J Physiol Wellcome Trust-funded researchers
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Physiol Volume 554, Number 1, 4-12, January 1, 2004 DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2003.049742
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
554/1/4    most recent
jphysiol.2003.049742v1
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mullins, L. J.
Right arrow Articles by Mullins, J. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mullins, L. J.
Right arrow Articles by Mullins, J. J.
Related Collections
Right arrow Review articles

TOPICAL REVIEW

Nuclear transfer in rodents

Linda J. Mullins1, Ian Wilmut2 and John J. Mullins1

1 Molecular Physiology Laboratory, University of Edinburgh Medical School, Edinburgh EH8 9AG, UK2 Roslin Institute, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS, UK

Cloning is the asexual reproduction of an individual, such that the offspring have an essentially identical nuclear genome. Nuclear transfer and cloning have been achieved in a number of species, namely sheep, cows, goats, rabbits, cats and mice, but have been largely unsuccessful, so far, in dogs, primates and rats. Clearly, contributory factors which affect the outcome of successful cloning experiments are not universally applicable to all species. One theme common to all cloning experiments, however, is the overall inefficiency of the process, typically 0–4%. A number of factors contribute to nuclear transfer inefficiency, and we will review mouse cloning experiments, which address these problems, highlighting the importance of donor nucleus choice (somatic or ES cell, fetal or adult, quiescent or actively dividing). Finally, we will summarize the emerging principles which appear to govern nuclear reprogramming and production of clones, and will consider the application of nuclear transfer to the rat.

(Received 23 June 2003; accepted after revision 16 October 2003; first published online 17 October 2003)
Corresponding author J. J. Mullins: Molecular Physiology Laboratory, University of Edinburgh Medical School, Edinburgh EH8 9AG, UK.  Email: j.mullins{at}ed.ac.uk




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Stem CellsHome page
B. Coleman, M. G. de Silva, and R. K. Shepherd
Concise Review: The Potential of Stem Cells for Auditory Neuron Generation and Replacement
Stem Cells, November 1, 2007; 25(11): 2685 - 2694.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Physiol. GenomicsHome page
C. Dapp, S. Schmutz, H. Hoppeler, and M. Fluck
Transcriptional reprogramming and ultrastructure during atrophy and recovery of mouse soleus muscle
Physiol Genomics, December 15, 2004; 20(1): 97 - 107.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 The Physiological Society.