Theriogenology
Volume 67, Issue 1 , Pages 178-184 , 1 January 2007

Comparison of meat composition from offspring of cloned and conventionally produced boars

  • S.C. Walker

      Affiliations

    • ViaGen Inc., 12357-A Riata Trace Parkway, Suite 100, Austin, TX 78727, USA
    • ,
  • R.K. Christenson

      Affiliations

    • U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Roman L. Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, Clay Center, NE 68933, USA
    • ,
  • R.P. Ruiz

      Affiliations

    • Eurofins Scientific Inc., 345 Adams Avenue, Memphis, TN 38103, USA
    • ,
  • D.E. Reeves

      Affiliations

    • Department of Population Health, College Of Veterinary Medicine University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA
    • ,
  • S.L. Pratt

      Affiliations

    • Clemson University, Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Clemson, SC 29634, USA
    • ,
  • F. Arenivas

      Affiliations

    • ViaGen Inc., 12357-A Riata Trace Parkway, Suite 100, Austin, TX 78727, USA
    • ,
  • N.E. Williams

      Affiliations

    • ViaGen Inc., 12357-A Riata Trace Parkway, Suite 100, Austin, TX 78727, USA
    • ,
  • B.L. Bruner

      Affiliations

    • ViaGen Inc., 12357-A Riata Trace Parkway, Suite 100, Austin, TX 78727, USA
    • ,
  • I.A. Polejaeva

      Affiliations

    • ViaGen Inc., 12357-A Riata Trace Parkway, Suite 100, Austin, TX 78727, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +1 512 401 5900; fax: +1 512 401 5919.

References 

  1. USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 18, 2005; website: http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/search/.
  2. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Animal cloning: a risk assessment, draft executive summary. Rockville MD: United States Food and Drug Administration, 2003; website: http://www.fda.gov/cvm/Documents/CLRAES.doc/.
  3. National Academy of Science. Safety of genetically engineered foods: approaches to assessing unintended health effects. Sub-report on methods and mechanisms of genetic manipulation and cloning of animals. The National Academic Press, Washington, DC, 2004; pp. 217–35.
  4. Norman HD, Lawlor TJ, Wright JR, Powell RL. Performance of Holstein clones in the United States. J Dairy Sci. 2004;87:729–738
  5. Takahashi S, Ito Y. Evaluation of meat products from cloned cattle: biological and biochemical properties. Cloning Stem Cells. 2004;6:165–171
  6. Tian XC, Kubota C, Sakashita K, Izaike Y, Okano R, Tabara N, et al. Meat and milk compositions of bovine clones. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102:6261–6266
  7. Walsh MK, Lucey JA, Govindasamy-Lucey S, Pace MM, Bishop MD. Comparison of milk produced by cows cloned by nuclear transfer with milk from non-cloned cows. Cloning Stem Cells. 2003;5:213–219
  8. Tome D, Dubarry M, Fromentin G. Nutritional value of milk and meat products derived from cloning. Cloning Stem Cells. 2004;6:172–177
  9. Rudenko L, Matheson JC, Adams AL, Dubbin ES, Greenlees KJ. Food consumption risks associated with animal clones: what should be investigated?. Cloning Stem Cells. 2004;6:79–93
  10. Williams NE, Walker SC, Reeves DE, Sherrer E, Galvin JM, Polejaeva I, et al. A comparison of reproductive characteristics of boars generated by somatic cell nuclear transfer to highly related conventionally produced boars. Cloning Stem Cells. 2006;8:131–140
  11. Kelly L. The safety assessment of foods from transgenic and cloned animals using the comparative approach. Rev Sci Tech (Int Office Epizootics). 2005;24:61–74

☆ Mention of trade names or commercial products in this article is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

PII: S0093-691X(06)00500-0

doi: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2006.09.025

Theriogenology
Volume 67, Issue 1 , Pages 178-184 , 1 January 2007

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution