ArticleCellular reprogramming2013
Transgenic chicken, mice, cattle, and pig embryos by somatic cell nuclear transfer into pig oocytes.
Article in Cellular reprogramming, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transcriptomic insights into developmental arrest in fluorescent labeling transgenic Asian elephant (Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Article
- Effect of arginine-induced motility and capacitation on RNA population in goat spermatozoa.Veterinary research communications · 2023Article
- Overcoming bioethical, legal, and hereditary barriers to mitochondrial replacement therapy in the USA.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2019Article
- Suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid during in vitro culture improves development of dog-pig interspecies cloned embryos but not dog cloned embryos.The Journal of reproduction and development · 2018Article
- Choosing a culture medium for SCNT and iSCNT reconstructed embryos: from domestic to wildlife species.Journal of animal science and technology · 2017Review
- Ooplast transfer of triploid pronucleus zygote improve reconstructed human-goat embryonic development.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study explored the possibility of producing transgenic cloned embryos by interspecies somatic cell nuclear transfer (iSCNT) of cattle, mice, and chicken donor cells into enucleated pig oocytes. Enhanced green florescent protein (EGFP)-expressing donor cells were used for the nuclear transfer. Results showed that the occurrence of first cleavage did not differ significantly when pig, cattle, mice, or chicken cells were used as donor nuclei (p>0.05). However, the rate of blastocyst formation was significantly higher in pig (14.9±2.1%; p<0.05) SCNT embryos than in cattle (6.3±2.5%), mice (4.2±1.4%), or chicken (5.1±2.4%) iSCNT embryos. The iSCNT embryos also contained a significantly less number of cells per blastocyst than those of SCNT pig embryos (p<0.05). All (100%) iSCNT embryos expressed the EGFP gene, as evidenced by the green florescence under ultraviolet (UV) illumination. Microinjection of purified mitochondria from cattle somatic cells into pig oocytes did not have any adverse effect on their postfertilization in vitro development and embryo quality (p>0.05). Moreover, NCSU23 medium, which was designed for in vitro culture of pig embryos, was able to support the in vitro development of cattle, mice, and chicken iSCNT embryos up to the blastocyst stage. Taken together, these data suggest that enucleated pig oocytes may be used as a universal cytoplast for production of transgenic cattle, mice, and chicken embryos by iSCNT. Furthermore, xenogenic transfer of mitochondria to the recipient cytoplast may not be the cause for poor embryonic development of cattle-pig iSCNT embryos.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.