NtributionsConceived and designed the experiments: MXH MJC JPG SRF. Performed the

NtributionsConceived and designed the experiments: MXH MJC JPG SRF. Performed the

NtributionsConceived and designed the experiments: MXH MJC JPG SRF. Performed the experiments: MXH MJC JF. Analyzed the data: MXH MJC JPG SRF. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: MXH MJC JF. Wrote the paper: MXH MJC SRF.(PDF)Table S2 Primers used in this study.(PDF)AcknowledgmentsThe authors would like to thank Dr Mariana Pinho for critical reading of the manuscript.
The generation of transgenic livestock holds considerable promise for the development of biomedical and agricultural systems [1,2]. The first transgenic livestock was produced via microinjection of foreign DNA into pronuclei of zygote in 1985 [3]. In 1986, cloning sheep was generated by nuclear transfer using embryonic stem cells as donors [4], and then cloning sheep Dolly was born in 1997 by somatic cell cloning (SCC) [5]. Concomitant with the success of SCC, the first cloning transgenic sheep was produced by nuclear transfer with stably transgenic somatic cells. In spite of the success in generation of transgenic livestock by pronuclear microinjection or SCC, concurrent techniques shows several significant shortcomings, such as low efficiency, high cost, random integration, and frequent incidenceof mosaicism. Efficient generation of transgenic livestock with low cost remains to be developed in transgenic animal field. Recent development of lentiviral vector for gene transfer shows the great potentials to overcome limitations mentioned above [6,7], and accordingly is becoming a new efficient tool to produce transgenic livestock. To date, various transgenic species including mice, fish, chicken, pig, non-human primate, cattle and sheep have been generated by lentiviral transgenesis [8,9]. Compared to traditional pronuclear DNA microinjection or somatic cell cloning (SCC), lentiviral transgenesis results in 11967625 a four to eight fold higher generation rate of transgenic animals per embryo Felypressin treated [10], and more than 90 transgenic founders can be observed transgene expression [11,12]. Furthermore, the transgene delivered by lentiviral vector alsoGeneration of Transgenic Sheep by Lentivirusstably expressed in their offsprings with considerably low methylation level in transgene promoter under certain circumstances. This differed from retrovirus-induced globally de novo methylation, which resulted in widespread silence of transgene expression [13]. Transgenic swine was the first livestock produced by injecting lentivirus into zygote with generation rates of 19?3 [14], which was significantly higher than 1 such rate obtained by conventional pronuclear microinjection [3]. However, the same investigators who successfully introduced lentiviral transgene into swine failed to produce transgenic cattle by the same procedure although the transgenic embryos were gained [15]. In 2004, the first transgenic cattle was produced by lentivirus infection of oocyte instead of microjection with the generation rate of 8.3 per oocyte treated [15]. In 2012, the transgenic cattle generated by injection of lentiviral vector into zygotes was reported with the generation rate of 7.5 per embryo transferred [16]. These studies indicated that the infection and integration capability of recombinant lentivirus were quite disparate within different livestock species. Previous studies on lentiviral transgenesis A 196 web demonstrated that the transgene expression was associated with transgene epigenetic modification, integrant numbers and locus [17,18]. So far, the overall regulatory mechanism of lentiviral tr.NtributionsConceived and designed the experiments: MXH MJC JPG SRF. Performed the experiments: MXH MJC JF. Analyzed the data: MXH MJC JPG SRF. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: MXH MJC JF. Wrote the paper: MXH MJC SRF.(PDF)Table S2 Primers used in this study.(PDF)AcknowledgmentsThe authors would like to thank Dr Mariana Pinho for critical reading of the manuscript.
The generation of transgenic livestock holds considerable promise for the development of biomedical and agricultural systems [1,2]. The first transgenic livestock was produced via microinjection of foreign DNA into pronuclei of zygote in 1985 [3]. In 1986, cloning sheep was generated by nuclear transfer using embryonic stem cells as donors [4], and then cloning sheep Dolly was born in 1997 by somatic cell cloning (SCC) [5]. Concomitant with the success of SCC, the first cloning transgenic sheep was produced by nuclear transfer with stably transgenic somatic cells. In spite of the success in generation of transgenic livestock by pronuclear microinjection or SCC, concurrent techniques shows several significant shortcomings, such as low efficiency, high cost, random integration, and frequent incidenceof mosaicism. Efficient generation of transgenic livestock with low cost remains to be developed in transgenic animal field. Recent development of lentiviral vector for gene transfer shows the great potentials to overcome limitations mentioned above [6,7], and accordingly is becoming a new efficient tool to produce transgenic livestock. To date, various transgenic species including mice, fish, chicken, pig, non-human primate, cattle and sheep have been generated by lentiviral transgenesis [8,9]. Compared to traditional pronuclear DNA microinjection or somatic cell cloning (SCC), lentiviral transgenesis results in 11967625 a four to eight fold higher generation rate of transgenic animals per embryo treated [10], and more than 90 transgenic founders can be observed transgene expression [11,12]. Furthermore, the transgene delivered by lentiviral vector alsoGeneration of Transgenic Sheep by Lentivirusstably expressed in their offsprings with considerably low methylation level in transgene promoter under certain circumstances. This differed from retrovirus-induced globally de novo methylation, which resulted in widespread silence of transgene expression [13]. Transgenic swine was the first livestock produced by injecting lentivirus into zygote with generation rates of 19?3 [14], which was significantly higher than 1 such rate obtained by conventional pronuclear microinjection [3]. However, the same investigators who successfully introduced lentiviral transgene into swine failed to produce transgenic cattle by the same procedure although the transgenic embryos were gained [15]. In 2004, the first transgenic cattle was produced by lentivirus infection of oocyte instead of microjection with the generation rate of 8.3 per oocyte treated [15]. In 2012, the transgenic cattle generated by injection of lentiviral vector into zygotes was reported with the generation rate of 7.5 per embryo transferred [16]. These studies indicated that the infection and integration capability of recombinant lentivirus were quite disparate within different livestock species. Previous studies on lentiviral transgenesis demonstrated that the transgene expression was associated with transgene epigenetic modification, integrant numbers and locus [17,18]. So far, the overall regulatory mechanism of lentiviral tr.

Leave a Reply