3 ms·
That is pretty interesting... I've hit a wall on figuring out what they did here but maybe have missed the info.[1] 1a) One male who was heterozygous for a cer
by nonbel 9y ago
That is pretty interesting... I've hit a wall on figuring out what they did here but maybe have missed the info.[1]
1a) One male who was heterozygous for a certain mutation donated his sperm:
-"only three adult heterozygous patients were identified by OHSU Knight Cardiovascular Institute physicians and referred to the research team, one of whom agreed to participate in the study."
1b) X females donated Y amount of eggs:
- I didn't see these numbers discussed anywhere
2) One sperm each was matched to each of Y eggs for Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). It isn't clear whether any selection for sperm went on here:
-"Oocytes were fertilized by ICSI using frozen and thawed sperm. Fertilization was determined approximately 18 h after ICSI by noting the presence of two pronuclei and second polar body extrusion."
3) Z zygotes were found at the end of the above 18 hours:
-"zygotes were collected 18 h after ICSI and placed in a micromanipulation drop...Injected zygotes were
cultured...for up to 3 days to the 4–8-cell stage"
4) 131 embryos formed from those Z zygotes that got injected with CRISPR-Cas9, consisting of 830 cells total:
-"A total of 830 blastomeres were isolated from 131 embryos, including 19 from control, 54 from zygote-injected and 58 from M-phase-injected groups."
5) A sequence was attained for 730 of those 830 cells:
-"Of 830 blastomeres, 730 (88%) resulted in successful libraries and produced PCR products for MYBPC3 while the remaining 100 blastomeres (12%) failed to generate PCR products and were excluded from the study."[2]
I mostly wanted to know Z, how many and what percent of zygotes survived the CRISPR/Cas-9 treatment. It seems to be missing. I would also like to know X and Y (initial number of women and eggs donated) though.
[1] http://nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/nature23305 http://nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/nature23305
[2] Elsewhere (the reporting summary) they say "no data were excluded"