| Title |
Identifying Candidate Reprogramming Genes in Mouse Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Stem Cell Reviews and Reports, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12015-016-9704-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fang Gao, Jingyu Li, Heng Zhang, Xu Yang, Tiezhu An |
| Abstract |
Factor-based induced reprogramming approaches have tremendous potential for human regenerative medicine, but the efficiencies of these approaches are still low. In this study, we analyzed the global transcriptional profiles of mouse induced pluripotent stem cells (miPSCs) and mouse embryonic stem cells (mESCs) from seven different labs and present here the first successful clustering according to cell type, not by lab of origin. We identified 2131 different expression genes (DEs) as candidate pluripotency-associated genes by comparing mESCs/miPSCs with somatic cells and 720 DEs between miPSCs and mESCs. Interestingly, there was a significant overlap between the two DE sets. Therefore, we defined the overlap DEs as "consensus DEs" including 313 miPSC-specific genes expressed at a higher level in miPSCs versus mESCs and 184 mESC-specific genes in total and reasoned that these may contribute to the differences in pluripotency between mESCs and miPSCs. A classification of "consensus DEs" according to their different expression levels between somatic cells and mESCs/miPSCs shows that 86% of the miPSC-specific genes are more highly expressed in somatic cells, while 73% of mESC-specific genes are highly expressed in mESCs/miPSCs, indicating that the miPSCs have not efficiently silenced the expression pattern of the somatic cells from which they are derived and failed to completely induce the genes with high expression levels in mESCs. We further revealed a strong correlation between oocyte-enriched factors and insufficiently induced mESC-specific genes and identified 11 hub genes via network analysis. In light of these findings, we postulated that these key hub genes might not only drive somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) reprogramming but also augment the efficiency and quality of miPSC reprogramming. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 12 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 42% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 25% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 25% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 8% |
| Engineering | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 January 2017.
All research outputs
#4,582,837
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Reviews and Reports
#167
of 1,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,455
of 421,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Reviews and Reports
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,035 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,519 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.