Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T13:46:08.027Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of chemically defined medium on early development of porcine embryos derived from parthenogenetic activation and cloning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

Zubing Cao ,
Liucai Sui ,
Yunsheng Li ,
Suofei Ji ,
Xiaorong Zhang  and
Yunhai Zhang
Zubing Cao
Affiliation:
Anhui Provincial Laboratory of Local Livestock and Poultry Genetical Resource Conservation and Breeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei city, Anhui Province 230036, China.
Liucai Sui
Affiliation:
Anhui Provincial Laboratory of Local Livestock and Poultry Genetical Resource Conservation and Breeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei city, Anhui Province 230036, China.
Yunsheng Li
Affiliation:
Anhui Provincial Laboratory of Local Livestock and Poultry Genetical Resource Conservation and Breeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei city, Anhui Province 230036, China.
Suofei Ji
Affiliation:
Anhui Provincial Laboratory of Local Livestock and Poultry Genetical Resource Conservation and Breeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei city, Anhui Province 230036, China.
Xiaorong Zhang*
Affiliation:
130 Changjiang West Road, College of Animal Science and Technology, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China.
Yunhai Zhang*
Affiliation:
130 Changjiang West Road, College of Animal Science and Technology, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China.
*
All correspondence to: Yunhai Zhang or Xiaorong Zhang. 130 Changjiang West Road, College of Animal Science and Technology, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China. Tel:/Fax: +86 551 5786357. e-mail: yunhaizhang@ahau.edu.cn
All correspondence to: Yunhai Zhang or Xiaorong Zhang. 130 Changjiang West Road, College of Animal Science and Technology, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China. Tel:/Fax: +86 551 5786357. e-mail: yunhaizhang@ahau.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The present study was to investigate if a completely chemically defined medium (PZM-4) could support the early development of porcine embryos derived from parthenogenetic activation (PA) and cloning (somatic cell nuclear transfer, SCNT), and to lay the foundation for determining the physiological roles of certain supplements in this medium. Porcine embryos derived from PA and SCNT were cultured in media: PZM-3 (a chemically semi-defined medium), PZM-4 (a fully defined medium), and PZM-5 (an undefined medium). Early embryo development was observed. We found that the three medium groups (PZM-3, PZM-4 and PZM-5) exhibited no significant differences in cleavage rates of PA embryos (p > 0.05), while the blastocyst rate in PZM-3 was significantly higher than in PZM-4 and PZM-5 (78.9% vs. 36.0% and 52.3%) (p < 0.05). Moreover, total cell number per blastocyst in PZM-3 was clearly higher than in PZM-5 but similar to that in PZM-4. As for SCNT embryos, no significant differences were observed for the cleavage rates or the blastocyst rates among the three groups (p > 0.05). However, total cell number per blastocyst in PZM-3 was notably higher than in PZM-5, but was similar to that in PZM-4. In conclusion, our results suggested that the completely chemically defined medium PZM-4 can be used to efficiently support the early development of porcine PA and SCNT embryos.

Keywords

Chemically defined mediumEmbryonic developmentIn vitro cultureSomatic cell nuclear transfer
Type
Research Article
Information
Zygote , Volume 20 , Issue 3 , August 2012 , pp. 229 - 236
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bauer, B.K., Isom, S.C., Spate, L.D., Whitworth, K.M., Spollen, W.G., Blake, S.M., Springer, G.K., Murphy, C.N. & Prather, R.S. (2010). Transcriptional profiling by deep sequencing identifies differences in mRNA transcript abundance in in vivo-derived versus in vitro-cultured porcine blastocyst stage embryos. Biol. Reprod. 83, 791–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bavister, B.D. (1995). Culture of preimplantation embryos: facts and artifacts. Hum. Reprod. Update 1, 91–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chung, Y.G., Mann, M.R., Bartolomei, M.S. & Latham, K.E. (2002). Nuclear-cytoplasmic “tug of war” during cloning: effects of somatic cell nuclei on culture medium preferences of preimplantation cloned mouse embryos. Biol. Reprod. 66, 1178–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cui, X.S., Jeong, Y.J., Lee, H.Y., Cheon, S.H. & Kim, N.H. (2004). Fetal bovine serum influences apoptosis and apoptosis-related gene expression in porcine parthenotes developing in vitro. Reproduction 127, 125–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dobrinsky, J.R., Johnson, L.A. & Rath, D. (1996). Development of a culture medium (BECM-3) for porcine embryos: effects of bovine serum albumin and fetal bovine serum on embryo development. Biol. Reprod. 55, 1069–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Du, Y., Kragh, P.M., Zhang, Y., Li, J., Schmidt, M., Bogh, I.B., Zhang, X., Purup, S., Jorgensen, A.L., Pedersen, A.M., Villemoes, K., Yang, H., Bolund, L. & Vajta, G. (2007). Piglets born from handmade cloning, an innovative cloning method without micromanipulation. Theriogenology 68, 1104–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farin, C.E., Farin, P.W. & Piedrahita, J.A. (2004). Development of fetuses from in vitro-produced and cloned bovine embryos. J. Anim. Sci. 82 (Suppl.), E53–62.Google Scholar
Fernandez-Gonzalez, R., Moreira, P., Bilbao, A., Jimenez, A., Perez-Crespo, M., Ramirez, M.A., Rodriguez De Fonseca, F., Pintado, B. & Gutierrez-Adan, A. (2004). Long-term effect of in vitro culture of mouse embryos with serum on mRNA expression of imprinting genes, development, and behavior. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101, 5880–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gao, S., Chung, Y.G., Williams, J.W., Riley, J., Moley, K. & Latham, K.E. (2003). Somatic cell-like features of cloned mouse embryos prepared with cultured myoblast nuclei. Biol. Reprod. 69, 48–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Im, G.S., Lai, L., Liu, Z., Hao, Y., Wax, D., Bonk, A. & Prather, R.S. (2004). In vitro development of preimplantation porcine nuclear transfer embryos cultured in different media and gas atmospheres. Theriogenology 61, 1125–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kamiya, C., Kobayashi, M. & Fukui, Y. (2006). In vitro culture conditions using chemically defined media for in vitro matured and intracytoplasmically inseminated porcine oocytes. J. Reprod. Dev. 52, 625–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lazzari, G., Wrenzycki, C., Herrmann, D., Duchi, R., Kruip, T., Niemann, H. & Galli, C. (2002). Cellular and molecular deviations in bovine in vitro-produced embryos are related to the large offspring syndrome. Biol. Reprod. 67, 767–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, J., Svarcova, O., Villemoes, K., Kragh, P.M., Schmidt, M., Bogh, I.B., Zhang, Y., Du, Y., Lin, L., Purup, S., Xue, Q., Bolund, L., Yang, H., Maddox-Hyttel, P. & Vajta, G. (2008). High in vitro development after somatic cell nuclear transfer and trichostatin A treatment of reconstructed porcine embryos. Theriogenology 70, 800–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lim, K.T., Jang, G., Ko, K.H., Lee, W.W., Park, H.J., Kim, J.J., Lee, S.H., Hwang, W.S., Lee, B.C. & Kang, S.K. (2007). Improved in vitro bovine embryo development and increased efficiency in producing viable calves using defined media. Theriogenology 67, 293–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mastromonaco, G.F., Semple, E., Robert, C., Rho, G.J., Betts, D.H. & King, W.A. (2004). Different culture media requirements of IVF and nuclear transfer bovine embryos. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 39, 462–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Men, H., Agca, Y., Critser, E.S. & Critser, J.K. (2005). Beneficial effects of serum supplementation during in vitro production of porcine embryos on their ability to survive cryopreservation by open pulled straw vitrification. Theriogenology 64, 1340–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mizobe, Y., Kurino, S., Sata, Y., Mori, H., Yoshida, M. & Miyoshi, K. (2010). Stage-specific effects of osmolarity of a culture medium on development of pig oocytes and miniature pig somatic cell nuclear transfer embryos activated by ultrasound treatment. Anim. Sci. J. 81, 453–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nanassy, L., Lee, K., Javor, A. & Machaty, Z. (2008). Effects of activation methods and culture conditions on development of parthenogenetic porcine embryos. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 104, 264–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Okada, K., Krylov, V., Kren, R. & Fulka, J. Jr. (2006). Development of pig embryos after electro-activation and in vitro fertilization in PZM-3 or PZM supplemented with fetal bovine serum. J. Reprod. Dev. 52, 91–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petters, R.M. & Wells, K.D. (1993). Culture of pig embryos. J. Reprod. Fertil. Suppl. 48, 61–73.Google ScholarPubMed
Rizos, D., Gutierrez-Adan, A., Perez-Garnelo, S., De La Fuente, J., Boland, M.P. & Lonergan, P. (2003). Bovine embryo culture in the presence or absence of serum: implications for blastocyst development, cryotolerance, and messenger RNA expression. Biol. Reprod. 68, 236–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roh, S. & Hwang, W.S. (2002). In vitro development of porcine parthenogenetic and cloned embryos: comparison of oocyte-activating techniques, various culture systems and nuclear transfer methods. Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 14, 93–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suzuki, C., Iwamura, S. & Yoshioka, K. (2004). Birth of piglets through the non-surgical transfer of blastocysts produced in vitro. J. Reprod. Dev. 50, 487–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wei, H.X., Zhang, K., Ma, Y.F., Li, Y., Li, Q.Y., Dai, Y.P. & Li, N. (2009). Stage-dependent effect of leptin on development of porcine embryos derived from parthenogenetic activation and transgenic somatic cell nuclear transfer. J. Reprod. Dev. 55, 99–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yamanaka, K., Sugimura, S., Wakai, T., Kawahara, M. & Sato, E. (2009). Difference in sensitivity to culture condition between in vitro fertilized and somatic cell nuclear transfer embryos in pigs. J. Reprod. Dev. 55, 299–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yoshioka, K., Suzuki, C., Tanaka, A., Anas, I.M. & Iwamura, S. (2002). Birth of piglets derived from porcine zygotes cultured in a chemically defined medium. Biol. Reprod. 66, 112–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoshioka, K., Suzuki, C., Itoh, S., Kikuchi, K., Iwamura, S. & Rodriguez-Martinez, H. (2003). Production of piglets derived from in vitro-produced blastocysts fertilized and cultured in chemically defined media: effects of theophylline, adenosine, and cysteine during in vitro fertilization. Biol. Reprod. 69, 2092–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yoshioka, K., Suzuki, C. & Onishi, A. (2008). Defined system for in vitro production of porcine embryos using a single basic medium. J. Reprod. Dev. 54, 208–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, L.E., Sinclair, K.D. & Wilmut, I. (1998). Large offspring syndrome in cattle and sheep. Rev. Reprod. 3, 155–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, Y., Li, J., Villemoes, K., Pedersen, A.M., Purup, S. & Vajta, G. (2007). An epigenetic modifier results in improved in vitro blastocyst production after somatic cell nuclear transfer. Cloning Stem Cells 9, 357–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, Y., Pan, D., Sun, X., Sun, G., Liu, X., Wang, X., Tian, X., Li, Y., Dai, Y. & Li, N. (2006). In vitro developmental competence of pig nuclear transferred embryos: effects of GFP-transfection, refrigeration, cell cycle synchronization, and shapes of donor cells. Zygote 14, 239–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhao, J., Ross, J.W., Hao, Y., Spate, L.D., Walters, E.M., Samuel, M.S., Rieke, A., Murphy, C.N. & Prather, R.S. (2009). Significant improvement in cloning efficiency of an inbred miniature pig by histone deacetylase inhibitor treatment after somatic cell nuclear transfer. Biol. Reprod. 81, 525–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed