Treatment of Nuclear-Donor Cells or Cloned Zygotes with Chromatin-Modifying Agents Increases Histone Acetylation But Does Not Improve Full-Term Development of Cloned Cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) is a promising tool, its potential use is hampered by the high mortality rates during the development to term of cloned offspring. Abnormal epigenetic reprogramming of donor nuclei after SCNT is thought to be the main cause of this low efficiency. We hypothesized that chromatin-modifying agents (CMAs) targeting chromatin acetylation and DNA methylation could alter the chromatin configuration and turn them more amenable to reprogramming. Thus, bovine fibroblasts were treated with 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine (AZA) plus trichostatin (TSA) or hydralazine (HH) plus valproic acid (VPA) whereas, in another trial, cloned bovine zygotes were treated with TSA. The treatment of fibroblasts with either AZA+TSA or HH+VPA increased histone acetylation, but did not affect the level of DNA methylation. However, treatment with HH+VPA decreased cellular viability and proliferation. The use of these cells as nuclear donors showed no positive effect on pre- and postimplantation development. Regarding the treatment of cloned zygotes with TSA, treated one-cell embryos showed an increase in the acetylation patterns, but not in the level of DNA methylation. Moreover, this treatment revealed no positive effect on pre- and postimplantation development. This work provides evidence the treatment of either nuclear donor cells or cloned zygotes with CMAs has no positive effect on pre- and postimplantation development of cloned cattle.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".