Comparison of birth weight and umbilical and placental characteristics of cloned and artificial insemination-derived piglets

Zheng AO, Chengfa ZHAO, Yanmin GAN, Xiao WU, Junsong SHI, Enqin ZHENG, Dewu LIU, Gengyuan CAI, Zhenfang WU, Zicong LI

PDF(1060 KB)
PDF(1060 KB)
Front. Agr. Sci. Eng. ›› 2019, Vol. 6 ›› Issue (1) : 54-60. DOI: 10.15302/J-FASE-2018249
RESEARCH ARTICLE
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparison of birth weight and umbilical and placental characteristics of cloned and artificial insemination-derived piglets

Author information +
History +

Abstract

Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT)-derived piglets have significantly higher stillbirth rate and postnatal mortality rate than artificial insemination (AI)-generated piglets. The question whether the low survival rate of SCNT piglets was related to birth weight, umbilical cord or placenta development was investigated. In this study, stillbirth rate, neonatal death rate, birth weight, umbilical cord status, placental parameters and placental gene expression patterns were compared between SCNT and AI piglets. Results showed that mortality rates at birth and during the neonatal stage of SCNT piglets were significantly higher than those of AI piglets. The incidence of abnormal umbilical cord in SCNT and SCNT-liveborn (SCNT-LB) piglets was significantly higher than in AI and AI-liveborn (AI-LB) piglets. Birth weight, placental weight, placental surface area and placental efficiency in SCNT and SCNT-LB piglets were significantly lower than those of AI and AI-LB piglets. Placental expression profiles of imprinting, angiopoiesis and nutrient transport-related genes were defective in SCNT-LB piglets compared with those in AI-LB piglets. Thus, the low survival rate of SCNT piglets may be associated with abnormal umbilical cord and placenta development. These characteristics may have resulted from aberrant expression of angiogenesis, nutrient transport, and imprinting-related genes in the placentas.

Keywords

cloned / pig / death / placenta / SCNT / umbilical cord

Cite this article

Download citation ▾
Zheng AO, Chengfa ZHAO, Yanmin GAN, Xiao WU, Junsong SHI, Enqin ZHENG, Dewu LIU, Gengyuan CAI, Zhenfang WU, Zicong LI. Comparison of birth weight and umbilical and placental characteristics of cloned and artificial insemination-derived piglets. Front. Agr. Sci. Eng., 2019, 6(1): 54‒60 https://doi.org/10.15302/J-FASE-2018249

References

[1]
Kuroiwa Y, Kasinathan P, Choi Y J, Naeem R, Tomizuka K, Sullivan E J, Knott J G, Duteau A, Goldsby R A, Osborne B A, Ishida I, Robl J M. Cloned transchromosomic calves producing human immunoglobulin. Nature Biotechnology, 2002, 20(9): 889–894
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[2]
Campbell K H, Fisher P, Chen W C, Choi I, Kelly R D, Lee J H, Xhu J. Somatic cell nuclear transfer: past, present and future perspectives. Theriogenology, 2007, 68(S1): S214–S231
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[3]
Yang X, Smith S L, Tian X C, Lewin H A, Renard J P, Wakayama T. Nuclear reprogramming of cloned embryos and its implications for therapeutic cloning. Nature Genetics, 2007, 39(3): 295–302
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[4]
Matsunari H, Nagashima H. Application of genetically modified and cloned pigs in translational research. Journal of Reproduction and Development, 2009, 55(3): 225–230
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[5]
Holm I E, Alstrup A K O, Luo Y. Genetically modified pig models for neurodegenerative disorders. Journal of Pathology, 2016, 238(2): 267–287
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[6]
Liu Y, Li J, Løvendahl P, Schmidt M, Larsen K, Callesen H. In vitro manipulation techniques of porcine embryos: a meta-analysis related to transfers, pregnancies and piglets. Reproduction, Fertility, and Development, 2015, 27(3): 429–439
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[7]
Geisert R, Schmitt R. Early embryonic survival in the pig: can it be improved? Journal of Animal Science, 2002, 80(S1): E54–E65
[8]
Liu T, Dou H, Xiang X, Li L, Li Y, Lin L, Pang X, Zhang Y, Chen Y, Luan J, Xu Y, Yang Z, Yang W, Liu H, Li F, Wang H, Yang H, Bolund L, Vajta G, Du Y. Factors determining the efficiency of porcine somatic cell nuclear transfer: data analysis with over 200000 reconstructed embryos. Cellular Reprogramming, 2015, 17(6): 463–471
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[9]
Huan Y, Hu K, Xie B, Shi Y, Wang F, Zhou Y, Liu S, Huang B, Zhu J, Liu Z, He Y, Li J, Kong Q, Liu Z. Ovulation statuses of surrogate gilts are associated with the efficiency of excellent pig cloning. PLoS One, 2015, 10(11): e0142549
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[10]
Estrada J, Sommer J, Collins B, Mir B, Martin A, York A, Petters R M, Piedrahita J A. Swine generated by somatic cell nuclear transfer have increased incidence of intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR). Cloning and Stem Cells, 2007, 9(2): 229–236
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[11]
Kurome M, Geistlinger L, Kessler B, Zakhartchenko V, Klymiuk N, Wuensch A, Richter A, Baehr A, Kraehe K, Burkhardt K, Flisikowski K, Flisikowska T, Merkl C, Landmann M, Durkovic M, Tschukes A, Kraner S, Schindelhauer D, Petri T, Kind A, Nagashima H, Schnieke A, Zimmer R, Wolf E. Factors influencing the efficiency of generating genetically engineered pigs by nuclear transfer: multi-factorial analysis of a large data set. BMC Biotechnology, 2013, 13(1): 43
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[12]
Park J Y, Kim J H, Choi Y J, Hwang K C, Cho S K, Park H H, Paik S S, Kim T, Park C, Lee H T, Seo H G, Park S B, Hwang S, Kim J H. Comparative proteomic analysis of malformed umbilical cords from somatic cell nuclear transfer-derived piglets: implications for early postnatal death. BMC Genomics, 2009, 10(1): 511
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[13]
Schmidt M, Winther K D, Secher J O, Callesen H. Postmortem findings in cloned and transgenic piglets dead before weaning. Theriogenology, 2015, 84(6): 1014–1023
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[14]
Ao Z, Liu D, Zhao C, Yue Z, Shi J, Zhou R, Cai G, Zheng E, Li Z, Wu Z. Birth weight, umbilical and placental traits in relation to neonatal loss in cloned pigs. Placenta, 2017, 57: 94–101
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[15]
van der Lende T, Knol E F, Leenhouwers J I. Prenatal development as a predisposing factor for perinatal losses in pigs. Reproduction Supplement, 2001, 58: 247–261
Pubmed
[16]
Vallet J L, Miles J R, Brown-Brandl T M, Nienaber J A. Proportion of the litter farrowed, litter size, and progesterone and estradiol effects on piglet birth intervals and stillbirths. Animal Reproduction Science, 2010, 119(1–2): 68–75
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[17]
Rootwelt V, Reksen O, Farstad W, Framstad T. Postpartum deaths: piglet, placental, and umbilical characteristics. Journal of Animal Science, 2013, 91(6): 2647–2656
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[18]
Milligan B N, Fraser D, Kramer D L. Within-litter birth weight variation in the domestic pig and its relation to pre-weaning survival, weight gain, and variation in weaning weights. Livestock Production Science, 2002, 76(1–2): 181–191
CrossRef Google scholar
[19]
Milligan B N, Fraser D, Kramer D L. Birth weight variation in the domestic pig: effects on offspring survival, weight gain and suckling behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2001, 73(3): 179–191
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[20]
Antonides A, Schoonderwoerd A C, Nordquist R E, van der Staay F J. Very low birth weight piglets show improved cognitive performance in the spatial cognitive holeboard task. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 2015, 9: 43
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[21]
Chavatte-Palmer P, Camous S, Jammes H, Le Cleac’h N, Guillomot M, Lee R S. Review: placental perturbations induce the developmental abnormalities often observed in bovine somatic cell nuclear transfer. Placenta, 2012, 33(S): S99–S104
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[22]
Cuffe J S M, Holland O, Salomon C, Rice G E, Perkins A V. Review: placental derived biomarkers of pregnancy disorders. Placenta, 2017, 54: 104–110
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[23]
Loi P, Clinton M, Vackova I, Fulka J Jr, Feil R, Palmieri C, Della Salda L, Ptak G. Placental abnormalities associated with post-natal mortality in sheep somatic cell clones. Theriogenology, 2006, 65(6): 1110–1121
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[24]
VanderWielen B, Zaleski C, Cold C, McPherson E. Wisconsin stillbirth services program: a multifocal approach to stillbirth analysis. American Journal of Medical Genetics: Part A, 2011, 155A(5): 1073–1080
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[25]
Miglino M A, Pereira F T V, Visintin J A, Garcia J M, Meirelles F V, Rumpf R, Ambrósio C E, Papa P C, Santos T C, Carvalho A F, Leiser R, Carter A M. Placentation in cloned cattle: structure and microvascular architecture. Theriogenology, 2007, 68(4): 604–617
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[26]
Wilson M E, Biensen N J, Youngs C R, Ford S P. Development of Meishan and Yorkshire littermate conceptuses in either a Meishan or Yorkshire uterine environment to day 90 of gestation and to term. Biology of Reproduction, 1998, 58(4): 905–910
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[27]
Park M R, Cho S K, Lee S Y, Choi Y J, Park J Y, Kwon D N, Son W J, Paik S S, Kim T, Han Y M, Kim J H. A rare and often unrecognized cerebromeningitis and hemodynamic disorder: a major cause of sudden death in somatic cell cloned piglets. Proteomics, 2005, 5(7): 1928–1939
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[28]
Alonso-Spilsbury M, Mota-Rojas D, Martínez-Burnes J, Arch E, López Mayagoitia A, Ramírez-Necoechea R, Olmos A, Trujillo M E. Use of oxytocin in penned sows and its effect on fetal intra-partum asphyxia. Animal Reproduction Science, 2004, 84(1–2): 157–167
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[29]
Alonso-Spilsbury M, Mota-Rojas D, Villanueva-García D, Martínez-Burnes J, Orozco H, Ramírez-Necoechea R, Mayagoitia A L, Trujillo M E. Perinatal asphyxia pathophysiology in pig and human: a review. Animal Reproduction Science, 2005, 90(1–2): 1–30
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[30]
Deront-Bourdin F, Blanquiot J L, Checchi C, Nataf S, Bongain A. Umbilical vein varix thrombosis. Gynécologie, Obstétrique & Fertilité, 2014, 42(6): 448–450in French)
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[31]
Smith G C, Crossley J A, Aitken D A, Pell J P, Cameron A D, Connor J M, Dobbie R. First-trimester placentation and the risk of antepartum stillbirth. Journal of the American Medical Association, 2004, 292(18): 2249–2254
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[32]
Man J, Hutchinson J C, Heazell A E, Ashworth M, Jeffrey I, Sebire N J. Stillbirth and intrauterine fetal death: role of routine histopathological placental findings to determine cause of death. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2016, 48(5): 579–584
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[33]
Tunster S J, Creeth H D J, John R M. The imprinted Phlda2 gene modulates a major endocrine compartment of the placenta to regulate placental demands for maternal resources. Developmental Biology, 2016, 409(1): 251–260
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[34]
Angiolini E, Fowden A, Coan P, Sandovici I, Smith P, Dean W, Burton G, Tycko B, Reik W, Sibley C, Constancia M. Regulation of placental efficiency for nutrient transport by imprinted genes. Placenta, 2006, 27(SA): S98–S102
[35]
Reik W, Constância M, Fowden A, Anderson N, Dean W, Ferguson-Smith A, Tycko B, Sibley C. Regulation of supply and demand for maternal nutrients in mammals by imprinted genes. Journal of Physiology, 2003, 547(Pt 1): 35–44
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by two grants received from the Department of Science and Technology of Guangdong Province, China (2016B020233006 and 2016A020210074).

Compliance with ethics guidelines

Zheng Ao, Chengfa Zhao, Yanmin Gan, Xiao Wu, Junsong Shi, Enqin Zheng, Dewu Liu, Gengyuan Cai, Zhenfang Wu, and Zicong Li declare that they have no conflicts of interest or financial conflicts to disclose.
All applicable institutional and national guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

The Author(s) 2018. Published by Higher Education Press. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF(1060 KB)

Accesses

Citations

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/