4.4 Article

Mouse⇆rat aggregation chimaeras can develop to adulthood

期刊

DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY
卷 427, 期 1, 页码 106-120

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2017.05.002

关键词

Embryo aggregation; Interspecific chimaera; Mouse; Rat

资金

  1. Polish National Centre of Science [2012/04/A/NZ3/00568]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In order to examine interactions between cells originating from different species during embryonic development we constructed interspecific mouse-rat chimaeras by aggregation of 8-cell embryos. Embryos of both species expressed different fluorescent markers (eGFP and DsRed), which enabled us to follow the fate of both components from the moment of aggregation until adulthood. We revealed that in majority of embryos the blastocyst cavity appeared inside the group of rat cells, while the mouse component was allocated to the deeper layer of the inner cell mass and to the polar trophectoderm. However, due to rearrangement of all cells and selective elimination of rat cells, shortly before implantation all primary lineages became chimaeric. Moreover, despite the fact that rat cells were always present in the mural trophectoderm, majority of mouse <-> rat chimaeric blastocysts implanted in mouse uterus, and out of those 46% developed into foetuses and pups, half of which were chimaeric. In contrast to mural trophectoderm, polar trophectoderm derivatives, i.e. the placentae of all chimaeras were exclusively of mouse origin. This strongly suggests that the successful postimplantation development of chimaeras is enabled by gradual elimination of xenogeneic cells from the nascent placenta. The size of chimaeric newborns was within the limits of control mouse neonates. The rat component located preferentially in the anterior part of the body, where it contributed mainly to the neural tube. Our observations indicate that although chimaeric animals were able to reach adulthood, high contribution of rat cells tended to diminish their viability.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据