4.5 Article

Epigenetic alteration of the donor cells does not recapitulate the reprogramming of DNA methylation in cloned embryos

期刊

REPRODUCTION
卷 134, 期 6, 页码 781-787

出版社

BIOSCIENTIFICA LTD
DOI: 10.1530/REP-07-0338

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Epigenetic reprogramming is a prerequisite process during mammalian development that is aberrant in cloned embryos. However, mechanisms that evolve abnormal epigenetic reprogramming during preimplantation development are unclear. To trace the molecular event of an epigenetic mark such as DNA methylation, bovine fibroblasts were epigenetically altered by treatment with trichostatin A (TSA) and then individually transferred into enucleated bovine oocytes. In the TSA-treated cells, expression levels of histone deacetylases and DNA methyltransferases were reduced, but the expression level of histone acetyltransferases such as Tip60 and histone acetyltransferase 1 (HAT1) did not change compared with normal cells. DNA methylation levels of non-treated (normal) and TSA-treated cells were 64.0 and 48.9% in the satellite I sequence (P<0.05) respectively, and 71.6 and 61.9% in the alpha-satellite sequence respectively. DNA methylation levels of nuclear transfer (NT) and TSA-NT blastocysts in the satellite I sequence were 67.2 and 42.2% (P<0.05) respectively, which was approximately similar to those of normal and TSA-treated cells. In the a-satellite sequence, NT and TSA-NT embryos were substantially demethylated at the blastocyst stage as IVF-derived embryos were demethylated. The in vitro developmental rate (46.6%) of TSA-NT embryos that were individually transferred with TSA-treated cells was higher than that (31.7%) of NT embryos with non-treated cells (P<0.05). Our findings suggest that the chromatin of a donor cell is unyielding to the reprogramming of DNA methylation during preimplantation development, and that alteration of the epigenetic state of donor cells may improve in vitro developmental competence of cloned embryos.

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

4.5
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