Lilian T. Iguma, Sharon F.C. Lisauskas, Eduardo O. Melo, Maurício M. Franco, Ivo Pivato, Giovanni R. Vianna, Regivaldo V. Sousa, Margot A.N. Dode, Francisco J.L. Aragão, Elíbio L. Rech, Rodolfo Rumpf
Published March 3, 2005
Genet. Mol. Res. 4 (1): 55-66 (2005)

About the Authors
Lilian T. Iguma, Sharon F.C. Lisauskas, Eduardo O. Melo, Maurício M. Franco, Ivo Pivato, Giovanni R. Vianna, Regivaldo V. Sousa, Margot A.N. Dode, Francisco J.L. Aragão, Elíbio L. Rech and Rodolfo Rumpf

Corresponding author
R. Rumpf
Email: rodolfo@cenargen.embrapa.br

ABSTRACT

An association of two techniques, nuclear transfer (NT), and transfection of somatic animal cells, has numerous potential applications and considerable impact, mainly in agriculture, medicine, pharmacy, and fundamental biology. In addition, somatic cell nuclear transfer is the most efficient alternative to produce large transgenic animals. We compared in vitro and in vivo developmental capacities of NT using fibroblast cells isolated from a 14-month-old cloned Simmental heifer (FCE) vs the same line transfected with a plasmid containing neomycin-resistant genes (TFCE). There were no significant differences (P > 0.5) in either fusion (116/149 = 78% vs 216/301 = 72%), cleavage (78/116 = 67% vs 141/216 = 65%) and blastocyst (35/116 = 30% vs 52/216 = 24%) rates or in pregnancy rate at 30 to 35 days after embryo transfer (2/17 vs 3/17) between NT using FCE and TFCE, respectively. Transfection and long-term in vitro culture of transfected cells did not affect developmental capacity of NT embryos up to 40 days of gestation.

Key words: Bovine, Assisted reproduction technology, Transfection, Transgenic animals, Fibroblasts.