Production of Wild Buffalo (<i>Bubalus arnee</i>) Embryos by Interspecies Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer Using Domestic Buffalo (<i>Bubalus bubalis</i>) Oocytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to explore the possibility of producing wild buffalo embryos by interspecies somatic cell nuclear transfer (iSCNT) through handmade cloning using wild buffalo somatic cells and domestic buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) oocytes. Somatic cells derived from the ear skin of wild buffalo were found to express vimentin but not keratin and cytokeratin-18, indicating that they were of fibroblast origin. The population doubling time of skin fibroblasts from wild buffalo was significantly (p < 0.05) higher, and the cell proliferation rate was significantly (p < 0.05) lower compared with that of skin fibroblasts from domestic buffalo. Neither the cleavage (92.6 ± 2.0% vs 92.8 ± 2.0%) nor the blastocyst rate (42.4 ± 2.4% vs 38.7 ± 2.8%) was significantly different between the intraspecies cloned embryos produced using skin fibroblasts from domestic buffalo and interspecies cloned embryos produced using skin fibroblasts from wild buffalo. However, the total cell number (TCN) was significantly (p < 0.05) lower (192.0 ± 25.6 vs 345.7 ± 42.2), and the apoptotic index was significantly (p < 0.05) higher (15.1 ± 3.1 vs 8.0 ± 1.4) for interspecies than that for intraspecies cloned embryos. Following vitrification in open-pulled straws (OPS) and warming, although the cryosurvival rate of both types of cloned embryos, as indicated by their re-expansion rate, was not significantly different (34.8 ± 1.5% vs 47.8 ± 7.8), the apoptotic index was significantly (p < 0.05) higher for vitrified-warmed interspecies than that for corresponding intraspecies cloned embryos (48.9 ± 7.2 vs 23.9 ± 2.8). The global level of H3K18ac was significantly (p < 0.05) lower in interspecies cloned embryos than that in intraspecies cloned embryos. The expression level of HDAC1, DNMT3a and CASPASE3 was significantly (p < 0.05) higher, that of P53 was significantly (p < 0.05) lower in interspecies than in intraspecies embryos, whereas that of DNMT1 was similar between the two types of embryos. In conclusion, these results demonstrate that wild buffalo embryos can be produced by iSCNT.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".