Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24836291›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

DNA replication is an integral part of the mouse oocyte's reprogramming machinery.

Bingyuan Wang, Martin J Pfeiffer, Caroline Schwarzer, Marcos J Araúzo-Bravo, Michele Boiani

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Bingyuan WangMax Planck Institute for Molecular Biomedicine, Münster, Germany.
Martin J PfeifferMax Planck Institute for Molecular Biomedicine, Münster, Germany.
Caroline SchwarzerMax Planck Institute for Molecular Biomedicine, Münster, Germany.
Marcos J Araúzo-BravoGroup of Computational Biology and Systems Biomedicine, Biodonostia Health Research Institute, San Sebastián, Spain; IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science, Bilbao, Spain.
Michele BoianiMax Planck Institute for Molecular Biomedicine, Münster, Germany.
Max Planck Institute for Molecular Biomedicine · DEBiogipuzkoa Health Research Institute · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many of the structural and mechanistic requirements of oocyte-mediated nuclear reprogramming remain elusive. Previous accounts that transcriptional reprogramming of somatic nuclei in mouse zygotes may be complete in 24-36 hours, far more rapidly than in other reprogramming systems, raise the question of whether the mere exposure to the activated mouse ooplasm is sufficient to enact reprogramming in a nucleus. We therefore prevented DNA replication and cytokinesis, which ensue after nuclear transfer, in order to assess their requirement for transcriptional reprogramming of the key pluripotency genes Oct4 (Pou5f1) and Nanog in cloned mouse embryos. Using transcriptome and allele-specific analysis, we observed that hundreds of mRNAs, but not Oct4 and Nanog, became elevated in nucleus-transplanted oocytes without DNA replication. Progression through the first round of DNA replication was essential but not sufficient for transcriptional reprogramming of Oct4 and Nanog, whereas cytokinesis and thereby cell-cell interactions were dispensable for transcriptional reprogramming. Responses similar to clones also were observed in embryos produced by fertilization in vitro. Our results link the occurrence of reprogramming to a previously unappreciated requirement of oocyte-mediated nuclear reprogramming, namely DNA replication. Nuclear transfer alone affords no immediate transition from a somatic to a pluripotent gene expression pattern unless DNA replication is also in place. This study is therefore a resource to appreciate that the quest for always faster reprogramming methods may collide with a limit that is dictated by the cell cycle.

Indexed as

AnimalsCellular ReprogrammingCloning, OrganismCytokinesisDNA PrimersDNA ReplicationFemaleGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression Regulation, DevelopmentalHomeodomain ProteinsMiceNanog Homeobox ProteinNuclear Transfer TechniquesOctamer Transcription Factor-3OocytesPolymerase Chain ReactionDNA PrimersHomeodomain ProteinsNanog Homeobox ProteinNanog protein, mouseOctamer Transcription Factor-3Pou5f1 protein, mouse

Identifiers

PMID24836291
PMCPMC4023938
OpenAlexW2024895263

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.