ReviewStem cell reviews and reports2020
The Progresses of Spermatogonial Stem Cells Sorting Using Fluorescence-Activated Cell Sorting.
Review in Stem cell reviews and reports, 2020. 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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploration of Novel Markers in Tan Sheep Spermatogenesis.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Systematic screening and dynamic profiling of germline regulatory pathways and spermatogonial surface markers in a bivalve mollusc.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Article
- Application of single cell sequencing technology in ovarian cancer research (review).Functional & integrative genomics · 2024Review
- Sorting Technology for Mesenchymal Stem Cells from a Single Tissue Source.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2024Review
- Modeling mammalian spermatogonial differentiation and meiotic initiation in vitro.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2022Article
- Progress in germline stem cell transplantation in mammals and the potential usage.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2022Review
- Current scenario and challenges ahead in application of spermatogonial stem cell technology in livestock.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Review
- Is It Possible to Treat Infertility with Stem Cells?Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2021Review
- Contributions of Flow Cytometry to the Molecular Study of Spermatogenesis in Mammals.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- The effect of regulating the Wnt signaling pathway on the proliferation and differentiation of spermatogonial stem cells.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, the research on stem cells has been more and more in-depth, and many achievements have been made in application. However, due to the small number of spermatogonial stem cells (SSCs) and deficiency of efficient markers, it is difficult to obtain very pure SSCs, which results in the research on them being hindered. In fact, many methods have been developed to isolate and purify SSCs, but these methods have their shortcomings. Fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS), as a method to enrich SSCs with the help of specific surface markers, has the characteristics of high efficiency and accuracy in enrichment of SSCs, thus it is widely accepted as an effective method for purification of SSCs. This review summarizes the recent studies on the application of FACS in SSCs, and introduces some commonly used markers of effective SSCs sorting, aiming to further optimize the FACS sorting method for SSCs, so as to promote the research of germline stem cells and provide new ideas for the research of reproductive biology.
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.