41
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effects of DNMT1 and HDAC Inhibitors on Gene-Specific Methylation Reprogramming during Porcine Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) in mammalian cloning currently remains inefficient. Incomplete or erroneous epigenetic reprogramming of specialized donor somatic nuclear and resulting aberrant gene expression during development of cloned embryos is commonly believed as the main reason that causes the low efficiency of SCNT. Use of small molecular reprogramming modifiers to assist the somatic nucleus to mimic naturally occurring DNA methylation and chromatin remodeling in nucleus of fertilization-derived zygotes, has been widely attempted to improve cloning efficiency. However, impacts of these small modifiers on gene-specific methylation dynamics and their potential effects on methylation of imprinted gene have rarely been traced. Here, we attempted two relatively novel DNMT1 inhibitor (DNMTi) and histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDACi), scriptaid and RG108, and demonstrated their effects on dynamics of gene-specific DNA methylation and transcription of porcine SCNT embryos. We found that scriptaid and RG108 had synergetic effects on rescuing the disrupted methylation imprint of H19 during SCNT at least partially by repression over-expressed MBD3 in eight-cell cloned embryos. Furthermore, we firstly identified a differential methylation regions (DMRs) at 5′ flanking regions of XIST gene and found that scriptaid alone and its combination with RG108 modify the dynamics of both transcription and DNA methylation levels in cloned embryos, by different manners. Additionally, we found that scriptaid alone and its combination with RG108 can significantly promote the transcription of NANOG in cloned embryos and enhance their pre-implantation developmental capacity. Our results would contribute to uncovering the epigenetic reprogramming mechanisms underlying the effects of assisted small molecules on improvement of mammalian cloning efficiency.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Epigenetic reprogramming in mammals.

          Epigenetic marking systems confer stability of gene expression during mammalian development. Genome-wide epigenetic reprogramming occurs at stages when developmental potency of cells changes. At fertilization, the paternal genome exchanges protamines for histones, undergoes DNA demethylation, and acquires histone modifications, whereas the maternal genome appears epigenetically more static. During preimplantation development, there is passive DNA demethylation and further reorganization of histone modifications. In blastocysts, embryonic and extraembryonic lineages first show different epigenetic marks. This epigenetic reprogramming is likely to be needed for totipotency, correct initiation of embryonic gene expression, and early lineage development in the embryo. Comparative work demonstrates reprogramming in all mammalian species analysed, but the extent and timing varies, consistent with notable differences between species during preimplantation development. Parental imprinting marks originate in sperm and oocytes and are generally protected from this genome-wide reprogramming. Early primordial germ cells possess imprinting marks similar to those of somatic cells. However, rapid DNA demethylation after midgestation erases these parental imprints, in preparation for sex-specific de novo methylation during gametogenesis. Aberrant reprogramming of somatic epigenetic marks after somatic cell nuclear transfer leads to epigenetic defects in cloned embryos and stem cells. Links between epigenetic marking systems appear to be developmentally regulated contributing to plasticity. A number of activities that confer epigenetic marks are firmly established, while for those that remove marks, particularly methylation, some interesting candidates have emerged recently which need thorough testing in vivo. A mechanistic understanding of reprogramming will be crucial for medical applications of stem cell technology.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Large offspring syndrome in cattle and sheep.

            Bovine and ovine embryos exposed to a variety of unusual environments prior to the blastocyst stage have resulted in the development of unusually large offspring which can also exhibit a number of organ defects. In these animals, the increased incidence of difficult parturition and of fetal and neonatal losses has limited the large-scale use of in vitro embryo production technologies commonly used in humans and other species. Four different situations have been identified that result in the syndrome: in vitro embryo culture, asynchronous embryo transfer into an advanced uterine environment, nuclear transfer and maternal exposure to excessively high urea diets. However, programming of the syndrome by all of these situations is unpredictable and not all of the symptoms described have been observed universally. Neither the environmental factors inducing the large offspring syndrome nor the mechanisms of perturbation occurring in the early embryo and manifesting themselves in the fetus have been identified.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Mechanisms regulating imprinted genes in clusters.

              Clustered imprinted genes are regulated by differentially methylated imprinting control regions (ICRs) that affect gene activity and repression in cis over a large region. Although a primary imprint signal for each of these clusters is DNA methylation, different mechanisms are used to establish and maintain these marks. The majority of ICRs are methylated in the maternal germline and are usually promoters for antisense transcripts whose elongation is associated with imprinting control in the domain. In contrast, ICRs methylated in the paternal germline do not appear to act as promoters and are located between genes. At least one, at the Igf2/H19 locus, is known to function as an insulator. Analysis of ICRs suggests that maternal and paternal methylation imprints function in distinct ways.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                1932-6203
                2013
                31 May 2013
                : 8
                : 5
                : e64705
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
                [2 ]College of Life Science, Longyan University, Longyan, Fujian, China
                [3 ]Wen’s Research Institute, Yunfu, Guangdong, China
                Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: WX ZL ZW. Performed the experiments: WX BY. Analyzed the data: WX ZL DL. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: XH JS RZ. Wrote the paper: WX.

                Article
                PONE-D-13-00918
                10.1371/journal.pone.0064705
                3669391
                23741375
                a60cc9f9-1c04-4b92-8414-c6f2b183f77a
                Copyright @ 2013

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 31 December 2012
                : 17 April 2013
                Page count
                Pages: 13
                Funding
                This study was supported by a grant from the National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (“863” Program, grant number: 2011AA100304), and a grant from the National Science and Technology Major Project of the Ministry of Science and Technology of China (grant number: 2011ZX08006004), and a grant from Department of Science and Technology of Guangdong (grant number: 2011A020901001), and a grant from Guangdong Science and Technology Project (grant number: 2011A020102003), and a grant from Department of Science and Technology of Guangdong (2008A024200012). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology
                Developmental Biology
                Embryology
                Genetics
                Cloning
                Reproductive Cloning
                Therapeutic Cloning
                Epigenetics
                DNA modification
                Genomic Imprinting
                X Chromosome Inactivation
                Molecular Genetics
                Gene Regulation
                Animal Genetics

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article