MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1561625595 · doi:10.1071/rdv16n1ab77

77 CLONED EMBRYO DEVELOPMENT IN VITRO: COMPARISON OF CONVENTIONAL AND INDUCED ENUCLEATION PROCEDURES FOR BOVINE CYTOPLAST PREPARATION

2004· article· en· W1561625595 on OpenAlexfundno aff
M.-K. Wang, E.W. Overström

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
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
KeywordsCytoplastCytochalasin BEnucleationSomatic cell nuclear transferAndrologyMolecular biologyBiologyIn vitroChemistryEmbryoBlastocystBiochemistryCell biologyEmbryogenesisMedicineMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Induced enucleation (IE) of oocytes with demecolcine produces competent ooplasts for SCNT as demonstrated previously in mouse, goat, cow and pig. Whether bovine IE cytoplasts are more or less competent than conventionally enucleated MII oocytes to support nuclear reprogramming of somatic chromatin and embryo development in vitro is not known. This study compared in vitro development of cloned bovine embryos produced by conventional and IE enucleation methods. Three experimental groups were: (1) Parthenogenetic controls. In vitro-matured, MII-arrested bovine oocytes were activated by a single (1 × Act, 10 µM ionomycin in Tyrodes-HEPES, 5 min) or double activation (2 × Act; 1 × Act, wash 5 min, 10 µg mL-1 cycloheximide [CHX] 20 min, repeat 1 × Act) followed by incubation in CHX and 5 µg mL-1 cytochalasin B (CB) for 6 h, and then culture (BARC medium) for 7 days. (2) Conventional SCNT. MII oocytes were enucleated by micromanipulation in HEPES-buffered enucleation medium (BARC containing 7.5 µg mL-1 CB, 5 µg mL-1 Hoechst 33342, 10% FBS) under UV illumination (3–5 s). Donor cells (fibroblasts, passage 7–9) were inserted into the perivitelline space, and the reconstructed couplets activated (1 × Act). Reconstructed couplets were then electrofused, placed in BARC medium containing 10 µg mL-1 CHX and 5 µg mL-1 CB (6 h), and then cultured for 7 days. (3) IE SCNT. MII oocytes were activated (1 × Act), placed into BARC-5% FBS containing 0.4 µg mL-1 demecolcine (DEME), 10 µg mL-1 CHX, 2 µg mL-1 cytochalasin D for 20 min, then 20 min without DEME, then returned to DEME. At 1–1.5 h post-activation, the extruding second polar body (PB2) containing nuclear chromatin was removed by micromanipulation, couplets were reconstructed and fused as above, and additionally activated (two pulses, 20–30 V/mm, 20 µs). Embryos were cultured in 10 µg mL-1 CHX and 5 µg mL-1 CB medium for 4–5 hour, then BARC for 7 days. The results (Table 1) reveal that 2 × Act increases embryo development at Day 2, but not Day 7. Further, there are no significant differences in embryo development rates between conventional and IE SCNT protocols. Respectively, 46%, 32% and 21% of cleaved control (1 × Act), conventional and IE embryos developed to 16 cells on Day 7. In vitro development of cleavage embryos to the blastocyst stage was greater in controls (25–32%) than in conventional (22%) and IE (17%) SCNT groups on Day 7. Further comparisons of in vivo development between conventional and IE SCNT methods following embryo transfer are warranted. Supported by ACT, Cyagra and USDA NRI \#2001-35205-09966. Table 1 Embryo development: Conventional v. induced enucleation

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.380
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207