MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1493424517 · doi:10.1071/rdv16n1ab44

44 POSSIBILITY OF PRODUCTION OF A TRANSGENIC CLONED COW USING THE SOMATIC CELL NUCLEAR TRANSFER OF HUMAN ALPHA 1-ANTITRYPSIN GENE-TRANSFECTED CELLS

2004· article· en· W1493424517 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Goo Jang, Mohammad Musharraf Uddin Bhuiyan, Eun Soo Park, Hyun‐Woo Chun, J.G. Cho, H.J. Park, Seong‐Jun Kang, B.C. Lee, W.S. Hwang

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Genetics and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Council for Canadian StudiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma KurumuOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsSomatic cell nuclear transferBiologyMolecular biologyGreen fluorescent proteinTransgeneTransfectionBlastocystReporter geneTransgenesisOviductEmbryoSomatic cellAndrologyCell cultureReproductive technologyCell biologyGene expressionGeneEmbryogenesisBiochemistryGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study was designed to produce, using a somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), transgenic cloned cows that secreted a therapeutic protein into milk. Bovine cumulus cells were transfected with a plasmid that contained the alpha 1-antytrypsin DNA and green fluorescent protein (GFP) reporter gene using a Fugene 6 as a lipid carrier. In vitro-matured bovine oocytes were enucleated followed by confirmation of enucleation via nuclear staining. The GFP-expressing donor cells with the transgene were selected under blue fluorescent light just before injection of cells. The SCNT was performed according to the established system in our laboratory (Jang G et al., 2003 Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 15, 179–185). The couplets were fused, chemically activated, and cultured in modified synthetic oviduct fluid (mSOF) at 39°C in a humidified atmosphere of 5% CO2 in air for up to 7 days. The developmental ability (in Experiment 1) and number of inner cell mass (ICM) and trophectoderm (TE) cells (in Experiment 2) in transgenic and non-transgenic cloned embryos determined by differential staining as described by Thouas et al., (2001 Reprod. Biomed Online 3, 35–29) were compared. In Experiment 3, only GFP-expressing blastocysts were transferred to the uteri of recipient cows. A general linear model consisting of ANOVA and a least squares method in the SAS program was used for statical analysis. The percentage of blastocysts was lower (P < 0.05) in transgenic cloned embryos compared to non-transgenic embryos (34% v. 20%). No difference (P < 0.05) in the cell number of ICM and TE cells between two groups of embryos was observed. Out of 47 recipient cows, three pregnancies were detected by non-return to estrus and by rectal palpation. However, the pregnancies were not maintained to term; 2 fetuses were aborted at Days 60, and 150, and one fetus was aborted at Day 240. The genomic DNA from the fetus aborted at Day 240 was prepared and analyzed for the expression of GFP and alpha 1-antitrypsin gene by polymerase chain reaction. The expected PCR products (710 bp for alpha 1-antytrypsin DNA and 431 bp for GFP) were obtained and confirmed by sequence analysis. In conclusion, the present study demonstrated that developmental competence of cloned embryos derived from transgenic donor cells was lower compared with cloned embryos derived from non-transfected donor cells. Although we failed to produce a viable transgenic cloned calf, expression of alpha 1-antitrypsin in fetal tissue represented the possibility of production of a transgenic cloned cow by SCNT. This study was supported by Biogreen 21-1000520030100000.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.562

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction Fertility and DevelopmentSame topicAnimal Genetics and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207