Reproductive and Developmental Biology

The Korean Society of Animal Reproduction (한국동물번식학회)
권호 표지

Control of MPF Activity of Recipient Oocytes and Subsequent Development and DNA Methylation of Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer Bovine Embryos

  • Park, Joo-Hee (School of Veterinary Medicine, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Choi, Yong-Lak (School of Veterinary Medicine, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Kwon, Dae-Jin (School of Veterinary Medicine, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Hwang, In-Sun (College of Animal Life Science, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Park, Choon-Keun (College of Animal Life Science, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Yang, Boo-Keun (College of Animal Life Science, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Cheong, Hee-Tae (School of Veterinary Medicine, Kangwon National University)
  • Published : 2009.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

We attempted to control the maturation promoting factor (MPF) activity and investigated the subsequent reprogramming of bovine somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) embryos. Serum-starved adult skin fibroblasts were fused to enucleated oocytes treated with 2.5 mM caffeine or $150\;{\mu}M$ roscovitine. The MPF activity, nuclear remodeling patterns, chromosome constitutions and development of SCNT embryos were evaluated. Methylated DNA of embryos was detected at various developmental stages. The MPF activity was increased by caffeine treatment or reduced by roscovitine treatment (p<0.05). Blastocyst development was higher in the caffeine-treated groups (27.6%) than that of the roscovitine-treated group (8.3%, p<0.05). There was no difference in the apoptotic cell index among the three groups. However, the mean cell number of blastocysts was increased in the caffeine-treated group (p<0.05). Higher methylation levels were observed in the Day 3 embryos of the roscovitine-treated group (50.8%), whereas lower methylation levels were noted at Day 5 in the caffeine-treated group (12.5%, p<0.05). These results reveal that the increase in MPF activity via a caffeine-treatment creates a more suitable condition for nuclear reprogramming after SCNT.

Keywords

References

  1. Alberio R, Motlik J, Stojkovic M, Wolf E, Zakhartchenko V (2000): Behavior of M-phase synchronized blastomeres after nuclear transfer in cattle. Mol Reprod Dev 57:37-47 https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2795(200009)57:1<37::AID-MRD6>3.0.CO;2-Y
  2. Anas MKI, Shoho A, Shimada M, Terada T (2000): Effects of wortmannin on the kinetics of GVBD and the activities of the maturation-promoting factor and mitogen-activated protein kinase during bovine oocyte maturation in vitro. Theriogenology 53:1797-1806 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(00)00315-0
  3. Baek JJ, Park CK, Yang BK, Kim CI, Cheong HT (2005): Effects of demecolcine-assisted enucleation and recipient cell cycle stage on the development of nuclear transfer bovine embryos. Reprod Dev Biol 29:175-180
  4. Beaujean N, Taylor J, Gardner J, Wilmut I, Meehan R, Young L (2004): Effect of limited DNA methylation reprogramming in the normal sheep embryo on somatic cell nuclear transfer. Biol Reprod 68:2013-2023 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.102.010066
  5. Campbell KHS, Ritchie WA, Wilmut I (1993): Disappearance of maturation promoting factor and the formation of pronuclei in electrically activated in vitro matured bovine oocytes. Theriogenology 39: 199 (abstr) https://doi.org/10.1016/0093-691X(93)90054-9
  6. Cheong HT, Takahashi Y, Kanagawa H (1993): Birth of mice after transplantation of early cell-cycle- stage embryonic nuclei into enucleated oocytes. Biol Reprod 48:958-963 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod48.5.958
  7. Collas P, Robl JM (1991): Relationship between nuclear remodeling and development in nuclear transplant rabbit embryos. Biol Reprod 45:455-465 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod45.3.455
  8. Dean W, Santos F, Stojkovic M, Zakhartchenko V, Walter J, Wolf E, Reik W (2001): Conservation of methylation reprogramming in mammalian development: aberrant reprogramming in cloned embryos. Proc Natl Acad Sci 98:13734-13738 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.241522698
  9. Dean W, Santos F, Reik W (2003): Epigenetic reprogramming in early mammalian development and following somatic nuclear transfer. Cell Dev Biol 14:93-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1084-9521(02)00141-6
  10. Hashimoto N, Kishimoto T (1988): Regulation of meiotic metaphase by a cytoplasmic maturation-promoting factor during mouse oocyte maturation. Dev Biol 126:242-252 https://doi.org/10.1016/0012-1606(88)90135-2
  11. Ito J, Hirabayashi M, Kato M, Takeuchi A, Ito M, Shimada M, Hochi S (2005): Contribution of high p34cdc2 kinase activity to premature chromosome condensation of injected somatic cell nuclei in rat oocytes. Reproduction 129:171-180
  12. Kang YK, Koo DB, Park JS, Choi YH, Chung AS, Lee KK, Han YM (2001a): Aberrant methylation of donor genome in cloned bovine embryos. Nature 28:173-177
  13. Kang YK, Koo DB, Park JS, Choi YH, Kim HN, Chang WK, Lee KK, Han YM (2001b): Typical demethylation events in cloned pig embryos. J Biol Chem 276:39980-39984 https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M106516200
  14. Kikuchi K, Naito K, Noguchi J, Shimada A, Kaneko H, Yanashita M, Aoki F, Tojo H, Toyoda Y (2000): Maturation/M-phase promoting factor: a regulation of aging in porcine oocytes. Biol Reprod 63:715-722 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod63.3.715
  15. Kwon DJ, Park CK, Yang BK, Cheong HT (2008): Control of nuclear remodeling and subsequent in vitro development and methylation status of porcine nuclear transfer embryos. Reproduction 135: 649-656 https://doi.org/10.1530/REP-06-0387
  16. Lai L, Tao T, Machaty Z, Kuhholzer B, Sun QY, Park KW, Day BN, Prather RS (2001): Feasibility of producing porcine nuclear transfer embryos by using G2/M-stage fetal fibroblasts as donor. Biol Reprod 65:1558-1564 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod65.5.1558
  17. Matsui Y, Markert CL (1971): Cytoplasmic control of nuclear behaviour during meiotic maturation of frog oocytes. J Exp Zool 177:129-145 https://doi.org/10.1002/jez.1401770202
  18. Norbury C, Nurse P (1992): Animal cell cycles and their control. Ann Rev Biochem 61:441-470 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.bi.61.070192.002301
  19. Nurse P (1990): Universal control mechanism regulating onset of M-phase. Nature 334:503-508 https://doi.org/10.1038/344503a0
  20. Shi W, Haaf T (2002): Aberrant methylation patterns at the two-cell stage as an indicator of early developmental failure. Mol Reprod Dev 63:329-334 https://doi.org/10.1002/mrd.90016
  21. Sung LY, Shen PC, Jeong BS, Xu J, Chang CC, Cheng WTK, Wu JS, Lee SN, Broek D, Faber D, Tian XC, Yang X, Du F (2007): Premature chromosome condensation is not essential for nuclear reprogramming in bovine somatic cell nuclear transfer. Biol Reprod 76:232-240 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.106.053561
  22. Szollosi D, Czolowska R, Borsuk E, Szollosi MS, Debey P (1998): Nuclear envelope removal/maintenance determines the structural and functional remodeling of embryonic red blood cell nuclei in activated mouse oocytes. Zygote 6: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0967199400005098
  23. Tani T, Kato Y, Tsunoda Y (2001): Direct exposure of chromosome to nonactivated ovum cytoplasm is effective for bovine somatic cell nucleus reprogramming. Biol Reprod 64:324-330 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod64.1.324
  24. Wilmut I, Schnieke AE, McWhir J, Kind AJ, Campbell KHS (1997): Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Nature 385:810- 813 https://doi.org/10.1038/385810a0
  25. 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. Biol Reprod 67:442-446 https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod67.2.442