Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T10:54:11.038Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modifications of chemically induced-enucleated nuclear transfer technique by reverse-order nuclear transfer in mouse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2009

Yongsheng Wang ,
Jun Liu ,
Shuang Tang ,
Zhixing An ,
Zhilin Guo ,
Xiangbin Ding ,
Fengjun Liu ,
Zelei Cao ,
Tuo Zhang  and
Yong Zhang
Yongsheng Wang
Affiliation:
Institute of Biotechnology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China.
Jun Liu
Affiliation:
Institute of Biotechnology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China.
Shuang Tang
Affiliation:
Institute of Biotechnology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China.
Zhixing An
Affiliation:
Institute of Biotechnology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China.
Zhilin Guo
Affiliation:
Institute of Biotechnology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China.
Xiangbin Ding
Affiliation:
Institute of Biotechnology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China.
Fengjun Liu
Affiliation:
Institute of Biotechnology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China.
Zelei Cao
Affiliation:
Institute of Biotechnology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China.
Tuo Zhang
Affiliation:
Institute of Biotechnology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China.
Yong Zhang*
Affiliation:
Institute of Biotechnology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China. Institute of Biotechnology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China.
*
All correspondence to: Yong Zhang. Institute of Biotechnology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China. Tel: +86 029 87080092. e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

To improve the developmental potential of somatic cell cloned embryos derived from demecolcine (DC) induced-enucleated nuclear transfer (INT), we modified the INT procedures by transferring donor nuclei into recipient cytoplasts prior to the induced enucleation of the recipient cytoplasts, and we called this modified INT technique as reverse-order and induced-enucleated nuclear transfer (RINT). Standard nuclear transfer (SNT) and INT were performed as controls. The dynamic changes of maternal and transferred donor nuclei in the RINT oocytes were monitored to evaluate the feasibility of this new nuclear transfer (NT) technique by timed immunofluorescence. Timed immunofluorescence showed that RINT is feasible because none of the transferred donor nuclei were expelled with the second polar body (Pb) in the RINT oocytes, while 42.2% of the oocytes showed extrusion of all maternal chromosome and spindles with the second Pb at 60 min after activation and DC treatment. Although there was no difference in cleavage rate (86.6% vs. 82.1%), the rates of successful enucleation and blastocyst formation were significantly increased in RINT compared with INT (44.1% vs. 27.5% and 43.3% vs. 12.8%, respectively; p < 0.01). Compared with SNT, there was no difference in cleavage rate (86.6% vs. 78.4%), but the blastocyst developmental rate was significantly increased in the RINT group (43.3% vs. 25.3%; p < 0.01). Blastocysts derived from RINT had a higher total cell number than those from SNT (45.1 ± 3 vs. 37.6 ± 4; p < 0.05). Our results provide evidence that RINT is feasible and may provide a more efficient and simple method for NT than INT.

Keywords

DemecolcineMouseOocytesPreimplantation development
Type
Research Article
Information
Zygote , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , August 2009 , pp. 261 - 268
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baguisi, A., Behboodi, E., Melican, D.T., Pollock, J.S., Destrempes, M.M., Cammuso, C., Williams, J.L., Nims, S.D., Porter, C.A., Midura, P., Palacios, M.J., Ayres, S.L., Denniston, R.S., Hayes, M.L., Ziomek, C.A., Meade, H.M., Godke, R.A., Gavin, W.G., Overstrom, E.W. & Echelard, Y. (1999). Production of goats by somatic cell nuclear transfer. Nat. Biotechnol. 17, 456–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baguisi, A. & Overström, E.W. (2000). Induced enucleation in nuclear transfer procedures to produce cloned animals. Theriogenology 54, 209.Google Scholar
Casas, E., Betancourt, M., Bonilla, E., Duculomb, Y., Zayas, H. & Trejo, R. (1999). Changes in cyclin B localisation during pig oocyte in vitro maturation. Zygote 7, 21–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eide, T., Coghlan, V., Orstavik, S., Holsve, C., Solberg, R., Skalhegg, B.S., Lamb, N.J., Langeberg, L., Fernandez, A., Scott, J.D., Jahnsen, T. & Tasken, K. (1998). Molecular cloning, chromosomal localization, and cell cycle-dependent subcellular distribution of the A-kinase anchoring protein, AKAP95. Exp. Cell Res. 238, 305–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elsheikh, A.S., Takahashi, Y., Katagiri, S. & Kanagawa, H. (1998). Functional enucleation of mouse metaphase II oocytes with etoposide. Jpn. J. Vet. Res. 45, 217–20.Google ScholarPubMed
Fischer, D., Ibanez, E., Cibelli, J., Albertini, D.F. & Overstrom, E.W. (2002). Activated bovine cytoplasts produced by induced enucleation support development of bovine nuclear transfer embryos in vitro. Biol. Reprod. 66, 238.Google Scholar
Fulka, J., Jr. & Moor, R.M. (1993). Noninvasive chemical enucleation of mouse oocytes. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 34, 427–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gao, S., Chung, Y.G., Parseghian, M.H., King, G.J., Adashi, E.Y. & Latham, K.E. (2004). Rapid H1 linker histone transitions following fertilization or somatic cell nuclear transfer: evidence for a uniform developmental program in mice. Dev. Biol. 266, 62–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gasparrini, B., Gao, S., Ainslie, A., Fletcher, J., McGarry, M., Ritchie, W.A., Springbett, A.J., Overstrom, E.W., Wilmut, I. & De Sousa, P.A. (2003). Cloned mice derived from embryonic stem cell karyoplasts and activated cytoplasts prepared by induced enucleation. Biol. Reprod. 68, 1259–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hou, J., Lei, T.H., Liu, L., Cui, X.H., An, X.R. & Chen, Y.F. (2006). Demecolcine-induced enucleation of sheep meiotically maturing oocytes. Reprod. Nutr. Dev. 46, 219–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ibáñez, E., Albertini, D.F. & Overstrom, E.W. (2003). Demecolcine-induced oocyte enucleation for somatic cell cloning: coordination between cell-cycle egress, kinetics of cortical cytoskeletal interactions, and second polar body extrusion. Biol. Reprod. 68, 1249–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ibáñez, E., Sanfins, A., Combelles, C., Albertini, D.F. & Overström, E.W. (2002). Induced enucleation of mouse and goat oocytes: kinetic and phenotypic characterizations. Theriogenology 57, 421.Google Scholar
Kang, Y.K., Koo, D.B., Park, J.S., Choi, Y.H., Lee, K.K. & Han, Y.M. (2001). Influence of oocyte nuclei on demethylation of donor genome in cloned bovine embryos. FEBS Lett. 499, 55–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, J.M., Ogura, A., Nagata, M. & Aoki, F. (2002). Analysis of the mechanism for chromatin remodeling in embryos reconstructed by somatic nuclear transfer. Biol. Reprod. 67, 760–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Latham, K.E. (1999). Mechanisms and control of embryonic genome activation in mammalian embryos. Int. Rev. Cytol. 193, 71–124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Latham, K.E. (2005). Early and delayed aspects of nuclear reprogramming during cloning. Biol. Cell. 97, 119–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, Z., Sun, X., Chen, J., Liu, X., Wisely, S.M., Zhou, Q., Renard, J.P., Leno, G.H. & Engelhardt, J.F. (2006). Cloned ferrets produced by somatic cell nuclear transfer. Dev. Biol. 293, 439–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ogura, A., Inoue, K., Takano, K., Wakayama, T. & Yanagimachi, R. (2000). Birth of mice after nuclear transfer by electrofusion using tail tip cells. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 57, 55–9.3.0.CO;2-W>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peura, T.T. (2003). Improved in vitro development rates of sheep somatic nuclear transfer embryos by using a reverse-order zona-free cloning method. Cloning Stem Cells 5, 13–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russell, D.F., Ibanez, E., Albertini, D.F. & Overstrom, E.W. (2005). Activated bovine cytoplasts prepared by demecolcine-induced enucleation support development of nuclear transfer embryos in vitro. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 72, 161–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Szollosi, D., Czolowska, R., Soltynska, M.S. & Tarkowski, A.K. (1986). Remodelling of thymocyte nuclei in activated mouse oocytes: an ultrastructural study. Eur. J. Cell Biol. 42, 140–51.Google ScholarPubMed
Szollosi, D., Czolowska, R., Szollosi, M.S. & Tarkowski, A.K. (1988). Remodeling of mouse thymocyte nuclei depends on the time of their transfer into activated, homologous oocytes. J. Cell Sci. 91 (Pt 4), 603–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vajta, G., Lewis, I.M., Hyttel, P., Thouas, G.A. & Trounson, A.O. (2001). Somatic cell cloning without micromanipulators. Cloning 3, 89–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wakayama, T., Perry, A.C., Zuccotti, M., Johnson, K.R. & Yanagimachi, R. (1998). Full-term development of mice from enucleated oocytes injected with cumulus cell nuclei. Nature 394, 369–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wakayama, T. & Yanagimachi, R. (2001). Mouse cloning with nucleus donor cells of different age and type. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 58, 376–83.3.0.CO;2-L>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilmut, I., Schnieke, A.E., McWhir, J., Kind, A.J. & Campbell, K.H. (1997). Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Nature 385, 810–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed