Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34401573›Full record

ReviewHeliyon2021

Alternative to FBS in animal cell culture - An overview and future perspective.

Karthikeyan Subbiahanadar Chelladurai, Jackson Durairaj Selvan Christyraj, Kamarajan Rajagopalan, Beryl Vedha Yesudhason, Saravanakumar Venkatachalam, Manikandan Mohan, Niranjan Chellathurai Vasantha, Johnson Retnaraj Samuel Selvan Christyraj

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heliyon, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 118 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
118citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
27.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

118 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 212 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

58 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Karthikeyan Subbiahanadar ChelladuraiRegeneration and Stem Cell Biology Lab, Centre for Molecular and Nanomedical Sciences, International Research Centre, Sathyabama Institute of Science & Technology, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India.
Jackson Durairaj Selvan ChristyrajRegeneration and Stem Cell Biology Lab, Centre for Molecular and Nanomedical Sciences, International Research Centre, Sathyabama Institute of Science & Technology, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India.
Kamarajan RajagopalanRegeneration and Stem Cell Biology Lab, Centre for Molecular and Nanomedical Sciences, International Research Centre, Sathyabama Institute of Science & Technology, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India.
Beryl Vedha YesudhasonRegeneration and Stem Cell Biology Lab, Centre for Molecular and Nanomedical Sciences, International Research Centre, Sathyabama Institute of Science & Technology, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India.
Saravanakumar VenkatachalamRegeneration and Stem Cell Biology Lab, Centre for Molecular and Nanomedical Sciences, International Research Centre, Sathyabama Institute of Science & Technology, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India.
Manikandan MohanPharmaceutical & Biomedical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, University of Georgia, Athens, USA.
Niranjan Chellathurai VasanthaRegeneration and Stem Cell Biology Lab, Centre for Molecular and Nanomedical Sciences, International Research Centre, Sathyabama Institute of Science & Technology, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India.
Johnson Retnaraj Samuel Selvan ChristyrajRegeneration and Stem Cell Biology Lab, Centre for Molecular and Nanomedical Sciences, International Research Centre, Sathyabama Institute of Science & Technology, Chennai, Tamilnadu, India.
Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology · INUniversity of Georgia · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fetal bovine serum (FBS) is a widely used growth supplement in the in vitro culturing of animal and human cells, tissues and organs, notably due to the occurrence of abundant micro- and macronutrients, along with growth factors. Over the years, increasing demand, high price, batch-to-batch variability in quality and composition, increasing ethical concerns lead to the search for an alternative to FBS. Several approaches have been suggested and employed in the past, but none is implemented as widely as FBS, and each supplement has its own disadvantages. In this review, we described the importance of FBS in cell culture, discussed the issues associated with FBS use and presented the efforts made in the recent past to reduce or replace FBS. The potential of four different alternative sources to FBS, namely, bovine ocular fluid, sericin protein, human platelet lysate and earthworm heat inactivated coelomic fluid was evaluated. In the end, we present the conceptual perspective using the Human Platelet Lysate (HPL) and earthworm Heat Inactivated Coelomic Fluid (HI-CF) combination to alternate FBS and its context in scientific and economic impacts.

Indexed as

Alternative to FBSAnimal cell cultureCoelomic fluidEarthwormFetal bovine serumHuman platelet lysate

Identifiers

PMID34401573
PMCPMC8349753
OpenAlexW3186162636

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.