| Title |
MULTICOLOR KARYOTYPE ANALYSES OF MOUSE EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Animal, January 2005
|
| DOI | 10.1290/990771.1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
JIANLI GUO, ANNA JAUCH, HOLTGREVE-GREZ HEIDI, BRIGITTE SCHOELL, DOROTHEE ERZ, MARTINA SCHRANK, JOHANNES W. G. JANSSEN |
| Abstract |
The manipulation of embryonic stem (ES) cells to introduce directional genetic changes into the genome of mice has become an important tool in biomedical research. Monitoring of cell morphology before and after DNA manipulation and special culture conditions are a prerequisite to preserve the pluripotent properties of ES cells and thus their ability to generate chimera and effective germline transmission (GLT). It has been reported that prolonged cell culturing may affect the diploid chromosomal composition of cells and therefore the percentage of chimerism and GLT. Herein, we report multicolor-fluorescence in situ hybridization (M-FISH) analysis of four different ES cell lines/clones. Although the morphology of all four ES cell lines/clones appeared normal and all four expressed the early markers Oct-3/4 and Nanog, two cell lines presented consistent numerical and structural chromosome aberrations. We demonstrate that M-FISH is a sensitive and accurate method for a comprehensive karyotype analysis of ES cells and may minimize time, costs, and disappointments due to inadequate ES cell sources. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Peru | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 32% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 19% |
| Unknown | 3 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 35% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 03 July 2014.
All research outputs
#1,937,281
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Animal
#8
of 853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,447
of 151,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Animal
#1
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 853 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 151,230 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.