Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28905710›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS2017

Cleavage Speed and Blastomere Number in DBA/2J Compared with C57BL/6J Mouse Embryos.

Hirofumi Nishizono, Kyosuke Uno, Hiroyuki Abe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Hirofumi NishizonoLife Science Research Center, University of Toyama, Toyama, Japan; Department of Bio-chemical Engineering, Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Yamagata University, Yonezawa, Japan. hirofumi@cts.u-toyama.ac.jp.
Kyosuke UnoDepartment of Pharmaceutical Therapy and Neuropharmacology, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Graduate School of Medicine and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Toyama, Japan.
Hiroyuki AbeDepartment of Bio-chemical Engineering, Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Yamagata University, Yonezawa, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

DBA/2J mice are among the oldest and most important inbred strains still used in many research fields. However, this strain has reproductive problems, which may consume considerable time and effort during experiments requiring a large population. Because the quality of DBA/2J embryos has not yet been described in detail, we compared DBA/2J mice with the reproductively efficient C57BL/6J strain. Compared with C57BL/6J embryos, DBA/2J embryos had a slower cleavage speed (mean ± 1 SD; first cleavage: C57BL/6J, 16.87 ± 1.32 ; DBA/2J, 19.64 ± 0.96 h; P < 0.01; second cleavage: C57BL/6J, 41.12 ± 2.02 h; DBA/2J, 46.20 ± 2.68 h, P < 0.01) and lower cell counts at the morula and blastocyst stages (morula stage: C57BL/6J, 15 ± 3 cells per embryo; DBA/2J, 9 ± 5 cells per embryo; P < 0.05; blastocyst stage: C57BL/6J, 52 ± 6 cells per embryo; DBA/2J, 35 ± 14 cells per embryo; P < 0.05). In addition, the results of reciprocal in vitro fertilization and male-female reciprocal crosses revealed that these phenotypes were not affected by the sperm genome and were recessively inherited. These findings likely will facilitate the production of DBA/2J mice and genetically modified mice with their background. Our results also suggest that, due to their slow cleavage speed, DBA/2J mice can serve as a new model for human infertility.

Indexed as

AnimalsBlastocystBlastomeresCell DivisionEmbryonic DevelopmentFemaleFertilization in VitroMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLMice, Inbred DBAPhenotype

Identifiers

PMID28905710
PMCPMC5250490

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.