Literature DB >> 11599047

Nuclear transfer in cattle with non-transfected and transfected fetal or cloned transgenic fetal and postnatal fibroblasts.

V Zakhartchenko1, S Mueller, R Alberio, W Schernthaner, M Stojkovic, H Wenigerkind, R Wanke, C Lassnig, M Mueller, E Wolf, G Brem.   

Abstract

The efficiency of nuclear transfer (NT) using two primary cultures of fetal fibroblasts (FF1 and FF2) was compared vs. the same cultures transfected with an expression vector in which the bovine prochymosin coding sequence is placed under the control of the bovine alpha(S1)-casein promoter (TFF1 and TFF2). In addition, fibroblasts of a cloned transgenic fetus (TRFF1) derived from TFF1 and ear skin fibroblasts of a 1-month-old cloned transgenic calf (TRCF1) derived from TRFF1 were used as nuclear donors. Embryos reconstructed from FF1 (44%) and FF2 (52%) developed to the blastocyst stage at a significantly (P < 0.05) higher rate than those derived from TFF1 (24%) and TFF2 (27%). The proportions of cleaved embryos and blastocysts were significantly (P < 0.05) higher with TRFF1 than with TRCF1 used as nuclear donors (75 vs. 66% and 33 vs. 16%, respectively). Transfer of NT embryos derived from FF2 and TFF2 to recipients resulted in similar pregnancy rates on day 30 (52 and 48%, respectively). However, with TFF2 embryos, the majority of pregnancies (8/11; 73%) was lost in the first and second trimesters of gestation, whereas 4/11 (36%) pregnancies with FF2 embryos were lost during the full period of in vivo development. Of 11 FF2 and 6 TFF2 born calves (25 and 13% of transferred embryos, respectively), 6 and 3 survived including one oversized FF2 calf. After transfer of TRFF1 and TRCF1 NT embryos to recipients, initial pregnancy rate was as a tendency higher in the TRFF1 (49%) than in the TRCF1 group (30%). The majority (14/17) of TRFF1 pregnancies and all TRCF1 pregnancies were lost in the first and second trimester. A high proportion of TRFF1 calves (5/8) showed increased body weights, and only two calves which were also large survived. These findings demonstrate that (i) extended culture associated with transfection and selection procedures may induce changes of donor cells which markedly decrease the efficiency of nuclear transfer and (ii) these changes are not reversed by recloning. Copyright 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11599047     DOI: 10.1002/mrd.1098

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Reprod Dev        ISSN: 1040-452X            Impact factor:   2.609


  14 in total

Review 1.  Transgenic bovine as bioreactors: Challenges and perspectives.

Authors:  Paulo S Monzani; Paulo R Adona; Otávio M Ohashi; Flávio V Meirelles; Matthew B Wheeler
Journal:  Bioengineered       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 3.269

2.  Comparison of cell proliferation and epigenetic modification of gene expression patterns in canine foetal fibroblasts and adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells.

Authors:  H J Oh; E J Park; S Y Lee; J W Soh; I S Kong; S W Choi; J C Ra; S K Kang; B C Lee
Journal:  Cell Prolif       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 6.831

3.  Transcriptional reprogramming of gene expression in bovine somatic cell chromatin transfer embryos.

Authors:  Nelida Rodriguez-Osorio; Zhongde Wang; Poothappillai Kasinathan; Grier P Page; James M Robl; Erdogan Memili
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2009-04-24       Impact factor: 3.969

4.  Efficient activation of reconstructed rat embryos by cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors.

Authors:  Robin L Webb; Kirk A Findlay; Michael A Green; Tina L Beckett; M Paul Murphy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-03-19       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Cloned transgenic farm animals produce a bispecific antibody for T cell-mediated tumor cell killing.

Authors:  Ludger Grosse-Hovest; Sigrid Müller; Rosa Minoia; Eckhard Wolf; Valeri Zakhartchenko; Hendrik Wenigerkind; Caroline Lassnig; Urban Besenfelder; Mathias Müller; Simon D Lytton; Gundram Jung; Gottfried Brem
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-04-22       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Cellular reprogramming for the creation of patient-specific embryonic stem cells.

Authors:  Jose B Cibelli; Arif M Kocabas; Zeki Beyhan; Pablo J Ross
Journal:  Stem Cell Rev       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 5.739

7.  A site-specific recombinase-based method to produce antibiotic selectable marker free transgenic cattle.

Authors:  Yuan Yu; Yongsheng Wang; Qi Tong; Xu Liu; Feng Su; Fusheng Quan; Zekun Guo; Yong Zhang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-05-01       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Post-mortem re-cloning of a transgenic red fluorescent protein dog.

Authors:  So Gun Hong; Ok Jae Koo; Hyun Ju Oh; Jung Eun Park; Minjung Kim; Geon-A Kim; Eun Jung Park; Goo Jang; Byeong-Chun Lee
Journal:  J Vet Sci       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.672

9.  Comparison of the efficiency of Banna miniature inbred pig somatic cell nuclear transfer among different donor cells.

Authors:  Hongjiang Wei; Yubo Qing; Weirong Pan; Hongye Zhao; Honghui Li; Wenmin Cheng; Lu Zhao; Chengsheng Xu; Hong Li; Si Li; Lei Ye; Taiyun Wei; Xiaobing Li; Guowen Fu; Wengui Li; Jige Xin; Yangzhi Zeng
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Generation of bovine transgenics using somatic cell nuclear transfer.

Authors:  Craig A Hodges; Steven L Stice
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2003-11-07       Impact factor: 5.211

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.