MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1999361103 · doi:10.1071/rdv21n1ab158

158 IN VITRO DEVELOPMENT OF WOOD BISON (BISON BISON ATHABASCAE) EMBRYOS BY INTERSPECIES SOMATIC CELL NUCLEAR TRANSFER

2008· article· en· W1999361103 on OpenAlexaffabout
B. Mohana Kumar, Elizabeth St. John, Paula M. Mackie, W.A. King, Gabriela F. Mastromonaco

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphToronto ZooGreo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSomatic cell nuclear transferBiologyAndrologyBlastocystEmbryoSomatic cellBison bisonZygoteEmbryogenesisGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wood bison (Bison bison athabascae) are currently classified as threatened in Canada. Interspecies somatic cell nuclear transfer (iSCNT) is a valuable tool for embryo production in non-domestic species in which access to gametes is limited. Unlike fertilization, SCNT allows preservation of the entire genome, thus avoiding dilution of valuable alleles, an important factor for the preservation of genetic diversity. The present study compared the developmental competence of iSCNT embryos reconstructed from adult female wood bison ear fibroblasts (bison NT) with development of embryos reconstructed from adult female cattle ear fibroblasts (cattle NT). Domestic cattle (Bos taurus) oocytes were used as recipient ooplasm for both donor cell types. In vitro fertilized (IVF) and parthenogenetic (PA) cattle embryos were used as controls. Fibroblast cultures at passages 3 to 5 confluent for 5 days were used for SCNT. Mature oocytes were enucleated, reconstructed by transfer of donor cells, and fused with an electrical stimulus of 1.5 kV cm–1 for 40 µs in 0.28 m mannitol containing 100 µm CaCl2 and MgCl2. Oocytes for parthenogenesis and following reconstruction were activated for 5 min in 5 µm ionomycin followed by 5 h in 10 µg mL–1 cycloheximide. Embryos produced by IVF, PA, and SCNT were cultured in modified synthetic oviductal fluid medium at 38.5°C in 5% CO2, 5% O2, 90% N2. Cleavage, blastocyst development to day 8, apoptosis (TUNEL assay, Roche Diagnostics, IN, USA), and total cell number were evaluated. Statistical analyses were carried out using one-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey post hoc analysis or the equivalent nonparametrical Kruskal-Wallis test. Cleavage rate was significantly (P < 0.05) higher in the IVF group than in all other groups (86.9 ± 2.9% v. 71.6 ± 4.5% to 78.1 ± 5.1%). Blastocyst rates, expressed as a percentage of cleaved embryos, were similar among all treatment groups (33.4 ± 3.3% to 39.8 ± 5.7%) except for bison NT which had significantly (P < 0.05) lower development to blastocyst (19.2 ± 5.5%). The percentages of TUNEL-positive cells among PA embryos (6.6 ± 1.5%) and bison NT embryos (6.7 ± 2.4%) were significantly (P < 0.05) higher than in IVF embryos (4.2 ± 1.0%), but similar to cattle NT embryos (5.4 ± 1.7%), which did not differ from the IVF group. Total cell number was significantly (P < 0.05) higher in the IVF group than in all other groups (133.2 ± 10.2 v. 91.2 ± 7.8 to 100.1 ± 12.9). These results confirm that in vitro-matured domestic cattle oocytes can serve as suitable recipients of wood bison somatic cells and that iSCNT may provide a possible alternative for embryo production and genetic preservation of endangered cattle species. Both the incidence of apoptotic cells and total cell number did not differ between cattle and bison NT embryos; thus other factors must play a role in the significantly decreased blastocyst development observed in bison NT embryos. This work was supported by Endangered Species Reserve Fund, Toronto Zoo, and the Canada Research Chairs program.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction Fertility and Development→Same topicReproductive Biology and Fertility→French-language works237,207→