Effects of enucleation method on in vitro and in vivo development rate of cloned pig embryos

doi:10.15302/J-FASE-2018227

Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering

2019, Vol. 6

Issue (1): 61-65 https://doi.org/10.15302/J-FASE-2018227

本期目录

Effects of enucleation method on in vitro and in vivo development rate of cloned pig embryos

Chengcheng ZHAO^1,², Junsong SHI³, Rong ZHOU³, Ranbiao MAI³, Lvhua LUO³, Xiaoyan HE³, Hongmei JI³, Gengyuan CAI^1,², Dewu LIU^1,², Enqin ZHENG^1,², Zhenfang WU^1,²(

), Zicong LI²(

)

¹. National Engineering Research Center for Breeding Swine Industry, College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China
². Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Agro-Animal Genomics and Molecular Breeding, College of Animal Science, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China
³. Guangdong Wens Foodstuff Group Co., Ltd., Yunfu 527400, China

全文: PDF(121 KB) HTML

Abstract：

Enucleation is a crucial procedure for mammalian somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), especially for domestic animal cloning. Oocytes of domestic animals such as pigs and cattle contain dark lipid droplets that hinder localization and removal of the nucleus. Using an oocyte enucleation technique that can obtain a high enucleation rate but has minimal negative effects on the reprogramming potential of oocyte for cloning is beneficial for enhancing the outcome of SCNT. In this study, we compared the pig cloning efficiency resulting from blind aspiration-based (BA-B) enucleation and spindle imaging system-assisted (SIS-A) enucleation, and compared the pig SCNT success rate associated with BA-B enucleation and blind aspiration plus post-enucleation staining-based (BAPPS-B) enucleation. SIS-A enucleation achieved a significantly higher oocyte enucleation success rate and tended to obtain a higher in vivo full term development rate of SCNT embryos than BA-B enucleation. BAPPS-B enucleation also obtained significantly higher in vitro as well as in vivo full term development efficiency of cloned porcine embryos than BA-B enucleation. These data indicate that SIS-A and BAPPS-B enucleation are better approaches for pig SCNT than BA-B enucleation.

Key words： cloning enucleation pig SCNT

收稿日期: 2017-12-07 出版日期: 2019-02-25

Corresponding Author(s): Zhenfang WU,Zicong LI

引用本文:

. [J]. Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering, 2019, 6(1): 61-65.
Chengcheng ZHAO, Junsong SHI, Rong ZHOU, Ranbiao MAI, Lvhua LUO, Xiaoyan HE, Hongmei JI, Gengyuan CAI, Dewu LIU, Enqin ZHENG, Zhenfang WU, Zicong LI. Effects of enucleation method on in vitro and in vivo development rate of cloned pig embryos. Front. Agr. Sci. Eng. , 2019, 6(1): 61-65.

链接本文:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fase/CN/10.15302/J-FASE-2018227
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fase/CN/Y2019/V6/I1/61

Tab.1

Tab.2

Tab.3

Tab.4

Tab.5

1	JMcGrath, D Solter. Nuclear transplantation in the mouse embryo by microsurgery and cell fusion. Science, 1983, 220(4603): 1300–1302 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.6857250 pmid: 6857250
2	R SPrather, M M Sims, N L First. Nuclear transplantation in early pig embryos. Biology of Reproduction, 1989, 41(3): 414–418 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod41.3.414 pmid: 2590712
3	TDominko, A Chan, CSimerly, C MLuetjens, LHewitson, CMartinovich, GSchatten. Dynamic imaging of the metaphase II spindle and maternal chromosomesin bovine oocytes: implications for enucleation efficiency verification, avoidance of parthenogenesis, and successful embryogenesis. Biology of Reproduction, 2000, 62(1): 150–154 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod62.1.150 pmid: 10611079
4	TTani, H Shimada, YKato, YTsunoda. Demecolcine-assisted enucleation for bovine cloning. Cloning and Stem Cells, 2006, 8(1): 61–66 https://doi.org/10.1089/clo.2006.8.61 pmid: 16571078
5	B GJeon, D H Betts, W A King, G J Rho. In vitro developmental potential of nuclear transfer embryos cloned with enucleation methods using pre-denuded bovine oocytes. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 2011, 46(6): 1035–1042 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.2011.01781.x pmid: 21426416
6	E YKim, M J Park, H Y Park, E J Noh, E H Noh, K S Park, J B Lee, C J Jeong, K Z Riu, S P Park. Improved cloning efficiency and developmental potential in bovine somatic cell nuclear transfer with the oosight imaging system. Cellular Reprogramming, 2012, 14(4): 305–311 https://doi.org/10.1089/cell.2011.0103 pmid: 22816525
7	YLi, J Liu, JDai, FXing, Z Fang, TZhang, ZShi, D Zhang, XChen. Production of cloned miniature pigs by enucleation using the spindle view system. Annual meeting of Chinese experimental animal science. 2010, 45(4): 608–613
8	LLiu, R Oldenbourg, J RTrimarchi, D LKeefe. A reliable, noninvasive technique for spindle imaging and enucleation of mammalian oocytes. Nature Biotechnology, 2000, 18(2): 223–225 https://doi.org/10.1038/72692 pmid: 10657133
9	J NCaamaño, CMaside, M AGil, MMuñoz, CCuello, CDíez, J RSánchez-Osorio, DMartín, JGomis, J MVazquez, JRoca, S Carrocera, E AMartinez, EGómez. Use of polarized light microscopy in porcine reproductive technologies. Theriogenology, 2011, 76(4): 669–677 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2011.03.020 pmid: 21601264
10	NChen, S L Liow, R B Abdullah, W K W Embong, W Y Yip, L G Tan, G Q Tong, S C Ng. Somatic cell nuclear transfer using transported in vitro-matured oocytes in cynomolgus monkey. Zygote, 2007, 15(1): 25–33 doi:10.1017/S0967199406003947 pmid: 17391543
11	J NCaamaño, MMuñoz, CDiez, E Gómez. Polarized light microscopy in mammalian oocytes. Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 2010, 45(S2): 49–56 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0531.2010.01621.x pmid: 20591065
12	J AByrne, D A Pedersen, L L Clepper, M Nelson, W GSanger, SGokhale, D PWolf, S MMitalipov. Producing primate embryonic stem cells by somatic cell nuclear transfer. Nature, 2007, 450(7169): 497–502 https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06357 pmid: 18004281
13	S MMitalipov, QZhou, J A Byrne, W Z Ji, R B Norgren, D P Wolf. Reprogramming following somatic cell nuclear transfer in primates is dependent upon nuclear remodeling. Human Reproduction, 2007, 22(8): 2232–2242 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dem136 pmid: 17562675
14	E SCritser, N L First. Use of a fluorescent stain for visualization of nuclear material in living oocytes and early embryos. Stain Technology, 1986, 61(1): 1–5 https://doi.org/10.3109/10520298609110697 pmid: 2420037
15	L CSmith. Membrane and intracellular effects of ultraviolet irradiation with Hoechst 33342 on bovine secondary oocytes matured in vitro. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility, 1993, 99(1): 39–44 https://doi.org/10.1530/jrf.0.0990039 pmid: 8283450
16	M AGil, C Maside, CCuello, IParrilla, J MVazquez, JRoca, E A Martinez. Effects of Hoechst 33342 staining and ultraviolet irradiation on mitochondrial distribution and DNA copy number in porcine oocytes and preimplantation embryos. Molecular Reproduction and Development, 2012, 79(9): 651–663 https://doi.org/10.1002/mrd.22071 pmid: 22777700
17	DIuso, M Czernik, FZacchini, GPtak, P Loi. A simplified approach for oocyte enucleation in mammalian cloning. Cellular Reprogramming, 2013, 15(6): 490–494 https://doi.org/10.1089/cell.2013.0051 pmid: 24219576
18	CMaside, M A Gil, C Cuello, JSanchez-Osorio, IParrilla, XLucas, J NCaamaño, J MVazquez, JRoca, E A Martinez. Effects of Hoechst 33342 staining and ultraviolet irradiation on the developmental competence of in vitro-matured porcine oocytes. Theriogenology, 2011, 76(9): 1667–1675 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2011.06.032 pmid: 21872317
19	EGomez, C Diez, MMunoz, DMartin, SCarrocera, J NCaamano. Effects of polarized light Microscopy on the viability of in vitro matured bovine oocytes. 1st Joint International Meeting, 2008, 64–65
20	IMolina, M Muñoz, CDíez, EGómez, E AMartínez, DMartín, BTrigal, SCarrocera, M AGil, JSánchezosorio, J NCaamaño. 351 polarized light microscopy: detection of microtubules and its effects on the viability of in vitro-matured porcine oocytes. Reproduction, Fertility, and Development, 2009, 22(1): 332–332 doi:10.1071/RDv22n1Ab351
21	P ANavarro, L Liu, J RTrimarchi, R AFerriani, D LKeefe. Noninvasive imaging of spindle dynamics during mammalian oocyte activation. Fertility and Sterility, 2005, 83(4 S1): 1197–1205 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.07.983 pmid: 15831293
22	YYang, J J Dai, T Y Zhang, H L Wu, X J Chen, D F Zhang, H D Ma. Application of spindle-view in the enucleation porcine of oocytes. Chinese Journal of Biotechnology, 2007, 23(6): 1140–1145 pmid: 18257251
23	M EWesthusin, M JLevanduski, RScarborough, C RLooney, K RBondioli. Viable embryos and normal calves after nuclear transfer into Hoechst stained enucleated demi-oocytes of cows. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility, 1992, 95(2): 475–480 https://doi.org/10.1530/jrf.0.0950475 pmid: 1381440
24	XYang, L Zhang, AKovács, CTobback, R HFoote. Potential of hypertonic medium treatment for embryo micromanipulation: II. Assessment of nuclear transplantation methodology, isolation, subzona insertion, and electrofusion of blastomeres to intact or functionally enucleated oocytes in rabbits. Molecular Reproduction and Development, 1990, 27(2): 118–129 https://doi.org/10.1002/mrd.1080270206 pmid: 2248775
25	YTsunoda, Y Shioda, MOnodera, KNakamura, TUchida. Differential sensitivity of mouse pronuclei and zygote cytoplasm to Hoechst staining and ultraviolet irradiation. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility, 1988, 82(1): 173–178 https://doi.org/10.1530/jrf.0.0820173 pmid: 2448454

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed