The Differential Requirement of Albumin and Sodium Citrate on the Development of In Vitro Produced Bovine Embryos

In vitro culture for bovine embryos is largely not optimal. Our study was to determine the components necessary for early embryo development. In experiment 1, IVF embryos were cultured for two days in CR1aa medium containing sodium citrate and BSA from two sources (Sigma vs. ICPbio), subsequently for additional five days with cumulus monolayer in 10% FBS CR1aa. We found that supplementation with both Sigma-BSA and sodium citrate significantly increased total blastocyst (BL) development compared with the ICPbio-BSA groups (37% vs. 19-21%), and enhanced the total number of high quality (C1 BL, IETS standard) blastocysts (26% vs. 11-17%) (P < 0.05). In experiment 2 with serum free and/or somatic free culture, we found that CR1aa culture can support a comparable embryo development with a supplement of Sigma BSA. The addition of sodium citrate did not increase blastocyst development in either the Sigma-BSA or the ICPbio-BSA groups. An inferior blastocyst development occurring in ICPbio-BSA culture (1-3%) could be rescued by culture in CRlaa supplemented with 10% FBS (29%), more importantly, by culture in CR1aa with a replacement of Sigma BSA (24%) (P <0.05). C1 blastocysts rescued by FBS and Sigma BSA in ICPbio-BSA culture possessed indistinguishable morphology to embryos developed in a Sigma-BSA, FBS and somatic co-culture system, showing similar cell number/blastocyst (129-180, P > 0.05). Our study found a beneficial effect of sodium citrate and BSA on the in vitro development of bovine IVF embryos during co-culture. We also determined that differential embryotrophic factor(s) contained in BSA and serum, probably not sodium citrate, is necessary for promoting competent morula and blastocyst development in cattle.

Ayurvedic Concept of Food and Nutrition

Ayurveda places special emphasis on Ahar (diet) and Anna (food) and believes that healthy nutrition nourishes the mind, body and soul. Ayurveda does not discriminate food to be good, or bad, instead it emphasizes various factors that influence food, such as its biological properties, origin, environmental factors, seasons, preparation, freshness, and provides a logical explanation of how to balance food according to one's dosha and physical needs.

Differential Cytoplast Requirement for Embryonic and Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer in Cattle

Effective activation of a recipient oocyte and its compatibility with the nuclear donor are critical to the successful nuclear reprogramming during nuclear transfer. We designed a series of experiments using various activation methods to determine the optimum activation efficiency of bovine oocytes. We then performed nuclear transfer (NT) of embryonic and somatic cells into cytoplasts presumably at G1/S phase (with prior activation) or at metaphase II (MII, without prior activation). Oocytes at 24 hr of maturation in vitro were activated with various combinations of calcium ionophore A23187 (A187) (5 microM, 5 min), electric pulse (EP), ethanol (7%, 7 min), cycloheximide (CHX) (10 micro g/ml, 6 hr), and then cultured in cytochalasin D (CD) for a total of 18 hr. Through a series of experiments (Exp. 1-4), an improved activation protocol (A187/EP/CHX/CD) was identified and used for comparison of NT efficiency of embryonic versus somatic donor cells (Exp. 5). When embryonic cells from morula and blastocysts (BL) were used as nuclear donors, a significantly higher rate of blastocyst development from cloned embryos was obtained with G1/S phase cytoplasts than with MII-phase cytoplasts (36 vs. 11%, P < 0.05). In contrast, when skin fibroblasts were used as donor cells, the use of an MII cytoplast (vs. G1/S phase) was imperative for blastocyst development (30 vs. 6%, P < 0.05). Differential staining showed that parthenogenetic, embryonic, and somatic cloned BL contained 26, 29, and 33% presumptive inner cell mass (ICM) cells, respectively, which is similar to that of frozen-thawed in vivo embryos at a comparable developmental stage (23%). These data indicate that embryonic and somatic nuclei require different recipient cytoplast environment for remodeling/ reprogramming, and this is likely due to the different cell cycle stage and profiles of molecular differentiation of the transferred donor nuclei.