Effect of Mechanical Enucleation Methods on Development of Bovine Nuclear Transfer Embryos

물리적 탈핵 방법이 소 복제수정란의 발달 능력에 미치는 영향

  • Published : 2006.09.30

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the effect of mechanical enucleation methods, aspiration and squeezing, on the developmental ability of nuclear transfer bovine embryos. Enucleated oocytes made by both enucleation methods were fused to adult ear skin cells. After 7 days of culture, developmental ability up to blastocyst stage was similar in both squeezing($33.6{\pm}15.7%$) and aspiration enucleation methods($31.9{\pm}13.4%$). The proportion of blastocysts at Day 8 of culture was also similar between the aspiration($37.8{\pm}10.4%$) and squeezing enucleatign s($35.3{\pm}15.1%$). The mean cell number in Day 7 blastocysts was also similar between the both groups(aspiration: $110.3{\pm}39.2$ vs. squeezing: $103.7{\pm}42.8$). The ratio of apoptotic cells was also found to be not significant different between the both groups(aspiration: $2.8{\pm}2.6%$ vs. squeezing: $4.3{\pm}4.4%$). These results suggest that aspiration and squeezing methods, as mechanical enucleation technique, are both useful for the production of bovine somatic cell nuclear transfer embryos.

본 연구는 물리적 탈핵 방법인 aspiration 방법과 squeezing 방법을 사용해 핵이식된 소 체세포 복제란의 발달능을 조사하였다. 두 방법에 의해 탈핵된 수핵란에 한우 귀피부 세포를 융합하여 체외에서 $7{\sim}8$일간 배양하여 발육능을 검사하였다. 배양 7일째 배반포 발달율은 aspiration 방법($31.9{\pm}13.4%$)과 squeezing 방법($33.6{\pm}15.7%$) 간에 차이가 없었다. 또한 배양 8일째 배반포 발달율도 squeezing 방법($35.3{\pm}15.1%$)과 aspiration 방법($37.8{\pm}10.4%$) 간에 차이가 없는 것으로 나타났다. 배양 7일째 배반포의 평균 세포수에 있어 각 처리 간에 차이가 없는 것으로 조사되었으며(aspiration: $110.3{\pm}39.2$, squeezing $103.7{\pm}42.8$), 세포자연사의 비율에 있어서도 역시 유의적인 차이가 없는 것으로 조사되었다(aspiration: $2.8{\pm}2.6%$, squeezing: $4.3{\pm}4.4%$). 본 연구의 결과는 물리적 탈핵 방법인 aspiration 방법과 squeezing 방법 모두 소 체세포 복제수정란의 생산을 위한 유용한 방법임을 보여준다.

Keywords

References

  1. Alikani M, Schimmel T, Willadsen SM (2005): Cytoplasmic fragmentation in activated eggs occurs in the cytokinetic phase of the cell cycle, in lieu of normal cytokinesis, and in response to cytoskeletal disorder. Mol Hum Reprod 11:335-344 https://doi.org/10.1093/molehr/gah171
  2. Baguisi A, Behboodi E, Melican DT, Pollock JS, Destrempes MM, Cammuso C, Williams JL, Nims SD, Porter CA, Midura P, Palacios MJ, Ayres SL, Denniston RS, Hayes ML, Ziomek CA, Meade HM, Godke RA, Gavin WG, Overstrom EW, Echelard Y (1999): Production of goats by somatic cell nuclear transfer. Nat Biotechnol 17:456- 461 https://doi.org/10.1038/8632
  3. Baguisi A, Overstrom EW (2000): Induced enucleation in nuclear transfer procedures to produce cloned animals. Theriogenology 54:209 (Abstr) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(00)00342-3
  4. Brison DR, Schultz RM (1997): Apoptosis during mouse blastocyst formation; evidence for a role survival factors including transforming growth factor alpha. BioI Reprod 56:1088-1096 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod56.5.1088
  5. Campbell KH, McWhir J, Ritchie WA, Wilmut I (1996): Sheep cloned by nuclear transfer from a cultured cell line. Nature 380:64-66 https://doi.org/10.1038/380064a0
  6. Christian S, Susan N, Antoine S-C Marc M, Francois P, Marc-Andre S (2004): Comparison of bulk enucleation methods for porcine oocytes. Mol Reprod Dev 67:70-76 https://doi.org/10.1002/mrd.20011
  7. Czolowska R, Waksmundzka M, Kubiak JZ, Tarkowski AK (1986): Chromosome condensation activity in ovulated metaphase II mouse oocytes assayed by fusion with interphase blastomeres. J Cell Sci 84:129- 138
  8. Dominko T, Mitalipova M, Haley B, Beyhan Z, Memili M, First N (1998): Bovine oocyte as a universal recipient cytoplasm in mammalian nuclear transfer. Theriogenology 49:385(Abstr) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(98)90738-5
  9. Elsheikh AS, Takahashi Y, Katagiri S, Kanagawa H (1998): Functional enucleation of mouse metaphase II oocytes with etoposide. Jpn J Vet Res 45:217-220
  10. Fahrudin M, Otoi T, Karja NWK, Mori M, Murakami M, Suzuki T (2002): Analysis of DNA fragmentation in bovine somatic nuclear transfer embryos using TUNEL. Reproduction 124:813-819 https://doi.org/10.1530/rep.0.1240813
  11. Fulka J Jr, Moor RM (1993): Noninvasive chemical enucleation of mouse oocytes. Mol Reprod Dev 34: 427- 430 https://doi.org/10.1002/mrd.1080340412
  12. Gasparrini B, Gao S, Ainslie A, Fletcher J, McGarry M, Ritchie WA, Springbett AJ, Overstrom EW, Wilmut I, De Sousa PA (2003): Cloned mice derived from embryonic stem cell karyoplasts and activated cytoplasts prepared by induced enucleation. Biol Reprod 68:1259-1266 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.102.008730
  13. Hardy K (1997): Cell death in the mammalian blastocyst. Mol Hum Repord 3:919-925 https://doi.org/10.1093/molehr/3.10.919
  14. Ibanez E, Albertini DF, Overstrom EW (2003): Demecolcine induced oocyte enucleation for somatic cell cloning: coordination between cell-cycle egress, kinetics of cortical cytoskeletal interactions, and second polar body extrusion. Biol Reprod 68:1249-1258 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.102.008292
  15. Kawakami M, Tani T, Yabuuchi A, Kobayashi T, Murakami H, Fujimura T, Kato Y, Tsunoda Y (2003):Effect of demecolcine and nocodazole on the efficiency of chemically assisted removal of chromosomes and the developmental potential of nuclear transferred porcine oocytes. Cloning Stem Cells 5: 379-387 https://doi.org/10.1089/153623003772032871
  16. Koo D-B, Kang Y-K Choi Y-H, Park J-S, Kim H-N, Oh K-B, Son D-S, Park HD, Lee K-K Han Y-M (2002): Aberrant allocations of inner cell mass and trophectoderm cells in bovine nuclear transfer blastocysts. BioI Reprod 67:487-492 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod67.2.487
  17. Kubota C, Yamakuchi H, Todoroki J, Mizoshita K Tabara N, Barber M, Yang X (2000): Six cloned calves produced from adult fibroblast cells after long-term culture. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:990-995
  18. Li GP, White KL, Bunch TD (2004): Review of enucleation methods and procedures used in animal cloning state of the art. Cloning Stem Cells 6:5-13 https://doi.org/10.1089/15362300460743781
  19. Loi P, Ptak G, Barboni B, Fulka J Jr, Cappai P, Clinton M (2001): Genetic rescue of an endangered mammal by cross-species nuclear transfer using post-mortem somatic cells. Nat Biotechnol 19:962-964 https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1001-962
  20. Matwee C, Betts DH, King WA (2000): Apoptosis in the early bovine embryo. Zygote 8:57-68 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0967199400000836
  21. Mitalipov SM, White KL, Farrar VR, Morrey J, Reed WA (1999): Development of nuclear transfer and parthenogenetic rabbit embryos activated with inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate. Biol Reprod 60:821- 827 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod60.4.821
  22. Nour MS, Takahashi Y (1999): Preparation of young preactivated oocytes with high enucleation efficiency for bovine nuclear transfer. Theriogenology 51: 661-666 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(99)00004-7
  23. Onishi A, Iwamoto M, Akita T, Mikawa S, Takeda K, Awata T, Hanada H, Perry AC (2000): Pig cloning by microinjection of fetal fibroblast nuclei. Science 289:1188-1190 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.289.5482.1188
  24. Papaioannous VE, Ebert KM (1988): The preimplantation pig embryo cell number and allocation to trophectoderm and inner cell mass of the blastocyst in vivo and in vitro. Development 102:793-803
  25. Polejaeva lA, Chen SH, Vaught TD, Page RL, Mullins J, Ball S, Dai Y, Boone J, Walker S, Ayares DL, Colman A, Campbell KH (2000): Cloned pigs produced by nuclear transfer from adult somatic cells. Nature 407:86-90 https://doi.org/10.1038/35024082
  26. Renard JP, Zhou Qi, LeBourhis D, Chavatte-Palmer P, Hue I, Heyman Y, Vignon X (2003): Nuclear transfer technologies: between successes and doubts. Theriogenology 57:203-222 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(01)00667-7
  27. Stojkovic M, Buttner M, Zakhartchenko V, Berm G, Wolf EA (1998): Reliable procedure for differential staining of in vitro produced bovine blastocysts; comparison of tissue culture medium 199 and Menezo's B2 medium. Anim Reprod Sci 50:1-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4320(97)00029-8
  28. Tesarik J, Martinez F, Rienzi L, Ubaldi F, Iacobelli M, Mendoza C, Greco E (2003): Microfilament disruption is required for enucleation and nuclear transfer in germinal vesicle but not metaphase II human oocytes. Fertil Steril 79:677-681 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(02)04816-1
  29. Wakayama T, Perry AC, Zuccotti M, Johnson KR, Yanagimachi R (1998): Full-term development of mice from enucleated oocytes injected with cumulus cell nuclei. Nature 394:369-374 https://doi.org/10.1038/28615
  30. Wilmut I, Schnieke AE, McWhir J, Kind AJ, Campbell KH (1997): Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Nature 385:810-813 https://doi.org/10.1038/385810a0
  31. Yin XJ, Tani T, Yonemura I, Kawakami M, Miyamoto K, Hasegawa R, Kato Y, Tsunoda Y (2002): Production of cloned pigs from adult somatic cells by chemically assisted removal of maternal chromosomes. BioI Reprod 67:442-446 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod67.2.442