$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
In conclusion, these results suggest that the presented SCNT method could reduce technical difficulties, and increase the efficiency of SCNT without requiring genetic modifications and mRNA supplementation (Table 1, Table 2), and ensure stable production of cloned embryos. This method enables us to reconstruct more SCNT embryos than conventional methods due to the better survival rate and simplified protocol. In this protocol, one critical step is cell fusion. To successfully produce cloned mice, it is vital to ensure that the proper amount of HVJ-E described in the protocol is maintained during the cell fusion process and oocytes need to be returned to the incubator within 10 min during the steps 6.2.3 - 6.2.5. Since 20 to 30 donor cells can be aspirated together with HVJ-E at a time in the manipulation pipette, the number of oocytes obtained by one operation is larger than that of the existing method. In the end, we can produce about 20 to 30 re-constructed oocytes within 10 min. Even when working with a large batch of oocytes (100 or more), the cell fusion procedure should take an hour or less by repeating the steps 6.2.3 - 6.2.5. The method and techniques presented here can serve as efficient protocols with simplified technical requirements.
At present, the molecular mechanisms underlying the development of SCNT embryos are still unclear. This improved SCNT method also contributes to studying such reprogramming mechanisms, since this method can produce many cloned embryos in only one experiment. This method uses somatic cells with intact cell membranes for cell fusion. Thus, it may be possible to apply this approach to other cells such as tail tip cells16, sertoli cells17, and embryonic stem (ES) cells18. When conventional SCNT methods are used for injecting relatively large cells, such as tail tip cells, directly into the oocyte cytoplasm, it becomes even more technically demanding to obtain live embryos. In addition, relatively hard cells, such as sertoli cells, are difficult to break by pipetting for injecting. When these various cell types are considered, the cell fusion method utilizing HVJ-E is simple and effective. Although the value and safety of HVJ-E have been convincingly demonstrated19,20, it might be important to re-consider the feasibility of using HVJ-E for producing cloned animals for agricultural or biomedical purposes.
Moreover, recently one group successfully produced cloned mice derived from urine cells21. To rescue endangered mammalian species, henceforth SCNT using the cells collected in a non-invasive manner, such as the urine cell, will be ideal. More recently, another group has directly generated cloned mice using antigen-specific CD4+ T cells22. It would be interesting to examine if this method is also applicable to efficiently clone mice from such cells. Furthermore, Latrunculin A has been reported as a better alternative for inhibiting actin polymerization during enucleation and parthenogenetic activation of SCNT oocytes23. Future study may reveal whether the Latrunculin A treatment, instead of cytochalasin B, further improves generation of cloned offspring. Additionally, the TSA treatment has been successfully used in mice, pigs24, and rabbits25 by changing treatment time, period, and concentration. Furthermore, VC not only enhances embryonic development in porcine SCNT10, but also improves iPS cell production in humans and mice26. Thus, it is plausible to speculate that TSA and VC treatment can also be applied to other mammalian species, and we may need to optimize the treatment time of TSA and VC for each species.
In conclusion, this method would make it possible to generate cloned mice with a practical level of efficiency with simple procedures. Therefore, the results of this study could lead us to use the SCNT technology for preserving the genetic resources of rare animals, and for understanding the molecular mechanisms of nuclear reprogramming and early embryonic development.