The presence of blastocyst within the uteri facilitates lumenal epithelium transformation for implantation via upregulating lysosome proteostasis activity

References

• Wang H, Dey SK. Roadmap to embryo implantation: clues from mouse models. Nat Rev Genet. 2006 Mar;7(3):185–199. doi: 10.1038/nrg1808
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang S, Lin H, Kong S, et al. Physiological and molecular determinants of embryo implantation. Mol Aspects Med. 2013 Oct;34(5):939–980. doi: 10.1016/j.mam.2012.12.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Restall BJ, Bindon BM. The timing and variation of pre-implantation events in the mouse. J Reprod Fertil. 1971 Mar;24(3):423–426. doi: 10.1530/jrf.0.0240423
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ye X. Uterine luminal epithelium as the Transient Gateway for embryo implantation. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2020 Feb;31(2):165–180. doi: 10.1016/j.tem.2019.11.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim HJ, Dey SK. HB-EGF: a unique mediator of embryo-uterine interactions during implantation. Exp Cell Res. 2009 Feb 15;315(4):619–626. doi: 10.1016/j.yexcr.2008.07.025
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paria BC, Ma W, Tan J, et al. Cellular and molecular responses of the uterus to embryo implantation can be elicited by locally applied growth factors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Jan 30;98(3):1047–1052. doi: 10.1073/pnas.98.3.1047
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Das SK, Wang XN, Paria BC, et al. Heparin-binding EGF-like growth factor gene is induced in the mouse uterus temporally by the blastocyst solely at the site of its apposition: a possible ligand for interaction with blastocyst EGF-receptor in implantation. Development. 1994 May;120(5):1071–1083. doi: 10.1242/dev.120.5.1071
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun X, Park CB, Deng W, et al. Uterine inactivation of muscle segment homeobox (Msx) genes alters epithelial cell junction proteins during embryo implantation. FASEB J. 2016 Apr;30(4):1425–1435. doi: 10.1096/fj.15-282798
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nallasamy S, Li Q, Bagchi MK, et al. Msx homeobox genes critically regulate embryo implantation by controlling paracrine signaling between uterine stroma and epithelium. PLoS Genet. 2012;8(2):e1002500. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002500
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daikoku T, Cha J, Sun X, et al. Conditional deletion of Msx homeobox genes in the uterus inhibits blastocyst implantation by altering uterine receptivity. Dev Cell. 2011 Dec 13;21(6):1014–1025. doi: 10.1016/j.devcel.2011.09.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pavlova A, Boutin E, Cunha G, et al. Msx1 (Hox-7.1) in the adult mouse uterus: cellular interactions underlying regulation of expression. Development. 1994 Feb;120(2):335–345. doi: 10.1242/dev.120.2.335
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee K, Jeong J, Kwak I, et al. Indian hedgehog is a major mediator of progesterone signaling in the mouse uterus. Nat Genet. 2006 Oct;38(10):1204–1209. doi: 10.1038/ng1874
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takamoto N, Zhao B, Tsai SY, et al. Identification of Indian hedgehog as a progesterone-responsive gene in the murine uterus. Mol Endocrinol. 2002 Oct;16(10):2338–2348. doi: 10.1210/me.2001-0154
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Matsumoto H, Zhao X, Das SK, et al. Indian hedgehog as a progesterone-responsive factor mediating epithelial-mesenchymal interactions in the mouse uterus. Dev Biol. 2002 May 15;245(2):280–290. doi: 10.1006/dbio.2002.0645
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirota Y. Progesterone governs endometrial proliferation-differentiation switching and blastocyst implantation. Endocr J. 2019 Mar 28;66(3):199–206. doi: 10.1507/endocrj.EJ18-0431
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Das SK, Chakraborty I, Paria BC, et al. Amphiregulin is an implantation-specific and progesterone-regulated gene in the mouse uterus. Mol Endocrinol. 1995 Jun;9(6):691–705. doi: 10.1210/mend.9.6.8592515
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rubel CA, Wu SP, Lin L, et al. A Gata2-dependent transcription network Regulates uterine progesterone Responsiveness and endometrial function. Cell Rep. 2016 Oct 25;17(5):1414–1425. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2016.09.093
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng J, Rosario G, Cohen TV, et al. Tissue-specific Ablation of the LIF receptor in the murine uterine epithelium results in implantation failure. Endocrinology. 2017 Jun 1;158(6):1916–1928. doi: 10.1210/en.2017-00103
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosario GX, Hondo E, Jeong JW, et al. The LIF-mediated molecular signature regulating murine embryo implantation. Biol Reprod. 2014 Sep;91(3):66. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.114.118513
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song H, Lim H. Evidence for heterodimeric association of leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) receptor and gp130 in the mouse uterus for LIF signaling during blastocyst implantation. Reproduction. 2006 Feb;131(2):341–349. doi: 10.1530/rep.1.00956
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhatt H, Brunet LJ, Stewart CL. Uterine expression of leukemia inhibitory factor coincides with the onset of blastocyst implantation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1991 Dec 15;88(24):11408–11412. doi: 10.1073/pnas.88.24.11408
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ni H, Ding NZ, Harper MJ, et al. Expression of leukemia inhibitory factor receptor and gp130 in mouse uterus during early pregnancy. Mol Reprod Dev. 2002 Oct;63(2):143–150. doi: 10.1002/mrd.10168
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song H, Lim H, Das SK, et al. Dysregulation of EGF family of growth factors and COX-2 in the uterus during the preattachment and attachment reactions of the blastocyst with the luminal epithelium correlates with implantation failure in LIF-deficient mice. Mol Endocrinol. 2000 Aug;14(8):1147–1161. doi: 10.1210/mend.14.8.0498
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cheng JG, Chen JR, Hernandez L, et al. Dual control of LIF expression and LIF receptor function regulate Stat3 activation at the onset of uterine receptivity and embryo implantation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Jul 17;98(15):8680–8685. doi: 10.1073/pnas.151180898
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou C, Lv M, Wang P, et al. Sequential activation of uterine epithelial IGF1R by stromal IGF1 and embryonic IGF2 directs normal uterine preparation for embryo implantation. J Mol Cell Biol. 2021 Dec 6;13(9):646–661. doi: 10.1093/jmcb/mjab034
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiraoka T, Hirota Y, Fukui Y, et al. Differential roles of uterine epithelial and stromal STAT3 coordinate uterine receptivity and embryo attachment. Sci Rep. 2020 Sep 23;10(1):15523. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-72640-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun X, Bartos A, Whitsett JA, et al. Uterine deletion of Gp130 or Stat3 shows implantation failure with increased estrogenic responses. Mol Endocrinol. 2013 Sep;27(9):1492–1501. doi: 10.1210/me.2013-1086
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pawar S, Starosvetsky E, Orvis GD, et al. STAT3 regulates uterine epithelial remodeling and epithelial-stromal crosstalk during implantation. Mol Endocrinol. 2013 Dec;27(12):1996–2012. doi: 10.1210/me.2013-1206
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lee JH, Kim TH, Oh SJ, et al. Signal transducer and activator of transcription-3 (Stat3) plays a critical role in implantation via progesterone receptor in uterus. FASEB J. 2013 Jul;27(7):2553–2563. doi: 10.1096/fj.12-225664
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ernst M, Inglese M, Waring P, et al. Defective gp130-mediated signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) signaling results in degenerative joint disease, gastrointestinal ulceration, and failure of uterine implantation. J Exp Med. 2001 Jul 16;194(2):189–203. doi: 10.1084/jem.194.2.189
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valdizan MC, Julian J, Carson DD. WGA-binding, mucin glycoproteins protect the apical cell surface of mouse uterine epithelial cells. J Cell Physiol. 1992 Jun;151(3):451–465. doi: 10.1002/jcp.1041510304
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Surveyor GA, Gendler SJ, Pemberton L, et al. Expression and steroid hormonal control of Muc-1 in the mouse uterus. Endocrinology. 1995 Aug;136(8):3639–3647. doi: 10.1210/endo.136.8.7628404
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meseguer M, Pellicer A, Simón C. MUC1 and endometrial receptivity. Mol Hum Reprod. 1998 Dec;4(12):1089–1098. doi: 10.1093/molehr/4.12.1089
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang Y, Qiu J, Tang Z, et al. P38α MAPK is a gatekeeper of uterine progesterone responsiveness at peri-implantation via Ube3c-mediated PGR degradation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Aug 9;119(32):e2206000119. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2206000119
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saftig P, Klumperman J. Lysosome biogenesis and lysosomal membrane proteins: trafficking meets function. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2009 Sep;10(9):623–635. doi: 10.1038/nrm2745
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hesketh GG, Wartosch L, Davis LJ, et al. The lysosome and intracellular Signalling. Prog Mol Subcell Biol. 2018;57:151–180.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chen JM, Dando PM, Rawlings ND, et al. Cloning, isolation, and characterization of mammalian legumain, an asparaginyl endopeptidase. J Biol Chem. 1997 Mar 21;272(12):8090–8098. doi: 10.1074/jbc.272.12.8090
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dall E, Brandstetter H. Mechanistic and structural studies on legumain explain its zymogenicity, distinct activation pathways, and regulation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Jul 2;110(27):10940–10945. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1300686110
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dall E, Brandstetter H. Structure and function of legumain in health and disease. Biochimie. 2016 Mar;122:126–150. doi: 10.1016/j.biochi.2015.09.022
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martínez-Fábregas J, Prescott A, van Kasteren S, et al. Lysosomal protease deficiency or substrate overload induces an oxidative-stress mediated STAT3-dependent pathway of lysosomal homeostasis. Nat Commun. 2018 Dec 17;9(1):5343. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-07741-6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kirk AT, Murphy CR. Increase in lysosomal numbers and activity in the rat uterine luminal and glandular epithelium during early pregnancy: a histochemical study. Acta Anat (Basel). 1991;141(1):63–69. doi: 10.1159/000147100
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leiser R, Wille KH. Cytochemical establishment of acid phosphatase in the bovine endometrium and trophoblast during implantation. Anat Embryol (Berl). 1975 Dec 23;148(2):159–173. doi: 10.1007/BF00315267
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smith MS. Histochemical observations on the mouse uterus during the oestrous cycle. J Reprod Fertil. 1970 Aug;22(3):461–467. doi: 10.1530/jrf.0.0220461
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Li Y, Wang Z, Andersen CL, et al. Functions of lysosomes in mammalian Female Reproductive System. Reprod Dev Med. 2020;4(2):109–122. doi: 10.4103/2096-2924.288025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiao S, Li R, El Zowalaty AE, et al. Acidification of uterine epithelium during embryo implantation in mice. Biol Reprod. 2017 Jan 1;96(1):232–243. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.116.144451
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Afonso S, Romagnano L, Babiarz B. The expression and function of cystatin C and cathepsin B and cathepsin L during mouse embryo implantation and placentation. Development. 1997 Sep;124(17):3415–3425. doi: 10.1242/dev.124.17.3415
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turk V, Turk B, Turk D. Lysosomal cysteine proteases: facts and opportunities. EMBO J. 2001 Sep 3;20(17):4629–4633. doi: 10.1093/emboj/20.17.4629
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shim J, Seo H, Choi Y, et al. Analysis of legumain and cystatin 6 expression at the maternal-fetal interface in pigs. Mol Reprod Dev. 2013 Jul;80(7):570–580. doi: 10.1002/mrd.22192
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao T, Li Z, Guo Z, et al. Functional recombinant human legumain protein expression in Pichia pastoris to enable screening for legumain small molecule inhibitors. Protein Expr Purif. 2018 Oct;150:12–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norgett EE, Golder ZJ, Lorente-Cánovas B, et al. Atp6v0a4 knockout mouse is a model of distal renal tubular acidosis with hearing loss, with additional extrarenal phenotype. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Aug 21;109(34):13775–13780. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1204257109
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenders M, Nordbeck P, Kurschat C, et al. Treatment of fabry disease with migalastat-outcome from a prospective 24 months observational multicenter study (FAMOUS). Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother. 2022 May 16;8(3): 272–281. doi: 10.1093/ehjcvp/pvab025
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruan YC, Guo JH, Liu X, et al. Activation of the epithelial Na+ channel triggers prostaglandin E₂ release and production required for embryo implantation. Nat Med. 2012 Jul;18(7):1112–1117. doi: 10.1038/nm.2771
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gholami K, Muniandy S, Salleh N. In-vivo functional study on the involvement of CFTR, SLC26A6, NHE-1 and CA isoenzymes II and XII in uterine fluid pH, volume and electrolyte regulation in rats under different sex-steroid influence. Int J Med Sci. 2013;10(9):1121–1134. doi: 10.7150/ijms.5918
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verkruyse LA, Hofmann SL. Lysosomal targeting of palmitoyl-protein thioesterase. J Biol Chem. 1996 Jun 28;271(26):15831–15836. doi: 10.1074/jbc.271.26.15831
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mindell JA. Lysosomal acidification mechanisms. Annu Rev Physiol. 2012;74(1):69–86. doi: 10.1146/annurev-physiol-012110-142317
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ballabio A, Bonifacino JS. Lysosomes as dynamic regulators of cell and organismal homeostasis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2020 Feb;21(2):101–118. doi: 10.1038/s41580-019-0185-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ishiguro K, Ando T, Watanabe O, et al. Novel application of low pH-dependent fluorescent dyes to examine colitis. BMC Gastroenterol. 2010 Jan 15;10(1):4. doi: 10.1186/1471-230X-10-4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Turk V, Turk B, Guncar G, et al. Lysosomal cathepsins: structure, role in antigen processing and presentation, and cancer. Adv Enzyme Regul. 2002;42:285–303. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2571(01)00034-6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sardiello M, Palmieri M, di Ronza A, et al. A gene network regulating lysosomal biogenesis and function. Science. 2009 Jul 24;325(5939):473–477. doi: 10.1126/science.1174447
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Settembre C, Di Malta C, Polito VA, et al. TFEB links autophagy to lysosomal biogenesis. Science. 2011 Jun 17;332(6036):1429–1433. doi: 10.1126/science.1204592
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreuzaler PA, Staniszewska AD, Li W, et al. Stat3 controls lysosomal-mediated cell death in vivo. Nat Cell Biol. 2011 Mar;13(3):303–309. doi: 10.1038/ncb2171
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sargeant TJ, Lloyd-Lewis B, Resemann HK, et al. Stat3 controls cell death during mammary gland involution by regulating uptake of milk fat globules and lysosomal membrane permeabilization. Nat Cell Biol. 2014 Nov;16(11):1057–1068. doi: 10.1038/ncb3043
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muhammad T, Li M, Wang J, et al. Roles of insulin-like growth factor II in regulating female reproductive physiology. Sci China Life Sci. 2020 Jun;63(6):849–865. doi: 10.1007/s11427-019-1646-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pedram A, Razandi M, Lewis M, et al. Membrane-localized estrogen receptor α is required for normal organ development and function. Dev Cell. 2014 May 27;29(4):482–490. doi: 10.1016/j.devcel.2014.04.016
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boretto M, Cox B, Noben M, et al. Development of organoids from mouse and human endometrium showing endometrial epithelium physiology and long-term expandability. Development. 2017 May 15;144(10):1775–1786. doi: 10.1242/dev.148478
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thie M, Fuchs P, Denker HW. Epithelial cell polarity and embryo implantation in mammals. Int J Dev Biol. 1996 Feb;40(1):389–393.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filant J, Spencer TE. Cell-specific transcriptional profiling reveals candidate mechanisms regulating development and function of uterine epithelia in mice. Biol Reprod. 2013 Oct;89(4):86. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.113.111971
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aikawa S, Hirota Y, Fukui Y, et al. A gene network of uterine luminal epithelium organizes mouse blastocyst implantation. Reprod Med Biol. 2022 Jan-Dec;21(1):e12435. doi: 10.1002/rmb2.12435
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoon SJ, Choi DH, Lee WS, et al. A molecular basis for embryo apposition at the luminal epithelium. Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2004 Apr 30;219(1–2):95–104. doi: 10.1016/j.mce.2004.01.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu C, Hu W, Zhao M, et al. The pre-implantation embryo Induces uterine Inflammatory reaction in mice. Reprod Sci. 2021 Jan;28(1):60–68. doi: 10.1007/s43032-020-00259-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell EA, O’Hara L, Catalano RD, et al. Temporal expression profiling of the uterine luminal epithelium of the pseudo-pregnant mouse suggests receptivity to the fertilized egg is associated with complex transcriptional changes. Hum Reprod. 2006 Oct;21(10):2495–2513. doi: 10.1093/humrep/del195
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matorras R, Matorras F, Mendoza R, et al. The implantation of every embryo facilitates the chances of the remaining embryos to implant in an IVF programme: a mathematical model to predict pregnancy and multiple pregnancy rates. Hum Reprod. 2005 Oct;20(10):2923–2931. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dei129
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Montfoort AP, Fiddelers AA, Janssen JM, et al. In unselected patients, elective single embryo transfer prevents all multiples, but results in significantly lower pregnancy rates compared with double embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2006 Feb;21(2):338–343. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dei359
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen Q, Peng H, Zhang Y, et al. Embryo implantation: A time for recalling and forwarding. Chinese Sci Bull. 2009;54(22):4083–4093. doi: 10.1007/s11434-009-0631-3
   Google Scholar
• He B, Zhang H, Wang J, et al. Blastocyst activation engenders transcriptome reprogram affecting X-chromosome reactivation and inflammatory trigger of implantation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Aug 13;116(33):16621–16630. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1900401116
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fouladi-Nashta AA, Jones CJ, Nijjar N, et al. Characterization of the uterine phenotype during the peri-implantation period for LIF-null, MF1 strain mice. Dev Biol. 2005 May 1;281(1):1–21. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2005.01.033
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimber SJ. Leukaemia inhibitory factor in implantation and uterine biology. Reproduction. 2005 Aug;130(2):131–145. doi: 10.1530/rep.1.00304
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daikoku T, Song H, Guo Y, et al. Uterine Msx-1 and Wnt4 signaling becomes aberrant in mice with the loss of leukemia inhibitory factor or Hoxa-10: evidence for a novel cytokine-homeobox-Wnt signaling in implantation. Mol Endocrinol. 2004 May;18(5):1238–1250. doi: 10.1210/me.2003-0403
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Devine PL, McKenzie IF. Mucins: structure, function, and associations with malignancy. BioEssays. 1992 Sep;14(9):619–625. doi: 10.1002/bies.950140909
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winchester B. Lysosomal metabolism of glycoproteins. Glycobiology. 2005 Jun;15(6):1r–15r. doi: 10.1093/glycob/cwi041
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pedram K, Laqtom NN, Shon DJ, et al. Lysosomal cathepsin D mediates endogenous mucin glycodomain catabolism in mammals. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Sep 27;119(39):e2117105119. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2117105119
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boudreau F, Lussier CR, Mongrain S, et al. Loss of cathepsin L activity promotes claudin-1 overexpression and intestinal neoplasia. FASEB J. 2007 Dec;21(14):3853–3865. doi: 10.1096/fj.07-8113com
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parr MB, Parr EL. Endocytosis in the rat uterine epithelium at implantation. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1986;476(1 Nidation):110–121. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1986.tb20926.x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tung HN, Parr EL, Parr MB. Endocytosis in the uterine luminal and glandular epithelial cells of mice during early pregnancy. Am J Anat. 1988 Jun;182(2):120–129. doi: 10.1002/aja.1001820203
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ng YH, Rome S, Jalabert A, et al. Endometrial exosomes/microvesicles in the uterine microenvironment: a new paradigm for embryo-endometrial cross talk at implantation. Plos One. 2013;8(3):e58502. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058502
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tancini B, Buratta S, Sagini K, et al. Insight into the role of extracellular vesicles in lysosomal storage disorders. Genes (Basel). 2019 Jul 6;10(7):510. doi: 10.3390/genes10070510
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dietrich P, Dragatsis I, Xuan S, et al. Conditional mutagenesis in mice with heat shock promoter-driven cre transgenes. Mamm Genome. 2000 Mar;11(3):196–205. doi: 10.1007/s003350010037
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guo B, Tian XC, Li DD, et al. Expression, regulation and function of Egr1 during implantation and decidualization in mice. Cell Cycle. 2014;13(16):2626–2640. doi: 10.4161/15384101.2014.943581
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matsumoto L, Hirota Y, Saito-Fujita T, et al. HIF2α in the uterine stroma permits embryo invasion and luminal epithelium detachment. J Clin Invest. 2018 Jul 2;128(7):3186–3197. doi: 10.1172/JCI98931
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haraguchi H, Saito-Fujita T, Hirota Y, et al. MicroRNA-200a locally attenuates progesterone signaling in the cervix, preventing embryo implantation. Mol Endocrinol. 2014 Jul;28(7):1108–1117. doi: 10.1210/me.2014-1097
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yuan J, Cha J, Deng W, et al. Planar cell polarity signaling in the uterus directs appropriate positioning of the crypt for embryo implantation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Dec 13;113(50):E8079–e8088. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1614946113
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ran H, Kong S, Zhang S, et al. Nuclear Shp2 directs normal embryo implantation via facilitating the ERα tyrosine phosphorylation by the src kinase. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 May 2;114(18):4816–4821. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1700978114
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bigler L, Spirli C, Fiorotto R, et al. Synthesis and cytotoxicity properties of amiodarone analogues. Eur J Med Chem. 2007 Jun;42(6):861–867. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmech.2006.12.031
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perzov N, Padler-Karavani V, Nelson H, et al. Characterization of yeast V-ATPase mutants lacking Vph1p or Stv1p and the effect on endocytosis. J Exp Biol. 2002 May;205(Pt 9):1209–1219. doi: 10.1242/jeb.205.9.1209
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teichgräber V, Ulrich M, Endlich N, et al. Ceramide accumulation mediates inflammation, cell death and infection susceptibility in cystic fibrosis. Nat Med. 2008 Apr;14(4):382–391. doi: 10.1038/nm1748
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoshinaga K. Effect of local application of ovarian hormones on the delay in implantation in lactating rats. J Reprod Fertil. 1961 Feb;2(1):35–41. doi: 10.1530/jrf.0.0020035
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Psychoyos A. [New remarks on the determinism of ovum implantation]. C RHebdSeances Acad Sci. 1962 Jun 18;254:4360–4362
   Google Scholar
• Ferrando G, Nalbandov AV. Relative importance of histamine and estrogen on implantation in rats. Endocrinology. 1968 Nov;83(5):933–937. doi: 10.1210/endo-83-5-933
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diao H, Xiao S, Howerth EW, et al. Broad gap junction blocker carbenoxolone disrupts uterine preparation for embryo implantation in mice. Biol Reprod. 2013 Aug;89(2):31. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.113.110106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dröse S, Altendorf K. Bafilomycins and concanamycins as inhibitors of V-ATPases and P-ATPases. J Exp Biol. 1997 Jan;200(Pt 1):1–8. doi: 10.1242/jeb.200.1.1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ye X, Hama K, Contos JJ, et al. LPA3-mediated lysophosphatidic acid signalling in embryo implantation and spacing. Nature. 2005 May 5;435(7038):104–108. doi: 10.1038/nature03505
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar