Optimal Number of Embryos for Transplantation in Obtaining Genetic-Modified Mice and Goats
The technology of creating genetically modified animals (placental mammals) by microinjection into the pronucleus of a fertilized egg suggests, as one of the key stages, the transplantation of early embryos into female recipients. However, there is a wide range of opinions among researchers about the optimal number of embryos to be transferred to the female recipient. Thus, data on transplantation of 20–60 mouse embryos and from 2 to 6 goat embryos to one recipient are given in the methodological literature and experimental articles devoted to the method of creating genetically modified animals. Thus, the standard recommendation is the transfer of a much larger number of embryos than that which develops in animals of both species in physiological pregnancy. At the same time, technology of transplantation of bovine embryos (cattle) involves the transfer of one embryo, which is the physiological norm for this species of animals. Clinical protocols of assisted reproductive technologies for the transplantation of human embryos also recommend the transfer of one embryo, because transferring the number of embryos greater than in physiological pregnancy leads to increased risks. In our work, we analyze the results of experiments on obtaining genetically modified mice and goats and provide data indicating the need to revise the standard recommendations on the number of transferred embryos downward. We believe that the number of transferred embryos should not exceed the number of embryos characteristic for physiological pregnancy. Excess of the number of transplanted embryos leads to a pathological course of pregnancy and a significant decrease in overall performance.
Keywords:genetically modified animals mice goats embryo transplantation pregnancy pathology
This work was performed with support from the Russian Science Foundation, project no. 16-14-00150 (2470 mouse embryos were transplanted into 269 recipients, 277 calves were obtained. The results of transplantation and statistical processing were systematized).
The work was conducted using equipment of the Center for Shared Use of the Gene Biology Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
We would like to thank A.I. Budevich and I.L. Goldman for invaluable assistance in mastering the technology of creating genetically modified animals.
- 4.Cho, A., Haruyama, N., and Kulkarni, A., Generation of Transgenic Mice, Current Protocols in Cell Biology [Internet], Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2009.Google Scholar
- 5.Damert, A. and Kusserow, H., Generation of transgenic mice by pronuclear injection, in Blood–Brain Barrier, New Jersey: Humana Press, 2003, pp. 513–528.Google Scholar
- 6.Deĭkin, A.V., Kovrazhkina, E.A., Ovchinnikov, R.K., et al., A mice model of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis expressing mutant human FUS protein, Zh. Nevrol. Psikhiatr. im. S.S. Korsakova, 2014, vol. 114, no. 8, pp. 62–69.Google Scholar
- 9.Goldman, I., Georgieva, S., Gurskiy, Y., et al., New opportunities of using transgenic milk animals for pharmaceutical human protein production, Transgenic Res., 2012a, vol. 21, no. 4, p. 923.Google Scholar
- 13.Hansson, L., Edlund, M., Edlund, A., et al., Expression and characterization of biologically active human extracellular superoxide dismutase in milk of transgenic mice, J. Biol. Chem., 1994, vol. 269, no. 7, pp. 5358–5363.Google Scholar
- 18.Maksimenko, O.G., Deykin, A.V., Khodarovich, Y.M., et al., Use of transgenic animals in biotechnology: prospects and problems, Acta Naturae, 2013, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 33–46.Google Scholar
- 20.Pandian, Z., Marjoribanks, J., Ozturk, O., et al., Number of Embryos for Transfer Following in vitro Fertilisation or Intra-Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Chichester: UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., 2013.Google Scholar
- 22.Rodriguez, A., Castro, F.O., Aguilar, A., et al., Expression of active human erythropoietin in the mammary gland of lactating transgenic mice and rabbits, Biol. Res., 1995, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 141–153.Google Scholar
- 24.Shelkovnikova, T.A., Peters, O.M., Deykin, A.V., et al., Fused in sarcoma (FUS) protein lacking nuclear localization signal (NLS) and major RNA binding motifs triggers proteinopathy and severe motor phenotype in transgenic mice, J. Biol. Chem., 2013, vol. 288, no. 35, pp. 25266–25274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Silaeva, Y.Y., Kalinina, A.A., Vagida, M.S., et al., Decrease in pool of T lymphocytes with surface phenotypes of effector and central memory cells under influence of TCR transgenic β-chain expression, Biochemistry (Moscow), 2013, vol. 78, no. 5, pp. 549–559.Google Scholar
- 27.Sokolov, V.E., Zhizn zhivotnykh (Life of Animals), Moscow: Prosveshchenie, 1989, vol. 7.Google Scholar
- 28.Voncken, J.W., Genetic modification of the mouse: general technology—pronuclear and blastocyst injection, in Transgenic Mouse Methods and Protocols, Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, 2011, pp. 11–36.Google Scholar
- 31.Zander-Fox, D.L., Tremellen, K., and Lane, M., Single blastocyst embryo transfer maintains comparable pregnancy rates to double cleavage-stage embryo transfer but results in healthier pregnancy outcomes: the benefits of single blastocyst transfer, Aust. N. Z. J. Obstet. Gynaecol., 2011, vol. 51, no. 5, pp. 406–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Zvezdova, E.S., Silaeva, Y.Y., Vagida, M.S., et al., Generation of transgenic animals expressing the α and β chains of the autoreactive t-cell receptor, Mol. Biol., 2010, vol. 44, no. 2, p. 277.Google Scholar