Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23166393›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2013

Recent advancements in cloning by somatic cell nuclear transfer.

Atsuo Ogura, Kimiko Inoue, Teruhiko Wakayama

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 104 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
104citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

104 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Gene Editing for Enhanced Swine Production: Current Advances and Prospects.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Incomplete activation ofLife science alliance · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Perspectives in Genome-Editing Techniques for Livestock.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

44 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Atsuo OguraRIKEN BioResource Center, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan. ogura@rtc.riken.go.jp
Kimiko Inoue
Teruhiko Wakayama

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) cloning is the sole reproductive engineering technology that endows the somatic cell genome with totipotency. Since the first report on the birth of a cloned sheep from adult somatic cells in 1997, many technical improvements in SCNT have been made by using different epigenetic approaches, including enhancement of the levels of histone acetylation in the chromatin of the reconstructed embryos. Although it will take a considerable time before we fully understand the nature of genomic programming and totipotency, we may expect that somatic cell cloning technology will soon become broadly applicable to practical purposes, including medicine, pharmaceutical manufacturing and agriculture. Here we review recent progress in somatic cell cloning, with a special emphasis on epigenetic studies using the laboratory mouse as a model.

Indexed as

Epigenesis, GeneticNuclear Transfer TechniquesAnimalsCellular ReprogrammingCloning, OrganismEmbryo, MammalianEmbryonic DevelopmentEmbryo TransferEpigenomicsGerm CellsHistone Deacetylase 1HistonesHydroxamic AcidsInheritance PatternsMiceX Chromosome InactivationHdac1 protein, mouseHistone Deacetylase 1HistonesHydroxamic Acidstrichostatin A

Identifiers

PMID23166393
PMCPMC3539358

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.