Journal of Embryo Transfer (한국수정란이식학회지)

The Korean Society of Embryo Transfer (한국수정란이식학회)
권호 표지

In Vitro Production of Jeju Black Cattle Cloned Embryos by Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT)

제주흑우 체세포 복제수정란의 체외 생산

  • Kim, Dong-Hoon (Animal Biotechnology Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Yang, Byoung-Chul (Animal Biotechnology Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Im, Gi-Sun (Animal Biotechnology Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Yoo, Jae Gyu (Animal Biotechnology Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • No, Jin-Gu (Animal Biotechnology Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Park, Jong-Ju (Animal Biotechnology Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Lee, Sung-Soo (Subtropical Animal Experiment Station, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Ko, Moon-Suck (Subtropical Animal Experiment Station, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Park, Jin-Ki (Animal Biotechnology Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA)
  • 김동훈 (국립축산과학원 동물바이오공학과) ;
  • 양병철 (국립축산과학원 동물바이오공학과) ;
  • 임기순 (국립축산과학원 동물바이오공학과) ;
  • 류재규 (국립축산과학원 동물바이오공학과) ;
  • 노진구 (국립축산과학원 동물바이오공학과) ;
  • 박종주 (국립축산과학원 동물바이오공학과) ;
  • 이성수 (난지축산시험장) ;
  • 고문석 (난지축산시험장) ;
  • 박진기 (국립축산과학원 동물바이오공학과)
  • Received : 2012.03.29
  • Accepted : 2012.05.18
  • Published : 2012.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study was carried out to investigate effective condition for producing somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) embryos of Jeju native cattle. As donor cells for SCNT, ear skin cells from Jeju native cattle were used. In experiment 1, the effect of recipient oocyte sources on the development of Jeju native cattle SCNT embryos were examined. Fusion rate of recipient oocyte and donor cell was not different between the Hanwoo and Holstein recipient oocytes (86.0% vs 89.9%). The rate of embryos developing to the blastocyst stage was significantly (p<0.05) higher in Hanwoo recipient oocytes than in Holstein recipient ones (28.2% vs 14.7%). Blastocysts derived from Hanwoo recipient oocytes contained higher numbers of total cells than those derived from Holstein ones ($115.1{\pm}40.8$ vs $101.4{\pm}33.3$), although there were no significant difference. The mean proportion of apoptotic cells in blastocyst was not different between the sources of recipient oocytes. In experiment 2, the development of Jeju native cattle and Hanwoo SCNT embryos were compared. Hanwoo oocytes were used as the recipient oocytes. Fusion rate was not different between the Jeju native cattle and Hanwoo SCNT embryos (92.1% vs 92.9%). The blastocyst rate of SCNT embryos was significantly (p<0.05) lower in Jeju native cattle than in Hanwoo (16.9% vs 31.0%). Blastocysts derived from Jeju native cattle SCNT embryos contained smaller numbers of total cells than those derived from Hanwoo ones ($136.6{\pm}33.7$ vs $149.9{\pm}39.7$), but there were no significant difference. The mean proportion of apoptotic cells in blastocyst was not different between the Jeju native cattle and Hanwoo SCNT embryos. The present study demonstrated that Hanwoo recipient oocytes were more effective in supporting production of Jeju native cattle SCNT embryos, although Jeju native cattle SCNT embryos showed reduced developmental capacity when compared to Hanwoo SCNT embryos.

Keywords

References

  1. Brookes PS, Yoon Y, Robotham JL, Anders MW and Sheu SS. 2004. Calcium, ATP, and ROS: a mitochondrial love-hate triangle. Am. J. Physiol. Cell. Physiol. 287:817-833. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpcell.00139.2004
  2. Fujino Y, Ozaki K, Yamamasu S, Ito F, Matsuoka I, Hayashi E, Nakamura H, Ogita S, Sato E and Inoue M. 1996. DNA fragmentation of oocytes in aged mice. Hum. Reprod. 11: 1480-1483. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019421
  3. Gao S, Czirr E, Chung YG, Han Z and Latham KE. 2004. Genetic variation in oocyte phenotype revealed through parthenogenesis and cloning: correlation with differences in pronuclear epigenetic modification. Biol. Reprod. 70:1162- 1170. https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.103.024216
  4. Gomez MC, Pope CE, Giraldo A, Lyons LA, Harris RF, King AL, Cole A, Godke RA and Dresser BL. 2004. Birth of african wildcat cloned kittens born from domestic cats. Cloning Stem Cells 6:247-258. https://doi.org/10.1089/clo.2004.6.247
  5. Goto H, Iwata H, Takeo S, Nisinosono K, Murakami S, Monji Y and Kuwayama T. 2011. Effect of bovine age on the proliferative activity, global DNA methylation, relative telomere length and telomerase activity of granulosa cells. Zygote 27:1-9.
  6. Han SH, Ko JC, Kim YH, Kim NY, Kim JH, Ko MS, Jeong HY, Cho IC, Yang YH and Lee SS. 2010. Verification of ET and AI derived offspring using on the genetic polymorphisms of microsatellite and coat color related genes in Jeju black cattle. J. Life Sci. 20:381-387. https://doi.org/10.5352/JLS.2010.20.3.381
  7. Ito M, Miyado K, Nakagawa K, Muraki M, Imai M, Yamakawa N, Qin J, Hosoi Y, Saito H and Takahashi Y. 2010. Age-associated changes in the subcellular localization of phosphorylated p38 MAPK in human granulosa cells. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 16:928-937. https://doi.org/10.1093/molehr/gaq076
  8. Janny L and Menezo YJ. 1996. Maternal age effect on early human embryonic development and blastocyst formation. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 45: 31-37. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2795(199609)45:1<31::AID-MRD4>3.0.CO;2-T
  9. Kato Y, Tani T, Sotomaru Y, Kurokawa K, Kato J, Doguchi H, Yasue H and Tsunoda Y. 1998. Eight calves cloned from somatic cells of a single adult. Science 282:2095-2098. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.282.5396.2095
  10. Kim DH, Kim SW, Lee MJ, Bae SH, Im GS, Lim HJ, Yang BC and Seong HH. 2008. Effects of recipient oocyte and embryo culture system on production of Hanwoo (Korean Native Cattle) somatic cell nuclear transferred embryos. Reprod. Dev. Biol. 32:175-181.
  11. Kim MK, Jang G, Oh HJ, Yuda F, Kim HJ, Hwang WS, Hossein MS, Kim JJ, Shin NS, Kang SK and Lee BC. 2007. Endangered wolves cloned from adult somatic cells. Cloning Stem Cells 9(1):130-137. https://doi.org/10.1089/clo.2006.0034
  12. Lanza RP, Cibelli JB, Diaz F, Moraes CT, Farin PW, Farin CE, Hammer CJ, West MD and Damiani P. 2000. Cloning of an endangered species (Bos gaurus) using interspecies nuclear transfer. Cloning 2:79-90. https://doi.org/10.1089/152045500436104
  13. Li Y, Dai Y, Du W, Zhao W, Wang L, Wang H, Liu Y, Li R and Li N. 2007a. In vitro development yak (Bos grunniens) embryos generated by interspecies nuclear transfer. Anim. Repord. Sci. 101:45-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2006.09.018
  14. Li Y, Li S, Dai Y, Du W, Zhao C, Wang L, Wang H, Li R, Liu Y, Wan R and Li N. 2007b. Nuclear reprogramming in embryos generated by the transfer of yak (Bos grunniens) nuclei into bovine oocytes and comparison with bovine- bovine SCNT and bovine IVF embryos. Theriogenology 67:1331-1338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2006.10.022
  15. Loi P, Ptak G, Barboni B, Fulka J Jr, Cappai P and Clinton M. 2001. Genetic rescue of an endangered mammal by crossspecies nuclear transfer using post-mortem somatic cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 19:962-964. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1001-962
  16. Lu F, Shi D, Wei J, Yang S and Wei Y. 2005. Development of embryos reconstructed by interspecies nuclear transfer of adult fibroblasts between buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) and cattle (Bos indicus). Theriogenology 64:1309-1319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2005.03.005
  17. Malhi PS, Adams GP, Mapletoft RJ and Singh J. 2007. Oocyte developmental competence in a bovine model of reproductive aging. Reproduction 134:233-239. https://doi.org/10.1530/REP-07-0021
  18. Mastromonaco GF, Favetta LA, Smith LC, Filcon F and Allan King W. 2007. The influence of nuclear content on developmental competence of Gaur ${\times}$Cattle hybrid in vitro fertilized and somatic cell nuclear transfer embryos. Biol. Reprod. 76:514-523. https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.106.058040
  19. Thouas GA, Trounson AO and Jones GM. 2005. Effect of female age on mouse oocyte developmental competence following mitochondrial injury. Biol. Reprod. 73:366-373. https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.105.040956
  20. Van Blerkom J, Davis P, Mathwig V and Alexander S. 2002. Domains of high-polarized and low-polarized mitochondria may occur in mouse and human oocytes and early embryos. Hum. Reprod. 17:393-406. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/17.2.393
  21. Vogel G. 2001. Endangered species. Cloned gaur a short-lived success. Science 219:409.
  22. Wells DN, Misica PM, Tervit HR and Vivanco WH. 1998. Adult somatic cell nuclear transfer is used to preserve the last surviving cow of the Enderby island cattle breed. Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 10:369-378. https://doi.org/10.1071/R98109
  23. Wilmut I, Schnieke AE, McWhir J, Kind AJ and Campbell KHS. 1997. Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Nature 385:810-813. https://doi.org/10.1038/385810a0
  24. Yamamoto T, Iwata H, Goto H, Shiratuki S, Tanaka H, Monji Y and Kuwayama T. 2010. Effect of maternal age on the developmental competence and progression of nuclear maturation in bovine oocytes. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 77:595-604. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrd.21188
  25. Yan H, Yan Z, Ma Q, Jiao F, Huang S, Zeng F and Zeng Y. 2011. Association between mitochondrial DNA haplotype compatibility and increased efficiency of bovine intersubspecies cloning. J. Genet. Genomics 38:21-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcg.2010.12.003
  26. Yan Z, Zhou Y, Fu J, Zhao L, Guan P, Huang S, Zeng Y and Zeng F. 2010. Donor-host mitochondrial compatibility improves efficiency of bovine somatic cell nuclear transfer. BMC Dev. Biol. 10:31. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-213X-10-31
  27. Yang XY, Zhao JG, Li HW, Li H, Liu HF, Huang SZ and Zeng YT. 2005. Improving in vitro development of cloned bovine embryos with hybrid (Holstein-Chinese Yellow) recipient oocytes recovered by ovum pick up. Theriogenology 64:1263-1272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.11.026