Literature DB >> 23672680

Defining the diversity of phenotypic respecification using multiple cell lines and reprogramming regimens.

Bradly Alicea1, Shashanka Murthy, Sarah A Keaton, Peter Cobbett, Jose B Cibelli, Steven T Suhr.   

Abstract

To better understand the basis of variation in cellular reprogramming, we performed experiments with two primary objectives: first, to determine the degree of difference, if any, in reprogramming efficiency among cells lines of a similar type after accounting for technical variables, and second, to compare the efficiency of conversion of multiple similar cell lines to two separate reprogramming regimens-induced neurons and induced skeletal muscle. Using two reprogramming regimens, it could be determined whether converted cells are likely derived from a distinct subpopulation that is generally susceptible to reprogramming or are derived from cells with an independent capacity for respecification to a given phenotype. Our results indicated that when technical components of the reprogramming regimen were accounted for, reprogramming efficiency was reproducible within a given primary fibroblast line but varied dramatically between lines. The disparity in reprogramming efficiency between lines was of sufficient magnitude to account for some discrepancies in published results. We also found that the efficiency of conversion to one phenotype was not predictive of reprogramming to the alternate phenotype, suggesting that the capacity for reprogramming does not arise from a specific subpopulation with a generally "weak grip" on cellular identity. Our findings suggest that parallel testing of multiple cell lines from several sources may be needed to accurately assess the efficiency of direct reprogramming procedures, and that testing a larger number of fibroblast lines--even lines with similar origins--is likely the most direct means of improving reprogramming efficiency.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23672680      PMCID: PMC3780423          DOI: 10.1089/scd.2013.0040

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stem Cells Dev        ISSN: 1547-3287            Impact factor:   3.272


  44 in total

1.  Labor pains of new technology: direct cardiac reprogramming.

Authors:  Yoshinori Yoshida; Shinya Yamanaka
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  2012-06-22       Impact factor: 17.367

2.  Generation of leukemia inhibitory factor and basic fibroblast growth factor-dependent induced pluripotent stem cells from canine adult somatic cells.

Authors:  Jiesi Luo; Steven T Suhr; Eun Ah Chang; Kai Wang; Pablo J Ross; Laura L Nelson; Patrick J Venta; Jason G Knott; Jose B Cibelli
Journal:  Stem Cells Dev       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 3.272

3.  Somatic cell nuclear transfer in zebrafish.

Authors:  Kannika Siripattarapravat; Boonya Pinmee; Patrick J Venta; Chia-Cheng Chang; Jose B Cibelli
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2009-08-30       Impact factor: 28.547

4.  Expression of a single transfected cDNA converts fibroblasts to myoblasts.

Authors:  R L Davis; H Weintraub; A B Lassar
Journal:  Cell       Date:  1987-12-24       Impact factor: 41.582

5.  Improved patch-clamp techniques for high-resolution current recording from cells and cell-free membrane patches.

Authors:  O P Hamill; A Marty; E Neher; B Sakmann; F J Sigworth
Journal:  Pflugers Arch       Date:  1981-08       Impact factor: 3.657

6.  Activity-dependent gene regulation in conditionally-immortalized muscle precursor cell lines.

Authors:  Peter C D Macpherson; Steven T Suhr; Daniel Goldman
Journal:  J Cell Biochem       Date:  2004-03-01       Impact factor: 4.429

7.  Inefficient reprogramming of fibroblasts into cardiomyocytes using Gata4, Mef2c, and Tbx5.

Authors:  Jenny X Chen; Markus Krane; Marcus-Andre Deutsch; Li Wang; Moshe Rav-Acha; Serge Gregoire; Marc C Engels; Kuppusamy Rajarajan; Ravi Karra; E Dale Abel; Joe C Wu; David Milan; Sean M Wu
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  2012-05-10       Impact factor: 17.367

8.  Transfection of a DNA locus that mediates the conversion of 10T1/2 fibroblasts to myoblasts.

Authors:  A B Lassar; B M Paterson; H Weintraub
Journal:  Cell       Date:  1986-12-05       Impact factor: 41.582

9.  A novel human muscle factor related to but distinct from MyoD1 induces myogenic conversion in 10T1/2 fibroblasts.

Authors:  T Braun; G Buschhausen-Denker; E Bober; E Tannich; H H Arnold
Journal:  EMBO J       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 11.598

10.  Heart repair by reprogramming non-myocytes with cardiac transcription factors.

Authors:  Kunhua Song; Young-Jae Nam; Xiang Luo; Xiaoxia Qi; Wei Tan; Guo N Huang; Asha Acharya; Christopher L Smith; Michelle D Tallquist; Eric G Neilson; Joseph A Hill; Rhonda Bassel-Duby; Eric N Olson
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-05-13       Impact factor: 49.962

View more
  2 in total

1.  Lead exposure disrupts global DNA methylation in human embryonic stem cells and alters their neuronal differentiation.

Authors:  Marie-Claude Senut; Arko Sen; Pablo Cingolani; Asra Shaik; Susan J Land; Douglas M Ruden
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2014-02-11       Impact factor: 4.849

2.  Data-Theoretical Synthesis of the Early Developmental Process.

Authors:  Bradly Alicea; Richard Gordon; Thomas E Portegys
Journal:  Neuroinformatics       Date:  2021-01-15
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.