MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2944048143 · doi:10.1101/630194

Somatic cell nuclear transfer in non-enucleated goldfish oocytes: understanding DNA fate during meiosis resumption and first cellular division

2019· preprint· en· W2944048143 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Charlène Rouillon, Alexandra Depincé, Nathalie Chênais, Pierre-Yves Le Bail, Catherine Labbé

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRégion BretagneInstitute of GeneticsInstitut National de la Recherche AgronomiqueInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche MédicaleSamsung Biomedical Research InstituteAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsBiologyMeiosisSomatic cellPolar bodyOocyteGeneticsCell biologyDNANuclear DNAMitosisCell divisionEmbryoCellMitochondrial DNAGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nuclear transfer consists in injecting a somatic nucleus carrying valuable genetic information into a recipient oocyte to sire a diploid offspring who bears the genome of interest. It requires that the oocyte (maternal) DNA is removed. In fish, because enucleation is difficult to achieve, non-enucleated oocytes are often used and disappearance of the maternal DNA was reported in some clones. The present work explore which cellular events explain spontaneous erasure of maternal DNA, as mastering this phenomenon would circumvent the painstaking procedure of fish oocyte enucleation. The fate of the somatic and maternal DNA during meiosis resumption and first cell cycle was studied using DNA labeling and immunofluorescence in goldfish clones. Maternal DNA was always found as an intact metaphase within the oocyte, and polar body extrusion was minimally affected after meiosis resumption. During the first cell cycle, only 40 % of the clones displayed symmetric cleavage, and these symmetric clones contributed to 80 % of those surviving at hatching. Maternal DNA was often fragmented and located under the cleavage furrow. The somatic DNA was organized either into a normal mitotic spindle or abnormal multinuclear spindle. Scenarios matching the DNA behavior and the embryo fate are proposed.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicReproductive Biology and Fertility→French-language works237,207→