Biology 133 lecture AY 2021- 2022

This is in response to Dr. Leonardo's questions which can be found below.

1. What do you think are the contributions of the cytoplasm of the donor and recipient to the subsequent development of the embryo?
2. In your recommendations, you mentioned some future studies that will benefit from these early findings. Please mention these future studies.

On behalf of the group, these are our responses:

1. The ratio of donor cell cytoplasm (blastula) to recipient cell cytoplasm (egg) is less than 1:20,000, according to the study's findings. Despite this, some cytoplasm is transported along with the blastula cell's nucleus. With this, it is genuinely recommended that the procedure be improved in order to remove the majority of the cytoplasm from the blastula donor cell. Thus, it can be deduced that the cytoplasm of the donor cell has no bearing on the embryo's later development.

Cell differentiation and development, on the other hand, are largely attributed to the well-known localizations in the egg cytoplasm. The recipient cell must give the most suitable cytoplasmic components – and maybe non-nuclear DNA – for reprogramming the somatic (donor) cells using the nuclear transfer approach. Furthermore, the recipient cytoplasm can convert the nucleus of spermatozoa, T cells, B cells, and olfactory neurons to a totipotent state capable of creating a whole embryo.

2. In the presentation, it is stated that the findings of the study by Briggs and King can advance related studies on experimental embryology, nuclear differentiation, and nuclear biochemistry. Specifically, these early findings can serve as a baseline on certain future studies such as the potential of the nuclear material of developing cells of different model organisms for full development. These early findings can also be helpful in identifying the specific roles the cytoplasm plays in the subsequent differentiation of the cells.

Thank you so much!

Hello Jianne, Ranna, and Paji from Group 7!

I am Ayesha Razuman from Group 6; on behalf of my groupmates, Jamaica Quinto and Regina Santos, we commend you for a job well done on your excellent presentation regarding amphibian blastula! It has perfectly explained the whole study with detail and precision. Now, you have mentioned that the embryos exhibited polyploidy and no haploidy, what could have accounted for the lack of haploids among the embryos in the experiment? Your answers are greatly appreciated. Great job, once again!

Thank you very much and have a happy break! :)

Good day, Ranna, Jianne, and Paul!

This is Dino from Group 8, and our group (Jose, Mariel; Pabilico, Dino Spencer; Tamaña, Eliana Rachelle) would like to congratulate your group for a job well done in the oral presentation. Even though the study you have chosen dates back to the 1950s, you were still able to present the information precisely and make it relevant to our current discussions on animal development. We really appreciate the way your group tried to explain the complicated parts in simpler terms. Furthermore, it was really helpful in understanding the objectives of the study, as well as the discussion of the results that they were able to collect. We were pretty surprised since you got to connect our 133 plant part lessons with Acetabularia sp. nuclear transplantation towards the blastula nuclei transplantation into enucleated frog eggs. Interestingly, the results clearly show that the transplantation had occurred and cleavage had ensued for most test subjects, despite abnormal growth and low mortality curves, be it for setups with impartial or complete transplantation.

However, our group wanted to delve deeper into certain information in the methodology chapter of the study. You have mentioned that a leak may possibly occur once the needle is slowly withdrawn. What would happen if the leak was not prevented? Please feel free to build upon our thoughts and ideas! Once again, thank you all for the very interesting report, and happy holidays to the whole group!