ArticleCytotechnology2019
Class A scavenger receptor expression and function in eight novel tadpole cell lines from the green frog (Lithobates clamitans) and the wood frog (Lithobates sylvatica).
Article in Cytotechnology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cytotoxicity of the field lampricide 3-trifluoromethyl-4-nitrophenol (TFM) in tadpole cell lines from North American frogs.In vitro cellular & developmental biology. Animal · 2023Article
- 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A total of eight tadpole cell lines were established from green frogs (Lithobates clamitans) and wood frogs (Lithobates sylvatica). The five green frog cell lines were named GreenTad-HF1, GreenTad-HF2, GreenTad-HF3, GreenTad-HE4, and GreenTad-gill. The three wood frog cell lines were named WoodTad-HE1, WoodTad-Bone, and WoodTad-rpe. DNA barcoding confirmed the cell lines to be from the correct species and the growth characteristics (optimal temperature and FBS requirement) were elucidated. In order to begin studying the innate immune capacity for each cell line, class A scavenger receptor expression and function were next explored. All cell lines expressed genes for at least 3 of the 5 class A scavenger receptor (SR-A) family members, but the gene expression patterns varied between cell lines. MARCO was only expressed in GreenTad-HE4 and WoodTad-Bone, while only GreenTad-HF3 did not express SCARA5 and only WoodTad-rpe did not express SR-AI. Acetylated low density lipoprotein (AcLDL) is a well-defined ligand for SR-As and WoodTad-rpe was the only cell line to which it was unable to bind. In the other seven tadpole cell lines, the SR-A competitive ligands (dextran sulfate, fucoidan, polyinosinic acid) blocked AcLDL binding whereas the SR-A non-competitive ligand counterparts (chondroitin sulfate, fetuin, polycytidylic acid, respectively) did not. Overall, these new eight cell lines can become important tools in the study of innate immunity in general and SR-A functions in particular in green frogs and wood frogs.
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.