ArticleScientific reports2018
A Comparative Assessment of Human and Chimpanzee iPSC-derived Cardiomyocytes with Primary Heart Tissues.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 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
51 citing papers in PubMed, 76 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Developmental signaling reveals functionally enriched human-specific gene regulation in telencephalic progenitors.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- CellBouncer, a unified toolkit for single-cell demultiplexing and ambient RNA analysis, reveals hominid mitochondrial incompatibilities.Cell genomics · 2026Article
- Evolution of CTCF binding sites in the human genome.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- CrossFilt: a cross-species filtering tool that eliminates alignment bias in comparative genomics studies of primates.Genome biology · 2026Article
- Discovery of novel biomarkers associated with myocardial fibrosis in chimpanzees (Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Generation and transcriptome profiling of bonobo induced pluripotent stem cells using stealth RNA vectors: a tripartite comparative study with humans and chimpanzees.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Interspecies Organoids Reveal Human-Specific Molecular Features of Dopaminergic Neuron Development and Vulnerability.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Hybrid exons evolved by coupling transcription initiation and splicing at the nucleotide level.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- Inferring DNA methylation in non-skeletal tissues of ancient specimens.Nature ecology & evolution · 2025Article
- Biological basis of critical illness subclasses: from the bedside to the bench and back again.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Review
- The modern human aryl hydrocarbon receptor is more active when ancestralized by genome editing.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Cell-type-specificeLife · 2024Article
- Astrocytes Drive Divergent Metabolic Gene Expression in Humans and Chimpanzees.Genome biology and evolution · 2024Article
- The evolution of aging and lifespan.Trends in genetics : TIG · 2023Review
- Human-specific genetics: new tools to explore the molecular and cellular basis of human evolution.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2023Review
- The relationship between regulatory changes in cis and trans and the evolution of gene expression in humans and chimpanzees.Genome biology · 2023Article
- Airway stem cell reconstitution by the transplantation of primary or pluripotent stem cell-derived basal cells.Cell stem cell · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Comparative genomic studies in primates have the potential to reveal the genetic and mechanistic basis for human specific traits. These studies may also help us better understand inter-species phenotypic differences that are clinically relevant. Unfortunately, the obvious limitation on sample collection and experimentation in humans and non-human apes severely restrict our ability to perform dynamic comparative studies in primates. Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), and their corresponding differentiated cells, may provide a suitable alternative system for dynamic comparative studies. Yet, to effectively use iPSCs and differentiated cells for comparative studies, one must characterize the extent to which these systems faithfully represent biological processes in primary tissues. To do so, we compared gene expression data from primary adult heart tissue and iPSC-derived cardiomyocytes from multiple human and chimpanzee individuals. We determined that gene expression in cultured cardiomyocytes from both human and chimpanzee is most similar to that of adult hearts compared to other adult tissues. Using a comparative framework, we found that 50% of gene regulatory differences between human and chimpanzee hearts are also observed between species in cultured cardiomyocytes; conversely, inter-species regulatory differences seen in cardiomyocytes are found significantly more often in hearts than in other primary tissues. Our work provides a detailed description of the utility and limitation of differentiated cardiomyocytes as a system for comparative functional genomic studies in primates.
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.