MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1541176748 · doi:10.1071/rdv16n1ab50

50 SPATIAL EXPRESSION OF OCT4 IS NORMALLY REGULATED IN PREIMPLANTATION STAGE BOVINE SOMATIC CELL CLONES

2004· article· en· W1541176748 on OpenAlexafffund
Satoshi Kurosaka, Sigrid Eckardt, M.K. Friez, N. Adrian Leu, Rolland Reinbold, K. John McLaughlin

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersInternational Council for Canadian StudiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma KurumuOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsBiologyBlastocystInner cell massAndrologyMolecular biologyReprogrammingTheriogenologySomatic cell nuclear transferBlastomereEmbryoEmbryo cultureGeneticsEmbryogenesisCell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oct4 is a member of the POU family of transcription factors and is expressed in blastomeres, pluripotent embryonic cells and the germ cell lineage. In the mouse blastocyst, expression of Oct4 becomes restricted to the inner cell mass (ICM). In bovine, Oct4 has not been considered to be a marker for pluripotency because Oct4 protein is expressed in both the ICM and the trophectoderm (TE) of bovine blastocysts (van Eijk MJT et al., 1999 Biol. Reprod. 60, 1093–1103; Kirchhof N et al., 2000 Biol. Reprod. 63, 1698–1705). Oct4 has been used as a marker gene for nuclear reprogramming in cloned embryos. Aberrant spatial distribution and levels of Oct4 have been observed in the majority of mouse clone blastocysts and blastocyst outgrowths (Boiani M et al., 2002 Genes Dev. 16, 1209–1219), indicating reprogramming failure of mouse clones. Lack of or abnormal Oct4 protein expression was also observed in cloned monkey embryos (Mitalipov SM et al., 2003 Biol. Reprod. 68 (suppl 1), 159). The spatial distribution of Oct4 mRNA and protein in bovine clones has not been reported. Bovine oocytes were obtained from a commercial supplier (BOMED, Inc., Madison, WI, USA), and were matured in vitro. Enucleated oocytes were fused with fibroblasts from ear skin and then treated with 10 µg mL-1 cycloheximide and 1.25 µg mL-1 cytochalasin D for 6 h. Embryos were cultured in SOF supplemented with 1% fetal calf serum (FCS) at 39°C under 5% CO2, 5% O2 and 90% N2 for 2 days. At Day 2, embryos were transferred to SOF supplemented with 5% FCS and cultured under the same conditions until Day 7. Blastocysts were analyzed at Day 7. Oct4 mRNA expression was visualized by whole-mount in situ hybridization using a bovine Oct4-specific antisense riboprobe. Oct4 protein was detected by immunocytochemistry. Control embryos were produced by IVF and were cultured under the same conditions to the blastocyst stage (Day 7). We found that Oct4 mRNA signal was restricted to the ICM in bovine blastocysts. Bovine clones were not different from control embryos in that distribution of Oct4 mRNA signal was typically restricted to the ICM (14 of 16). In contrast to our previous report on mouse clones (Boiani M et al., 2002 Genes Dev. 16, 1209–1219), ectopic expression of Oct4 mRNA in the TE was rarely detected in bovine clones (2 of 16). Distribution of Oct4 protein was also similar between clones and controls with distribution in both the ICM and TE (clones: 9 of 9; controls: 9 of 9). It is unclear why defects in Oct4 distribution should differ between bovine and other species tested including monkey (Mitalipov SM et al., 2003 Biol. Reprod. 68 (suppl 1), 159–160); however, the higher rate of normal Oct4 distribution is consistent with the generally higher rates of postimplantation development of bovine clones (Shi W et al., 2003 Differentiation 71, 91–113).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction Fertility and DevelopmentSame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207