ArticlePloS one2022
Scalable in vitro production of defined mouse erythroblasts.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Loop extrusion by cohesin plays a role in enhancer-activated gene expression early in differentiation.Nature communications · 2026Article
- A functional overlap between actively transcribed genes and chromatin insulator elements.The EMBO journal · 2026Article
- Facilitators may represent a new class of regulatory elements.Current opinion in genetics & development · 2026Review
- Active regulatory elements recruit cohesin to establish cell specific chromatin domains.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The α-globin super-enhancer acts in an orientation-dependent manner.Nature communications · 2025Article
- The characteristics of CTCF binding sequences contribute to enhancer blocking activity.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- Super-enhancers include classical enhancers and facilitators to fully activate gene expression.Cell · 2023Article
- On-microscope staging of live cells reveals changes in the dynamics of transcriptional bursting during differentiation.Nature communications · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mouse embryonic stem cells (mESCs) can be manipulated in vitro to recapitulate the process of erythropoiesis, during which multipotent cells undergo lineage specification, differentiation and maturation to produce erythroid cells. Although useful for identifying specific progenitors and precursors, this system has not been fully exploited as a source of cells to analyse erythropoiesis. Here, we establish a protocol in which characterised erythroblasts can be isolated in a scalable manner from differentiated embryoid bodies (EBs). Using transcriptional and epigenetic analysis, we demonstrate that this system faithfully recapitulates normal primitive erythropoiesis and fully reproduces the effects of natural and engineered mutations seen in primary cells obtained from mouse models. We anticipate this system to be of great value in reducing the time and costs of generating and maintaining mouse lines in a number of research scenarios.
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.