ArticlePloS one2014
The aggregation of four reconstructed zygotes is the limit to improve the developmental competence of cloned equine embryos.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Swine clones: potential application for animal production and animal models.Animal reproduction · 2025Review
- Horse Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer Using Zona Pellucida-Enclosed and Zona-Free Oocytes.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023Article
- Back to the future: optimised microwell culture of individual human preimplantation stage embryos.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Article
- Article
- Improves the In Vitro Developmental Competence and Reprogramming Efficiency of Cloned Bovine Embryos by Additional Complimentary Cytoplasm.Cellular reprogramming · 2019Article
- Embryo aggregation regulatesPeerJ · 2019Article
- Bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells as nuclear donors improve viability and health of cloned horses.Stem cells and cloning : advances and applications · 2018Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Embryo aggregation has been demonstrated to improve cloning efficiency in mammals. However, since no more than three embryos have been used for aggregation, the effect of using a larger number of cloned zygotes is unknown. Therefore, the goal of the present study was to determine whether increased numbers of cloned aggregated zygotes results in improved in vitro and in vivo embryo development in the equine. Zona-free reconstructed embryos (ZFRE's) were cultured in the well of the well system in four different experimental groups: I. 1x, only one ZFRE per microwell; II. 3x, three per microwell; III. 4x, four per microwell; and IV. 5x, five ZFRE's per microwell. Embryo size was measured on day 7, after which blastocysts from each experimental group were either a) maintained in culture from day 8 until day 16 to follow their growth rates, b) fixed to measure DNA fragmentation using the TUNEL assay, or c) transferred to synchronized mares. A higher blastocyst rate was observed on day 7 in the 4x group than in the 5x group. Non-aggregated embryos were smaller on day 8 compared to those aggregated, but from then on the in vitro growth was not different among experimental groups. Apoptotic cells averaged 10% of total cells of day 8 blastocysts, independently of embryo aggregation. Only pregnancies resulting from the aggregation of up to four embryos per microwell went beyond the fifth month of gestation, and two of these pregnancies, derived from experimental groups 3x and 4x, resulted in live cloned foals. In summary, we showed that the in vitro and in vivo development of cloned zona-free embryos improved until the aggregation of four zygotes and declined when five reconstructed zygotes were aggregated.
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.