Review on the major challenges and difficulties of farm animal cloning


  • Tekalign Tadesse College of Agriculture and Forestry, Mettu University, P.O. Box 318, Mettu, Ethiopia
  • Hailegebrael Bedada College of Veterinary Medicine, Samara University, P.O. Box, 132, Samara, Afar, Ethiopia


Biotechnology, Cloning, Food safety, Nuclear transfer, Trans generational effects


Developments in biotechnology 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. However, at present it is an inefficient process in farm animal and small number of the embryos transferred to the reproductive tracts of recipient mother result in healthy, long-term surviving clones. Recent cloning research also reveals high failure rates, premature deaths, and dysfunctioning of internal organs. Food products from healthy clones, i.e. meat or milk, did not differ from products from healthy conventionally bred animals. Even though the food products of cloned animals showed no differences with conventional offspring or products, throughout the world, there is significant public opposition to the introduction of meat and milk from cloned animals and their progeny into the food supply. Cloning also threatens the welfare of surrogate mothers, the underlying health of the animals and the next generation, the consequential effect on food safety are critical aspects that require investigation to gain regulatory and consumer acceptance. Data on clones of farmed species for food production other than cattle and pigs have remained limited and do not allow for assessment of food safety or animal health and welfare aspects.


Andrabi, S.M., Maxwell, W.M., 2007. A review on reproductive biotechnologies for conservation of endangered mammalian species. Anim. Reprod. Sci., 99, 223-243.

Chavatte-Palmer, P., Heyman, Y., Richard, C., Monget, P., Le-Bourhis, D., Kann, G., Chilliard, Y., Vignon, X., Renard, J.P., 2002. Clinical, hormonal and hematologic characteristics of bovine calves derived from nuclei from somatic cells. Biol. Reprod., 66, 1596-1603.

Chesne, P., Adenot, P., Viglietta, C., Baratte, M., Boulanger, L., Renard, J., 2002. Cloned rabbits produced by nuclear transfer from adult somatic cells. Natur. Biotech., 20, 366-369.

D’Silva, J., 2007. The ethical aspects of animal cloning for food supply, compassion in world farming (CIWF) organization.

Das, S.K., Majumdar, A.C., Sharma, G.T., 2003. In vitro development of reconstructed goat oocyte after somatic cell nuclear transfer with fetal fibroblast cells. Small Rumin. Res., 48, 217-225.

De-Sousa, P.A., King, T., Harkness, L., Young, L.E., Walker, S.K., Wilmut, I., 2001. Evaluation of gestational deficiencies in cloned sheep fetuses and placentae. Biol. Reprod., 65, 23-30.

Duszewska, A., Reklewski, Z., 2007. Uzyskiwanie zarodków zwierz¹t gospodarskich in vitro (Obtaining in vitro embryos from farm animals). Med. Wet., 63, 1522-1525.

EFSA, 2008. Statement of EFSA prepared by the scientific committee and advisory forum unit on further advice on the Implications of animal cloning (SCNT). EFSA J., 1-9.

EFSA, 2009. Statement of EFSA prepared by the scientific committee and advisory forum unit on further advice on the Implications of animal cloning (SCNT). EFSA J. RN, 319, 1-15.

EGE, The European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies to the European Commission, 2008. Ethical aspects of animal cloning for food supply, opinion number 23. Farming Trust.

Former, F.J., 2005. Attempts to produce monozygotic quadruplets in cattle by blastomere separation. Vet. Rec., 2, 234-254.

Han, Y.M., Kang, Y.K., Koo, D.B., Lee, K.K., 2003. Nuclear reprogramming of cloned embryos produced in vitro. Therio., 59, 33-44.

Hill, J.R., Schlafer, D.H., Fisher, P.J., Davies, C.J., 2002. Abnormal expression of trophoblast major histocompatibility complex class I antigens in cloned bovine pregnancies is associated with a pronounced endometrial lymphocytic response. Biol. Reprod., 67, 55-63.

Humpherys, D., Eggan, K., Akutsu, H., Friedman, A., Hochedlinger, K., Yanagimachi, R., Lander, E., Golub, T., Jaenisch, R., 2002. Abnormal gene expression in cloned mice derived from embryonic stem cell and cumulus cell nuclei. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 99, 1289-1294.

Jaenisch, R., 2003. The biology of nuclear cloning and the potential of embryonic stem cells for transplantation therapy. Background paper for the president’s commission on bioethics, available at:

Lee, R.S., Peterson, A.J., Donnison, M.J., Ravelich, S., Ledgard, A.M., Li, N., Oliver, J.E., Miller, A.L., Tucker, F.C., Breier, B., Wells, D.N., 2004. Cloned cattle fetuses with the same nuclear genetics are more variable than contemporary half-siblings resulting from artificial insemination and exhibit fetal and placental growth deregulation even in the first trimester. Biol. Reprod., 70, 1-11.

Oback, B., Wiersema, A.T., Gaynor, P., Laible, G., Tucker, F.C., Oliver, J.E., Miller, A.L., Troskie, H.E., Wilson, K.L., Forsyth, J.T., Berg, M.C., Cockrem, K., McMillan, V., Tervit, H.R., Wells, D.N., 2003. Cloned cattle derived from a novel zona-free embryo reconstruction system. Clon. Stem Cell., 5, 3-12.

Ogonuki, N., Inoue, K., Yamamoto, Y., Noguchi, Y., Tanemura, K., Suzuki, O., Nakayama, H., Doi, K., Ohtomo, Y., Satoh, M., Nishida, A., Ogura, A., 2002. Early death of mice cloned from somatic cells. Nat. Gene, 30, 253-254.

Ogura, A., Inoue, K., Ogonuki, N., Lee, J., Kohda, T., Ishino, F., 2002. Phenotypic effects of somatic cell cloning in the mouse. Clon. Stem Cell., 4, 397-405.

Panarace, M., Aguero, J., Garrote, M., 2007. How healthy are clones and their progeny. Therio., 67, 142-151.

Rhind, S., Cui, W., King, T., Ritchie, W., Wylie, D., Wilmut, I., 2004. Dolly: A final report. Reprod. Fertil. Dev., 16, 156.

Rudenko, L., Matheson, J., Adams, A., Dubbin, E., Greenlees, K., 2004. Food consumption risks associated with animal clones. Clon. Stem Cell., 6, 79-93.

Takahashi, S., Ito, Y., 2004. Evaluation of meat products from cloned cattle: Biological and biochemical properties. Clon. Stem Cell., 6, 165-171.

The Gallup Organization, 2008. Flash eurobarometer 238: Europeans’ attitudes towards animal cloning. An HSI report: Welfare Issues with Genetic Engineering and Cloning of Farm Animals. 2, 1-9.

Tucker-Foreman, C., 2012. Public interest perspective on animal cloning. In: Animal cloning and the production of food products: Perspectives from the food chain. Proceedings from a workshop sponsored by the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology and the Center for Veterinary Medicine of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Turner, J., 2002. The gene and the stable door biotechnology and farm animals. A report for the compassion in world, January.

Wells, D., Laible, G., Tucker, F., Miller, A., Oliver, J., Xiang, T., Forsyth, J., Berg, M., Tervit, H., Oback, B., 2003. Coordination between donor cell type and cell cycle stage improves nuclear cloning efficiency in cattle. Therio., 59, 45-59.

Wells, D.N., Forsyth, J.T., Mc Millan, V., Oback, B., 2004. Review: The health of somatic cell cloned cattle and their offspring. Clon. Stem Cell., 6, 101-110.



How to Cite

Tadesse, T. ., & Bedada, H. . (2018). Review on the major challenges and difficulties of farm animal cloning. Scientific Journal of Zoology, 7(1), 82-87. Retrieved from



Review Article