

The role of the novel PKCδ isotype in egg fertilization and zygote development has been thoroughly studied (see Table 3). PKCδ activates MPF at fertilization, and MPF activity is essential for the transition from the one‐cell stage to the two‐cell stage [103]. After fertilization, PKCδ translocates to the spindle midzone, suggesting its involvement in the transition from meiosis to mitosis. PKCδ is then rephosphorylated during the M‐phase of the first mitotic cleavage division [122]. After the first mitosis, PKCδ becomes dephosphorylated and accumulates in the pronuclei and nuclei of 2‐cell‐stage mouse embryos, together with PKCγ, α, and ζ [113]. During the early stages of embryonic development, PKCδ plays a crucial role in maintaining the integrity and proper function of the spindle apparatus [91]. In cattle, PKCδ is essential for the development of preimplantation embryos, and inhibition of PKCδ prevents bovine embryos from progressing beyond the 8‐ to 16‐cell stage [117]. Additionally, inhibiting PKCδ at or after the 16‐cell stage reduces blastocyst development rates, total blastomere numbers, and the inner cell mass‐to‐trophoblast cell ratio [117]. PKCδ knockout in mice leads to impaired fetal development and is associated with hyperplasia of heart elastic fibers and lung inflammation [118].

Active p‐PKCζ is detected in both pronuclei 6 h after fertilization, remains enriched in both pronuclei at 14 h post‐fertilization, and is also present in the nuclei of the two‐cell embryo [73]. After the 2‐cell stage, a significant decrease in the nuclear localization of PKCα, PKCγ, and PKCδ is observed, whereas PKCζ remains localized along the nuclear periphery [111]. Inhibiting PKCζ, but not other PKC isotypes, causes a rapid disruption of the meiotic spindle. This finding suggests that PKCζ is involved in spindle stability, while other PKC isotypes may have distinct roles in the egg‐to‐zygote transition. During the late eight‐cell stage, just before compaction, the PKCζ isotype becomes highly concentrated in the nuclei [111]. However, during embryo compaction, the PKC isotypes α, γ, δ, and μ delineate the cell boundaries to varying degrees and are largely absent from the nucleus [111, 123].

In experimental settings, the activation of PKC isotypes by the natural agonist leads to the migration of PKCα to the internal cell‐cell boundaries. PKCβI has been observed to accumulate specifically in the nuclei of 4‐cell‐stage embryos. During the post‐compaction stage, PKCβII is consistently distributed throughout the cytoplasm and nuclei, persisting from the 4‐cell stage to the blastocyst stage [112]. It has been proposed that blocking both PKCδ and PKCε with peptides that interfere with adapter sites disrupts the movement of these isotypes, potentially leading to altered transcription [112]. This suggests that the specific localization of a PKC isotype within the cells may influence its activity, and isotypes localized in the nucleus are likely involved in transcription during early embryo development.

In the late 8‐cell stage mouse embryo, the atypical PKCζ and PKCλ isotypes phosphorylate ezrin, a protein involved in cell signaling and structure. Ezrin is often associated with cell membranes and the cytoskeleton, and its function is important for cell polarization and embryo compaction [121]. Additionally, ezrin expression is maintained during the later stages of embryo development, when cells differentiate into the trophectoderm and trophoblast. It has been suggested that, when phosphorylated by PKC, ezrin may promote embryonic attachment by regulating the invasiveness of trophoblast cells, a process essential for embryo implantation and placental development [120, 124]. In the pre‐implantation mouse embryo, PKC signaling plays a role in regulating tight junctions assembly. These findings suggest that at least two atypical PKC isotypes, PKCλ and PKCζ, may contribute to the control of tight junctions assembly in the trophectoderm [119].

10. Conclusion

PKC has been identified as a critical regulator of both the mitotic and meiotic cell cycles. Individual PKC isotypes exert their effects by interacting with multiple targets, including MPF, lamins, and microtubules. This review highlights the role of PKC in regulating oocyte meiosis and early embryo development. PKC isotypes have been shown to support meiosis reinitiation, promote meiotic progression, and play a regulatory role in early embryonic development. Dysregulation of PKC activity during oocyte meiosis can result in defective spindle assembly, errors in chromosome segregation, and compromised preimplantation development, ultimately leading to infertility or birth defects. Identifying specific substrates of individual PKC isotypes could provide new opportunities to control meiotic progression and early development. A more profound understanding of PKC's multifaceted functions and manifold roles of PKC in oocyte meiosis and early embryo development is imperative for advancing reproductive biology and developing novel infertility therapies. In the context of age‐related fertility decline and potential therapeutic applications, future research could explore methods to maintain or restore PKC levels in oocytes to improve fertility outcomes.

Author Contributions

J.K.: Writing, original draft preparation, and editing. L.N.: Writing and editing. F.J.B.: Editing and figure design.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

The project was funded by Institutional Research Concept (RVO67985904) and the Czech Science Foundation (22‐27301S).

Open access publishing facilitated by Ustav zivocisne fyziologie a genetiky Akademie ved Ceske republiky, as part of the Wiley ‐ CzechELib agreement.

Kalous J., Berro F. J., and Nemcova L., “Protein Kinase C Regulates Meiosis in Mammalian Oocytes.” BioEssays 48, no. 1 (2026): e70087. 10.1002/bies.70087

[Correction added on 07/01/2026, after first online publication: The copyright line has been updated.]

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

References

  • 1. Newton A. C., “Protein Kinase C: Poised to Signal,” American Journal of Physiology Endocrinology and Metabolism 298, no. 3 (2010): E395–402, 10.1152/ajpendo.00477.2009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Mochly‐Rosen D., Das K., and Grimes K. V., “Protein Kinase C, an Elusive Therapeutic Target?,” Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 11, no. 12 (2012): 937–957, 10.1038/nrd3871. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Pieles O. and Morsczeck C., “The Role of Protein Kinase C During the Differentiation of Stem and Precursor Cells Into Tissue Cells,” Biomedicines 12, no. 12 (2024), 10.3390/biomedicines12122735. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Poli A., Mongiorgi S., Cocco L., and Follo M. Y., “Protein Kinase C Involvement in Cell Cycle Modulation,” Biochemical Society Transactions 42, no. 5 (2014): 1471–1476, 10.1042/BST20140128. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Papp H., Czifra G., Lázár J., et al., “Protein Kinase C Isozymes Regulate Proliferation and High Cell Density‐Mediated Differentiation in HaCaT Keratinocytes,” Experimental Dermatology 12, no. 6 (2003): 811–824, 10.1111/j.0906-6705.2003.00097.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Newton A. C., “Protein Kinase C: Perfectly Balanced,” Critical Reviews in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 53, no. 2 (2018): 208–230, 10.1080/10409238.2018.1442408. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Borner C., Filipuzzi I., Wartmann M., Eppenberger U., and Fabbro D., “Biosynthesis and Posttranslational Modifications of Protein Kinase C in human Breast Cancer Cells,” Journal of Biological Chemistry 264, no. 23 (1989): 13902–13909, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2474538. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Keranen L. M., Dutil E. M., and Newton A. C., “Protein Kinase C Is Regulated In Vivo by Three Functionally Distinct Phosphorylations,” Current Biology 5, no. 12 (1995): 1394–1403, 10.1016/S0960-9822(95)00277-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Dutil E. M., Toker A., and Newton A. C., “Regulation of Conventional Protein Kinase C Isozymes by Phosphoinositide‐Dependent Kinase 1 (PDK‐1),” Current Biology 8, no. 25 (1998): 1366–1375, 10.1016/S0960-9822(98)00017-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Le Good J. A., Ziegler W. H., Parekh D. B., Alessi D. R., Cohen P., and Parker P. J., “Protein Kinase C Isotypes Controlled by Phosphoinositide 3‐Kinase Through the Protein Kinase PDK1,” Science 281, no. 5385 (1998): 2042–2045, 10.1126/science.281.5385.2042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Guertin D. A., Stevens D. M., Thoreen C. C., et al., “Ablation in Mice of the mTORC Components Raptor, Rictor, or mLST8 Reveals That mTORC2 Is Required for Signaling to Akt‐FOXO and PKCα, but Not S6K1,” Developmental Cell 11, no. 6 (2006): 859–871, 10.1016/j.devcel.2006.10.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Behn‐Krappa A. and Newton A. C., “The Hydrophobic Phosphorylation Motif of Conventional Protein Kinase C Is Regulated by Autophosphorylation,” Current Biology 9, no. 14 (1999): 728–737, 10.1016/S0960-9822(99)80332-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Tsutakawa S. E., Medzihradszky K. F., Flint A. J., Burlingame A. L., and Koshland D. E., “Determination of In Vivo Phosphorylation Sites in Protein Kinase C,” Journal of Biological Chemistry 270, no. 45 (1995): 26807–26812, 10.1074/jbc.270.45.26807. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Wilson C. H., Ali E. S., Scrimgeour N., et al., “Steatosis Inhibits Liver Cell Store‐operated Ca2+ Entry and Reduces ER Ca2+ Through a Protein Kinase C‐Dependent Mechanism,” Biochemical Journal 466, no. 2 (2015): 379–390, 10.1042/BJ20140881. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Verdaguer N., Corbalan‐Garcia S., Ochoa W. F., Fita I., and Gómez‐Fernández J. C., “Ca2+ Bridges the C2 Membrane‐Binding Domain of Protein Kinase Cα Directly to Phosphatidylserine,” EMBO Journal 18, no. 22 (1999): 6329–6338, 10.1093/emboj/18.22.6329. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Steinberg S. F., “Structural Basis of Protein Kinase C Isoform Function,” Physiological Reviews 88, no. 4 (2008): 1341–1378, 10.1152/physrev.00034.2007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Kanno T., Yamamoto H., Yaguchi T., et al., “The Linoleic Acid Derivative DCP‐LA Selectively Activates PKC‐ɛ, Possibly Binding to the Phosphatidylserine Binding Site,” Journal of Lipid Research 47, no. 6 (2006): 1146–1156, 10.1194/jlr.M500329-JLR200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Kajimoto T., Caliman A. D., Tobias I. S., et al., “Activation of atypical Protein Kinase C by Sphingosine 1‐Phosphate Revealed by an aPKC‐Specific Activity Reporter,” Science Signaling 12, no. 562 (2019): aat6662, 10.1126/scisignal.aat6662. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Limatola C., Schaap D., Moolenaar W. H., and van Blitterswijk W. J., “Phosphatidic Acid Activation of Protein Kinase C‐ ζ Overexpressed in COS Cells: Comparison With Other Protein Kinase C Isotypes and Other Acidic Lipids,” Biochemical Journal 304, no. 3 (1994): 1001–1008, 10.1042/bj3041001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Sajan M. P., Acevedo‐Duncan M. E., Standaert M. L., Ivey R. A., Lee M., and Farese R. V., “Akt‐Dependent Phosphorylation of Hepatic FoxO1 Is Compartmentalized on a WD40/ProF Scaffold and Is Selectively Inhibited by aPKC in Early Phases of Diet‐Induced Obesity,” Diabetes 63, no. 8 (2014): 2690–2701, 10.2337/db13-1863. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Shoji M., Girard P. R., Mazzei G. J., Vogler W. R., and Kuo J. F., “Immunocytochemical Evidence for Phorbol Ester‐Induced Protein Kinase C Translocation in HL60 Cells,” Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 135, no. 3 (1986): 1144–1149, 10.1016/0006-291X(86)91047-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Disatnik M. H., Hernandez‐Sotomayor S. M., Jones G., Carpenter G., and Mochly‐Rosen D., “Phospholipase C‐gamma 1 Binding to Intracellular Receptors for Activated Protein Kinase C,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 91, no. 2 (1994): 559–563, 10.1073/pnas.91.2.559. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Gruss O. J., Feick P., Frank R., and Dobberstein B., “Phosphorylation of Components of the ER Translocation Site,” European Journal of Biochemistry 260, no. 3 (1999): 785–793, 10.1046/j.1432-1327.1999.00215.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Westermann P., Knoblich M., Maier O., Lindschau C., and Haller H., “Protein Kinase C Bound to the Golgi Apparatus Supports the Formation of Constitutive Transport Vesicles,” Biochemical Journal 320, no. 2 (1996): 651–658, 10.1042/bj3200651. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Wu‐Zhang A. X., Murphy A. N., Bachman M., and Newton A. C., “Isozyme‐Specific Interaction of Protein Kinase Cδ With Mitochondria Dissected Using Live Cell Fluorescence Imaging,” Journal of Biological Chemistry 287, no. 45 (2012): 37891–37906, 10.1074/jbc.M112.412635. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Zalewski P. D., Forbes I. J., Valente L., Apostolou S., and Hurst N. P., “Translocation of Protein Kinase C to a Triton‐Insoluble Sub‐Cellular Compartment Induced by the Lipophilic Gold Compound Auranofin,” Biochemical Pharmacology 37, no. 7 (1988): 1415–1417, 10.1016/0006-2952(88)90802-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Gonzalez‐Garcia J. R., Machaty Z., Lai F. A., and Swann K., “The Dynamics of PKC‐Induced Phosphorylation Triggered by Ca 2+ Oscillations in Mouse Eggs,” Journal of Cellular Physiology 228, no. 1 (2013): 110–119, 10.1002/jcp.24110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Meier M., Menne J., and Haller H., “Targeting the Protein Kinase C Family in the Diabetic Kidney: Lessons From Analysis of Mutant Mice,” Diabetologia 52, no. 5 (2009): 765–775, 10.1007/s00125-009-1278-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Fan H.‐Y., Huo L.‐J., Chen D.‐Y., Schatten H., and Sun Q.‐Y., “Protein Kinase C and Mitogen‐Activated Protein Kinase Cascade in Mouse Cumulus Cells: Cross Talk and Effect on Meiotic Resumption of Oocyte1,” Biology of Reproduction 70, no. 4 (2004): 1178–1187, 10.1095/biolreprod.103.024737. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Kuroda T., Naito K., Sugiura K., Yamashita M., Takakura I., and Tojo H., “Analysis of the Roles of Cyclin B1 and Cyclin B2 in Porcine Oocyte Maturation by Inhibiting Synthesis With Antisense RNA Injection1,” Biology of Reproduction 70, no. 1 (2004): 154–159, 10.1095/biolreprod.103.021519. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Massacci G., Perfetto L., and Sacco F., “The Cyclin‐Dependent Kinase 1: More Than a Cell Cycle Regulator,” British Journal of Cancer 129, no. 11 (2023): 1707–1716, 10.1038/s41416-023-02468-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Kishimoto T., “Entry Into Mitosis: A Solution to the Decades‐Long Enigma of MPF,” Chromosoma 124, no. 4 (2015): 417–428, 10.1007/s00412-015-0508-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Dorée M. and Hunt T., “From Cdc2 to Cdk1: When Did the Cell Cycle Kinase Join Its Cyclin Partner?,” Journal of Cell Science 115, no. 12 (2002): 2461–2464, 10.1242/jcs.115.12.2461. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Jones K. T., “Turning It On and Off: M‐Phase Promoting Factor During Meiotic Maturation and Fertilization,” Molecular Human Reproduction 10, no. 1 (2004): 1–5, 10.1093/molehr/gah009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Lu L. X., Domingo‐Sananes M. R., Huzarska M., Novak B., and Gould K. L., “Multisite Phosphoregulation of Cdc25 Activity Refines the Mitotic Entrance and Exit Switches,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109, no. 25 (2012): 9899–9904, 10.1073/pnas.1201366109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Margadant C., Cremers L., Sonnenberg A., and Boonstra J., “MAPK Uncouples Cell Cycle Progression From Cell Spreading and Cytoskeletal Organization in Cycling Cells,” Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences 70, no. 2 (2013): 293–307, 10.1007/s00018-012-1130-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Mitchell D., Rodgers K., Hanly J., et al., “Lipoxins Inhibit Akt/PKB Activation and Cell Cycle Progression in Human Mesangial Cells,” American Journal of Pathology 164, no. 3 (2004): 937–946, 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)63181-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Zhang X., “Aurora Kinases,” Current Biology 18, no. 4 (2008): R146–R148, 10.1016/j.cub.2007.12.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Lolli G. and Johnson L. N., “CAK—Cyclin‐Dependent Activating Kinase: A Key Kinase in Cell Cycle Control and a Target for Drugs?,” Cell Cycle (Georgetown, Tex) 4, no. 4 (2005): 572–577, 10.4161/cc.4.4.1607. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Procházka R., Bartková A., Němcová L., et al., “The Role of MAPK3/1 and AKT in the Acquisition of High Meiotic and Developmental Competence of Porcine Oocytes Cultured In Vitro in FLI Medium,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences 22, no. 20 (2021): 11148, 10.3390/ijms222011148. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Kalous J., Aleshkina D., and Anger M., “A Role of PI3K/Akt Signaling in Oocyte Maturation and Early Embryo Development,” Cells 12, no. 14 (2023): 1830, 10.3390/cells12141830. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Willems E., Dedobbeleer M., Digregorio M., Lombard A., Lumapat P. N., and Rogister B., “The Functional Diversity of Aurora Kinases: A Comprehensive Review,” Cell Division 13, no. 1 (2018): 7, 10.1186/s13008-018-0040-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Black A. R. and Black J. D., “Protein Kinase C Signaling and Cell Cycle Regulation,” Frontiers in Immunology 3 (2013): 423, 10.3389/fimmu.2012.00423. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Barboule N., Lafon C., Chadebech P., Vidal S., and Valette A., “Involvement of p21 in the PKC‐Induced Regulation of the G2/M Cell Cycle Transition,” FEBS Letters 444, no. 1 (1999): 32–37, 10.1016/S0014-5793(99)00022-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Besson A. and Yong V. W., “Involvement of p21 Waf1/Cip1 in Protein Kinase C Alpha‐Induced Cell Cycle Progression,” Molecular and Cellular Biology 20, no. 13 (2000): 4580–4590, 10.1128/MCB.20.13.4580-4590.2000. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Black J. D., “PKC and Control of the Cell Cycle,” in Protein Kinase C in Cancer Signaling and Therapy (Humana Press, 2010): 155–188, 10.1007/978-1-60761-543-9_8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Li Y., Li M., Weigel B., Mall M., Werth V. P., and Liu M., “Nuclear Envelope Rupture and NET Formation Is Driven by PKCα‐Mediated Lamin B Disassembly,” EMBO Reports no. 8 (2020): 21, 10.15252/embr.201948779. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 48. Jaffe L. A. and Norris R. P., “Initiation of the Meiotic Prophase‐to‐Metaphase Transition in Mammalian Oocytes,” in Oogenesis (Wiley, 2010): 179–197, 10.1002/9780470687970.ch7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Ozturk S., “Molecular Determinants of the Meiotic Arrests in Mammalian Oocytes at Different Stages of Maturation,” Cell Cycle 21, no. 6 (2022): 547–571, 10.1080/15384101.2022.2026704. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Pei Z., Deng K., Xu C., and Zhang S., “The Molecular Regulatory Mechanisms of Meiotic Arrest and Resumption in Oocyte Development and Maturation,” Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 21, no. 1 (2023): 90, 10.1186/s12958-023-01143-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Bornslaeger E. A. and Schultz R. M., “Regulation of Mouse Oocyte Maturation: Effect of Elevating Cumulus Cell cAMP on Oocyte cAMP Levels1,” Biology of Reproduction 33, no. 3 (1985): 698–704, 10.1095/biolreprod33.3.698. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Sanders J. R. and Jones K. T., “Regulation of the Meiotic Divisions of Mammalian Oocytes and Eggs,” Biochemical Society Transactions 46, no. 4 (2018): 797–806, 10.1042/BST20170493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Homer H., Gui L., and Carroll J., “A Spindle Assembly Checkpoint Protein Functions in Prophase I Arrest and Prometaphase Progression,” Science 326, no. 5955 (2009): 991–994, 10.1126/science.1175326. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Adhikari D. and Liu K., “The Regulation of Maturation Promoting Factor During Prophase I Arrest and Meiotic Entry in Mammalian Oocytes,” Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology 382, no. 1 (2014): 480–487, 10.1016/j.mce.2013.07.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Kalous J., Kubelka M., Rimkevicova Z., Guerrier P., and Motlik J., “Okadaic Acid Accelerates Germinal Vesicle Breakdown and Overcomes Cycloheximide‐ and 6‐Dimethylaminopurine Block in Cattle and Pig Oocytes,” Developmental Biology 157, no. 2 (1993): 448–454, 10.1006/dbio.1993.1148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Lincoln A. J., Wickramasinghe D., Stein P., et al., “Cdc25b phosphatase Is Required for Resumption of Meiosis During Oocyte Maturation,” Nature Genetics 30, no. 4 (2002): 446–449, 10.1038/ng856. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Kubelka M., Anger M., Kalous J., Schultz R. M., and MotlÍk J., “Chromosome Condensation in Pig Oocytes: Lack of a Requirement for either cdc2 Kinase or MAP Kinase Activity,” Molecular Reproduction and Development 63, no. 1 (2002): 110–118, 10.1002/mrd.10176. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Marangos P. and Carroll J., “The Dynamics of Cyclin B1 Distribution During Meiosis I in Mouse Oocytes,” Reproduction (Cambridge, England) 128, no. 2 (2004): 153–162, 10.1530/rep.1.00192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Kalous J., Jansová D., and Šušor A., “Role of Cyclin‐Dependent Kinase 1 in Translational Regulation in the M‐Phase,” Cells 9, no. 7 (2020): 1568, 10.3390/cells9071568. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Kidder G. M. and Vanderhyden B. C., “Bidirectional Communication Between Oocytes and Follicle Cells: Ensuring Oocyte Developmental Competence,” Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology 88, no. 4 (2010): 399–413, 10.1139/Y10-009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Zhang M., Su Y.‐Q., Sugiura K., Xia G., and Eppig J. J., “Granulosa Cell Ligand NPPC and Its Receptor NPR2 Maintain Meiotic Arrest in Mouse Oocytes,” Science 330, no. 6002 (2010): 366–369, 10.1126/science.1193573. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Kalma Y., Granot I., Galiani D., Barash A., and Dekel N., “Luteinizing Hormone‐Induced Connexin 43 Down‐Regulation: Inhibition of Translation,” Endocrinology 145, no. 4 (2004): 1617–1624, 10.1210/en.2003-1051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Conti M., Hsieh M., Zamah A. M., and Oh J. S., “Novel Signaling Mechanisms in the Ovary During Oocyte Maturation and Ovulation,” Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology 356, no. 1–2 (2012): 65–73, 10.1016/j.mce.2011.11.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Norris R. P., Freudzon M., Mehlmann L. M., et al., “Luteinizing Hormone Causes MAP Kinase‐Dependent Phosphorylation and Closure of Connexin 43 Gap Junctions in Mouse Ovarian Follicles: One of Two Paths to Meiotic Resumption,” Development (Cambridge, England) 135, no. 19 (2008): 3229–3238, 10.1242/dev.025494. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Sela‐Abramovich S., Edry I., Galiani D., Nevo N., and Dekel N., “Disruption of Gap Junctional Communication Within the Ovarian Follicle Induces Oocyte Maturation,” Endocrinology 147, no. 5 (2006): 2280–2286, 10.1210/en.2005-1011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66. Norris R. P., Ratzan W. J., Freudzon M., et al., “Cyclic GMP From the Surrounding Somatic Cells Regulates Cyclic AMP and Meiosis in the Mouse Oocyte,” Development (Cambridge, England) 136, no. 11 (2009): 1869–1878, 10.1242/dev.035238. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67. Li Y., Chang H.‐M., Sung Y.‐W., Zhu H., Leung P. C. K., and Sun Y.‐P., “Betacellulin Regulates Gap Junction Intercellular Communication by Inducing the Phosphorylation of Connexin 43 in Human Granulosa‐Lutein Cells,” Journal of Ovarian Research 16, no. 1 (2023): 103, 10.1186/s13048-023-01185-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68. Cai H., Liu B., Yang T., et al., “Involvement of PKCε in FSH‐Induced Connexin43 Phosphorylation and Oocyte Maturation in Mouse,” Biology Open 7, no. 8 (2018): bio034678, 10.1242/bio.034678. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69. Yi Z.‐Y., Liang Q.‐X., Meng T.‐G., et al., “PKCβ1 Regulates Meiotic Cell Cycle in Mouse Oocyte,” Cell Cycle 18, no. 4 (2019): 395–412, 10.1080/15384101.2018.1564492. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70. Viveiros M. M., Hirao Y., and Eppig J. J., “Evidence That Protein Kinase C (PKC) Participates in the Meiosis I to Meiosis II Transition in Mouse Oocytes,” Developmental Biology 235, no. 2 (2001): 330–342, 10.1006/dbio.2001.0311. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Avazeri N., Courtot A.‐M., and Lefevre B., “Regulation of Spontaneous Meiosis Resumption in Mouse Oocytes by Various Conventional PKC Isozymes Depends on Cellular Compartmentalization,” Journal of Cell Science 117, no. 21 (2004): 4969–4978, 10.1242/jcs.01375. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72. Ma W., Koch J. A., and Viveiros M. M., “Protein Kinase C Delta (PKCδ) Interacts With Microtubule Organizing Center (MTOC) – Associated Proteins and Participates in Meiotic Spindle Organization,” Developmental Biology 320, no. 2 (2008): 414–425, 10.1016/j.ydbio.2008.05.550. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73. Baluch D. P., Koeneman B. A., Hatch K. R., McGaughey R. W., and Capco D. G., “PKC Isotypes in Post‐activated and Fertilized Mouse Eggs: Association With the Meiotic Spindle,” Developmental Biology 274, no. 1 (2004): 45–55, 10.1016/j.ydbio.2004.05.030.. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74. Zheng Z.‐Y., Li Q.‐Z., Chen D.‐Y., Schatten H., and Sun Q.‐Y., “Translocation of Phospho‐Protein Kinase Cs Implies Their Roles in Meiotic‐Spindle Organization, Polar‐Body Emission and Nuclear Activity in Mouse Eggs,” Reproduction (Cambridge, England) 129, no. 2 (2005): 229–234, 10.1530/rep.1.00336. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75. Luria A., Tennenbaum T., Sun Q. Y., Rubinstein S., and Breitbart H., “Differential Localization of Conventional Protein Kinase C Isoforms During Mouse Oocyte Development,” Biology of Reproduction 62, no. 6 (2000): 1564–1570, 10.1095/biolreprod62.6.1564. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76. Raz T., Skutelsky E., Amihai D., Hammel I., and Shalgi R., “Mechanisms Leading to Cortical Reaction in the Mammalian Egg,” Molecular Reproduction and Development 51, no. 3 (1998): 295–303, 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2795(199811)51:3<295::AID-MRD9>3.0.CO;2-K. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77. Downs S. M., Cottom J., and Hunzicker‐Dunn M., “Protein Kinase C and Meiotic Regulation in Isolated Mouse Oocytes,” Molecular Reproduction and Development 58, no. 1 (2001): 101–115, 10.1002/1098-2795(200101)58:1<101::AID-MRD13>3.0.CO;2-J. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78. Craig L. B., Curnow E. C., and Hayes E. S., “Bovine Oocytes as a Model System for the Study of Protein Kinase C (PKC) Signaling During Mammalian Oocyte In Vitro Maturation (IVM),” Fertility and Sterility 82 (2004): S278–S279, 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.07.747. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 79. Mondadori R. G., Neves J. P., and Gonçalves P. B. D., “Protein Kinase C (PKC) Role in Bovine Oocyte Maturation and Early Embryo Development,” Animal Reproduction Science 107 (2008): 20–29, 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2007.06.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80. Quan H.‐M., Fan H.‐Y., Meng X.‐Q., et al., “Effects of PKC Activation on the Meiotic Maturation, Fertilization and Early Embryonic Development of Mouse Oocytes,” Zygote (Cambridge, England) 11, no. 4 (2003): 329–337, 10.1017/S0967199403002399. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81. Denys A., Avazeri N., and Lefèvre B., “The PKC Pathway and in Particular Its β1 Isoform Is Clearly Involved in Meiotic Arrest Maintenance but Poorly in FSH‐Induced Meiosis Resumption of the Mouse Cumulus Cell Enclosed Oocyte,” Molecular Reproduction and Development 74, no. 12 (2007): 1575–1580, 10.1002/mrd.20748. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82. Baluch D. P. and Capco D. G., “GSK3β Mediates Acentromeric Spindle Stabilization by Activated PKCζ,” Developmental Biology 317, no. 1 (2008): 46–58, 10.1016/j.ydbio.2008.01.044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83. Lu Q., Smith G. D., Chen D.‐Y., et al., “Phosphorylation of Mitogen‐Activated Protein Kinase Is Regulated by Protein Kinase C, Cyclic 3′,5′‐Adenosine Monophosphate, and Protein Phosphatase Modulators During Meiosis Resumption in Rat Oocytes1,” Biology of Reproduction 64, no. 5 (2001): 1444–1450, 10.1095/biolreprod64.5.1444. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84. Sun Q. Y., Rubinstein S., and Breitbart H., “MAP Kinase Activity Is Downregulated by Phorbol Ester During Mouse Oocyte Maturation and Egg Activation In Vitro,” Molecular Reproduction and Development 52, no. 3 (1999): 310–318, 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2795(199903)52:3<310::AID-MRD9>3.0.CO;2-C. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85. Prochazka R., Blaha M., and Němcová L., “Significance of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Signaling for Acquisition of Meiotic and Developmental Competence in Mammalian Oocytes†,” Biology of Reproduction 97, no. 4 (2017): 537–549, 10.1093/biolre/iox112. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86. Shimada M., Umehara T., and Hoshino Y., “Roles of Epidermal Growth Factor (EGF)‐Like Factor in the Ovulation Process,” Reproductive Medicine and Biology 15, no. 4 (2016): 201–216, 10.1007/s12522-016-0236-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87. Abbassi L., El‐Hayek S., Carvalho K. F., et al., “Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Signaling Uncouples Germ Cells From the Somatic Follicular Compartment at Ovulation,” Nature Communications 12, no. 1 (2021): 1438, 10.1038/s41467-021-21644-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88. Chen X., Zhou B., Yan J., et al., “Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Activation by Protein Kinase C Is Necessary for FSH‐induced Meiotic Resumption in Porcine Cumulus–Oocyte Complexes,” Journal of Endocrinology 197, no. 2 (2008): 409–419, 10.1677/JOE-07-0592. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89. Prochazka R. and Nemcova L., “Mechanisms of FSH‐ and Amphiregulin‐Induced MAP Kinase 3/1 Activation in Pig Cumulus‐Oocyte Complexes During Maturation In Vitro,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences 20, no. 5 (2019): 1179, 10.3390/ijms20051179. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90. Chen Q., Zhang W., Ran H., et al., “PKCδ and θ Possibly Mediate FSH‐Induced Mouse Oocyte Maturation via NOX‐ROS‐TACE Cascade Signaling Pathway,” PLoS ONE 9, no. 10 (2014): 111423, 10.1371/journal.pone.0111423. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91. Halet G., “PKC Signaling at Fertilization in Mammalian Eggs,” Biochimica Et Biophysica Acta (BBA)—Molecular Cell Research 1742, no. 1–3 (2004): 185–189, 10.1016/j.bbamcr.2004.09.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92. Kalive M., Faust J. J., Koeneman B. A., and Capco D. G., “Involvement of the PKC family in Regulation of Early Development,” Molecular Reproduction and Development 77, no. 2 (2010): 95–104, 10.1002/mrd.21112. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93. Cui L.‐B., Zhao Z.‐J., Zhou X.‐Y., Li Q., Huang X.‐Y., and Sun F.‐Z., “Effect of Age, GV Transfer and Modified Nucleocytoplasmic Ratio on PKCα in Mouse Oocytes and Early Embryos,” Zygote (Cambridge, England) 20, no. 1 (2012): 87–95, 10.1017/S0967199410000626. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94. Ma W., Baumann C., and Viveiros M. M., “Lack of Protein Kinase C‐Delta (PKCδ) Disrupts Fertilization and Embryonic Development,” Molecular Reproduction and Development 82, no. 10 (2015): 797–808, 10.1002/mrd.22528. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95. Zhang Y., Wu L.‐L., Wan X., et al., “Loss of PKC Mu Function Induces Cytoskeletal Defects in Mouse Oocyte Meiosis,” Journal of Cellular Physiology 234, no. 10 (2019): 18513–18523, 10.1002/jcp.28487. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96. Kalive M., Baluch D. P., and Capco D. G., “Involvement of PKCζ and GSK3β in the Stability of the Metaphase Spindle,” In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology—Animal 48, no. 2 (2012): 97–111, 10.1007/s11626-011-9476-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97. Liu X. F., Xie X., and Miki T., “Inhibition of Protein Kinase C ζ Blocks the Attachment of Stable Microtubules to Kinetochores Leading to Abnormal Chromosome Alignment,” Cellular Signalling 18, no. 12 (2006): 2314–2323, 10.1016/j.cellsig.2006.05.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98. Leitges M., Mayr M., Braun U., et al., “Exacerbated Vein Graft Arteriosclerosis in Protein Kinase Cδ–Null Mice,” Journal of Clinical Investigation 108, no. 10 (2001): 1505–1512, 10.1172/JCI12902. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99. Gallicano G. I., McGaughey R. W., and Capco D. G., “Activation of Protein Kinase C After Fertilization Is Required for Remodeling the Mouse Egg Into the Zygote,” Molecular Reproduction and Development 46, no. 4 (1997): 587–601, 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2795(199704)46:4<587::AID-MRD16>3.0.CO;2-T. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100. Feitosa W. B., Lopes E., Visintin J. A., and Assumpção M. E. O. D., “Endoplasmic Reticulum Distribution During Bovine Oocyte Activation Is Regulated by Protein Kinase C via Actin filaments,” Journal of Cellular Physiology 235, no. 7–8 (2020): 5823–5834, 10.1002/jcp.29516. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101. Fan H.‐Y., Tong C., Li M.‐Y., et al., “Translocation of the Classic Protein Kinase C Isoforms in Porcine Oocytes: Implications of Protein Kinase C Involvement in the Regulation of Nuclear Activity and Cortical Granule Exocytosis,” Experimental Cell Research 277, no. 2 (2002): 183–191, 10.1006/excr.2002.5547. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102. Liu Y., Deng X., Wu D., Jin M., and Yu B., “PKCδ Promotes Fertilization of Mouse Embryos in Early Development via the Cdc25B Signaling Pathway,” Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 18, no. 5 (2019): 3281–3290, 10.3892/etm.2019.7959. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103. Yu B., Zheng J., Yu A., et al., “Effects of Protein Kinase C on M‐Phase Promoting Factor in Early Development of Fertilized Mouse Eggs,” Cell Biochemistry and Function 22, no. 5 (2004): 291–298, 10.1002/cbf.1103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104. Liu M., “The Biology and Dynamics of Mammalian Cortical Granules,” Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology: RB&E 9 (2011): 149, 10.1186/1477-7827-9-149. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105. Eliyahu E., Shtraizent N., Tsaadon A., and Shalgi R., “Association Between Myristoylated Alanin‐Rich C Kinase Substrate (MARCKS) Translocation and Cortical Granule Exocytosis in Rat Eggs,” Reproduction (Cambridge, England) 131, no. 2 (2006): 221–231, 10.1530/rep.1.00794. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106. Eliyahu E., Tsaadon A., Shtraizent N., and Shalgi R., “The Involvement of Protein Kinase C and Actin filaments in Cortical Granule Exocytosis in the Rat,” Reproduction (Cambridge, England) 129, no. 2 (2005): 161–170, 10.1530/rep.1.00424. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107. Tsaadon L., Kaplan‐Kraicer R., and Shalgi R., “Myristoylated Alanine‐rich C Kinase Substrate, but Not Ca2+/Calmodulin‐Dependent Protein Kinase II, Is the Mediator in Cortical Granules Exocytosis,” Reproduction (Cambridge, England) 135, no. 5 (2008): 613–624, 10.1530/REP-07-0554. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108. Haberman Y., Alon L. T., Eliyahu E., and Shalgi R., “Receptor for Activated C Kinase (RACK) and Protein Kinase C (PKC) in Egg Activation,” Theriogenology 75, no. 1 (2011): 80–89, 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.07.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109. Carbone M. C. and Tatone C., “Alterations in the Protein Kinase C Signaling Activated by a Parthenogenetic Agent in Oocytes From Reproductively Old Mice,” Molecular Reproduction and Development 76, no. 2 (2009): 122–131, 10.1002/mrd.20923. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110. Wu X., Zhang X., Li X., et al., “Translocation of Classical PKC and Cortical Granule Exocytosis of human Oocyte in Germinal Vesicle and Metaphase II Stage,” Acta Pharmacologica Sinica 27, no. 10 (2006): 1353–1358, 10.1111/j.1745-7254.2006.00407.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111. Pauken C. M. and Capco D. G., “The Expression and Stage‐Specific Localization of Protein Kinase C Isotypes During Mouse Preimplantation Development,” Developmental Biology 223, no. 2 (2000): 411–421, 10.1006/dbio.2000.9763. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 112. Dehghani H. and Hahnel A. C., “Expression Profile of Protein Kinase C Isozymes in Preimplantation Mouse Development,” Reproduction (Cambridge, England) 130, no. 4 (2005): 441–451, 10.1530/rep.1.00571. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113. Viveiros M. M., O'Brien M., Wigglesworth K., and Eppig J. J., “Characterization of Protein Kinase C‐δ in Mouse Oocytes Throughout Meiotic Maturation and Following Egg Activation,” Biology of Reproduction 69, no. 5 (2003): 1494–1499, 10.1095/biolreprod.103.019018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114. Gallicano G. I. and Capco D. G., “Remodeling of the Specialized Intermediate Filament Network in Mammalian Eggs and Embryos During Development: Regulation by Protein Kinase C and Protein Kinase M,” Current Topics in Developmental Biology 31 (1995): 277–320, 10.1016/s0070-2153(08)60231-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 115. Eliyahu E. and Shalgi R., “A Role for Protein Kinase C During Rat Egg Activation,” Biology of Reproduction 67, no. 1 (2002): 189–195, 10.1095/biolreprod67.1.189. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 116. Lu Q., Smith G. D., Chen D.‐Y., Han Z.‐M., and Sun Q.‐Y., “Activation of Protein Kinase C Induces Mitogen‐Activated Protein Kinase Dephosphorylation and Pronucleus Formation in Rat Oocytes1,” Biology of Reproduction 67, no. 1 (2002): 64–69, 10.1095/biolreprod67.1.64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 117. Yang Q.‐E., Ozawa M., Zhang K., Johnson S. E., and Ealy A. D., “The Requirement for Protein Kinase C Delta (PRKCD) During Preimplantation Bovine Embryo Development,” Reproduction, Fertility, and Development 28, no. 4 (2016): 482–490, 10.1071/RD14160. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118. Niino Y. S., Kawashima I., Iguchi Y., et al., “PKCδ Deficiency Inhibits Fetal Development and Is Associated With Heart Elastic fiber Hyperplasia and Lung Inflammation in Adult PKCδ Knockout Mice,” PLoS ONE 16, no. 7 (2021): 0253912, 10.1371/journal.pone.0253912. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 119. Eckert J. J., McCallum A., Mears A., Rumsby M. G., Cameron I. T., and Fleming T. P., “PKC Signalling Regulates Tight Junction Membrane Assembly in the Pre‐Implantation Mouse Embryo,” Reproduction (Cambridge, England) 127, no. 6 (2004): 653–667, 10.1530/rep.1.00150. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 120. Zhang R., Li G., Du M., and Bao S., “Effect of Ezrin on Regulating Trophoblast Cell Invasion via PKC Signaling Pathway in Unexplained Recurrent Spontaneous Abortion,” Reproductive Biology 22, no. 2 (2022): 100634, 10.1016/j.repbio.2022.100634. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 121. Liu H., Wu Z., Shi X., et al., “Atypical PKC, Regulated by Rho GTPases and Mek/Erk, Phosphorylates Ezrin During Eight‐Cell Embryocompaction,” Developmental Biology 375, no. 1 (2013): 13–22, 10.1016/j.ydbio.2013.01.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 122. Tatone C., Delle Monache S., Francione A., Gioia L., Barboni B., and Colonna R., “Ca2+‐Independent Protein Kinase C Signalling in Mouse Eggs During the Early Phases of Fertilization,” International Journal of Developmental Biology 47, no. 5 (2003): 327–333, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12895027. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 123. Pauken C. M. and Capco D. G., “Regulation of Cell Adhesion During Embryonic Compaction of Mammalian Embryos: Roles for PKC and Beta‐catenin,” Molecular Reproduction and Development 54, no. 2 (1999): 135–144, 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2795(199910)54:2<135::AID-MRD5>3.0.CO;2-A. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 124. Dard N., Louvet S., Santa‐Maria A., et al., “In Vivo Functional Analysis of Ezrin During Mouse Blastocyst Formation,” Developmental Biology 233, no. 1 (2001): 161–173, 10.1006/dbio.2001.0192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.


Articles from Bioessays are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES