ArticleCellular reprogramming2010
Porcine skin-derived progenitor (SKP) spheres and neurospheres: Distinct "stemness" identified by microarray analysis.
Article in Cellular reprogramming, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Therapeutic mechanism of hederagenin, an active component inNan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2025Article
- Sonic hedgehog signalling regulates the self-renewal and proliferation of skin-derived precursor cells in mice.Cell proliferation · 2018Article
- Locus-specific DNA methylation reprogramming during early porcine embryogenesis.Biology of reproduction · 2013Article
- The in vivo developmental potential of porcine skin-derived progenitors and neural stem cells.Stem cells and development · 2012Article
- The multi-potentiality of skin-derived stem cells in pigs.Theriogenology · 2011Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Skin-derived progenitors (SKP) are neural crest derived and can generate neural and mesodermal progeny in vitro, corresponding to the multipotency of neural crest stem cells. Likewise, neural stem/progenitor cells (displaying as neurospheres) have the capacity of self-renewing, and can produce most phenotypes in the nervous system. Both form spheres when cultured with epidermal growth factor (EGF) and basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF). Although the "stemness" of neural stem/progenitor cells has been extensively investigated, the molecular comparison of SKP spheres and neurospheres has not been elucidated. Here, SKP spheres and neurospheres from the same individual porcine fetuses were isolated with the same culture medium, and the multipotency was tested by in vitro differentiation assays. Microarray analysis was used to illustrate the "stemness" of SKP spheres and neurospheres. The upregulated genes that were in common in the SKP spheres and neurospheres are involved in ribosome, tight junction, gap junction, cell communication, calcium signaling, ErbB signaling, JAK-STAT signaling, MAPK signaling, etc. The differentially expressed genes between SKP spheres and neurospheres are mainly involved in ECM-receptor interaction and the transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-b) signaling pathway. Finally, treatment with leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) or MEK inhibitor results in a distinctive impact on the "stemness" and differentiation genes of SKP spheres and neurospheres. Thus, the cell-intrinsic genetic program may contribute to the innate "stemness" of SKP spheres and neurospheres in a similar local microenvironment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.