Encyclopedia of Molecular Cell Biology and Molecular Medicine 2011
DOI: 10.1002/3527600906.mcb.200400139.pub2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nuclear Transfer for Cloning Animals

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 191 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One of the differences, besides the cell origin is that MEF cells were extensively treated prior to manipulation, whereas cumulus cells were not. For instance, MEF cells were treated with repeated trypsin treatments and kept in culture longer prior to manipulation than cumulus cells (Dinnyes et al, 2004). In accordance with our results, a previous study in the donor cell type of ntESC establishment reported a significantly better rate when freshly isolated cumulus cells were used as donor nuclei compared to cultured tail-tip fibroblast (Wakayama et al, 2005).…”
Section: Zona-free Ntesc Derivationsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…One of the differences, besides the cell origin is that MEF cells were extensively treated prior to manipulation, whereas cumulus cells were not. For instance, MEF cells were treated with repeated trypsin treatments and kept in culture longer prior to manipulation than cumulus cells (Dinnyes et al, 2004). In accordance with our results, a previous study in the donor cell type of ntESC establishment reported a significantly better rate when freshly isolated cumulus cells were used as donor nuclei compared to cultured tail-tip fibroblast (Wakayama et al, 2005).…”
Section: Zona-free Ntesc Derivationsupporting
confidence: 90%