ArticleBMC genomics2015
Comparison of American mink embryonic stem and induced pluripotent stem cell transcriptomes.
Article in BMC genomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pluripotent Stem Cells of Order Carnivora: Technical Perspective.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Establishment of the Primary Avian Gonadal Somatic Cell Lines for Cytogenetic Studies.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
- Molecular Regulation of Paused Pluripotency in Early Mammalian Embryos and Stem Cells.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Review
- Genetic Signatures of Evolution of the Pluripotency Gene Regulating Network across Mammals.Genome biology and evolution · 2020Article
- Induced pluripotent stem cells throughout the animal kingdom: Availability and applications.World journal of stem cells · 2019Review
- 3D organization of chicken genome demonstrates evolutionary conservation of topologically associated domains and highlights unique architecture of erythrocytes' chromatin.Nucleic acids research · 2019Article
- Immortalized murine fibroblast cell lines are refractory to reprogramming to pluripotent state.Oncotarget · 2018Article
- Alternative dominance of the parental genomes in hybrid cells generated through the fusion of mouse embryonic stem cells with fibroblasts.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Deterministic versus stochastic model of reprogramming: new evidence from cellular barcoding technique.Open biology · 2017Article
- The papers presented at 7th Young Scientists School "Systems Biology and Bioinformatics" (SBB'15): Introductory Note. Introduction.BMC genetics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecently fibroblasts of many mammalian species have been reprogrammed to pluripotent state using overexpression of several transcription factors. This technology allows production of induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells with properties similar to embryonic stem (ES) cells. The completeness of reprogramming process is well studied in such species as mouse and human but there is not enough data on other species. We produced American mink (Neovison vison) ES and iPS cells and compared these cells using transcriptome analysis.
resultsWe report the generation of 10 mink ES and 22 iPS cell lines. The majority of the analyzed cell lines had normal diploid chromosome number. The only ES cell line with XX chromosome set had both X-chromosomes in active state that is characteristic of pluripotent cells. The pluripotency of ES and iPS cell lines was confirmed by formation of teratomas with cell types representing all three germ layers. Transcriptome analysis of mink embryonic fibroblasts (EF), two ES and two iPS cell lines allowed us to identify 11831 assembled contigs which were annotated. These led to a number of 6891 unique genes. Of these 3201 were differentially expressed between mink EF and ES cells. We analyzed expression levels of these genes in iPS cell lines. This allowed us to show that 80% of genes were correctly reprogrammed in iPS cells, whereas approximately 6% had an intermediate expression pattern, about 7% were not reprogrammed and about 5% had a "novel" expression pattern. We observed expression of pluripotency marker genes such as Oct4, Sox2 and Rex1 in ES and iPS cell lines with notable exception of Nanog.
conclusionsWe had produced and characterized American mink ES and iPS cells. These cells were pluripotent by a number of criteria and iPS cells exhibited effective reprogramming. Interestingly, we had showed lack of Nanog expression and consider it as a species-specific feature.
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.