PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16110893

Animal cloning: problems and prospects.

Abstract

An efficient animal cloning technology would provide many new opportunities for livestock agriculture, human medicine, and animal conservation. Nuclear cloning involves the production of animals that are genetically identical to the donor cells used in a technique known as nuclear transfer (NT). However, at present it is an inefficient process: in cattle, only around 6% of the embryos transferred to the reproductive tracts of recipient cows result in healthy, longterm surviving clones. Of concern are the high losses throughout gestation, during birth and in the post-natal period through to adulthood. Many of the pregnancy losses relate to failure of the placenta to develop and function correctly. Placental dysfunction may also have an adverse influence on postnatal health. These anomalies are probably due to incorrect epigenetic reprogramming of the donor genome following NT, leading to inappropriate patterns of gene expression during the development of clones. Whilst some physiological tests on surviving clones suggest normality, other reports indicate a variety of post-natal clone-associated abnormalities. This variability in outcome may reflect species-specific and/or cloning methodological differences. Importantly, to date it appears that these clone-associated phenotypes are not transmitted to offspring following sexual reproduction. This indicates that they represent epigenetic errors, rather than genetic errors, which are corrected during gametogenesis. Whilst this needs confirmation at the molecular level, it provides initial confidence in the first application of NT in agriculture, namely, the production of small numbers of cloned sires from genetically elite bulls, for natural mating, to effectively disseminate genetic gain. In addition to the animal welfare concerns with the technology, the underlying health of the animals and the consequential effect on food safety are critical aspects that require investigation to gain regulatory and consumer acceptance. Future improvements in animal cloning will largely arise from a greater understanding of the molecular mechanisms of reprogramming.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D N Wells. 2005. Animal cloning: problems and prospects.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16110893/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Systematic review of comparative studies examining alternatives to the harmful use of animals in biomedical education.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the published literature for controlled studies comparing learning outcomes of traditional methods that require the terminal use of animals (eg, dissection, live-animal surgery, and live-animal laboratory demonstrations) with outcomes obtained with alternative teaching methods. DESIGN: Systematic review. STUDY POPULATION: Controlled studies published between 1996 and 2004. PROCEDURES: PubMed was searched with the following keywords, used alone and in combination: educational alternatives, nonlethal teaching methods, veterinary alternatives, medical education, and nonterminal animal use. Cited references of retrieved reports were reviewed to identify additional reports. Reports were selected for review only if a comparison group was included. RESULTS: 17 studies that were randomized controlled trials or nonrandomized trials that included a comparison group were identified. Five involved veterinary students, 3 involved medical students, 6 involved university undergraduate students, and 3 involved high school biology students. Sample size ranged from 14 to 283 students. Eleven studies appeared to be randomized, parallel-group trials, 4 involved comparative groups to which participants were not randomly assigned or for which the randomization process was not clear, 1 was a 2-period crossover study, and 1 involved a retrospective review of grades. In all 17 studies reviewed, results associated with the alternative method of instruction were not significantly different from or superior to results associated with the conventional method. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Although the number of controlled studies identified was small, the results seem to support more widespread adoption of alternative teaching methods in biomedical education.

Animal Welfare↗