Embryo Aggregation Promotes Derivation Efficiency of Outgrowths from Porcine Blastocysts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Porcine embryonic stem cells (pESCs) have become an advantageous experimental tool for developing therapeutic applications and producing transgenic animals. However, despite numerous reports of putative pESC lines, deriving validated pESC lines from embryos produced in vitro remains difficult. Here, we report that embryo aggregation was useful for deriving pESCs from in vitro-produced embryos. Blastocysts derived from embryo aggregation formed a larger number of colonies and maintained cell culture stability. Our derived cell lines demonstrated expression of pluripotent markers (alkaline phosphatase, Oct4, Sox2, and Nanog), an ability to form embryoid bodies, and the capacity to differentiate into the three germ layers. A cytogenetic analysis of these cells revealed that all lines derived from aggregated blastocysts had normal female and male karyotypes. These results demonstrate that embryo aggregation could be a useful technique to improve the efficiency of deriving ESCs from in vitro-fertilized pig embryos, studying early development, and deriving pluripotent ESCs in vitro in other mammals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".