ArticlePloS one2011
Effect of different factors on proliferation of antler cells, cultured in vitro.
Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- TheBiology · 2025Article
- Phenotypic differences in white-tailed deer antlerogenic progenitor cells and marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells.Tissue engineering. Part A · 2014Article
- Aqueous extract of red deer antler promotes hair growth by regulating the hair cycle and cell proliferation in hair follicles.TheScientificWorldJournal · 2014Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antlers as a potential model for bone growth and development have become an object of rising interest. To elucidate processes explaining how antler growth is regulated, in vitro cultures have been established. However, until now, there has been no standard method to cultivate antler cells and in vitro results are often opposite to those reported in vivo. In addition, many factors which are often not taken into account under in vitro conditions may play an important role in the development of antler cells. In this study we investigated the effects of the antler growth stage, the male individuality, passaged versus primary cultures and the effect of foetal calf serum concentrations on proliferative potential of mixed antler cell cultures in vitro, derived from regenerating antlers of red deer males (Cervus elaphus). The proliferation potential of antler cells was measured by incorporation of (3)H thymidine. Our results demonstrate that there is no significant effect of the antler growth stage, whereas male individuality and all other examined factors significantly affected antler cell proliferation. Furthermore, our results suggest that primary cultures may better represent in vivo conditions and processes occurring in regenerating antlers. In conclusion, before all main factors affecting antler cell proliferation in vitro will be satisfactorily investigated, results of in vitro studies focused on hormonal regulation of antler growth should be taken with extreme caution.
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.