| Title |
Biological characterization and pluripotent identification of ovine amniotic fluid stem cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Methods in Cell Science, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10616-017-0115-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wenhua Pei, Tengfei Lu, Kunfu Wang, Meng Ji, Shuang Zhang, Fenghao Chen, Lu Li, Xiangchen Li, Weijun Guan |
| Abstract |
Mesenchymal stem cells derived from amniotic fluid have become one of the most potential stem cell source for cell-based therapy for the reason they can be harvested at low cost and without ethical problems. Here, we obtained amniotic fluid stem cells (AFSCs) from ovine amniotic fluid and studied the expansion capacity, cell markers expression, karyotype, and multilineage differentiation ability. In our work, AFSCs were subcultured to passage 62. The cell markers, CD29, CD44, CD73 and OCT4 which analyzed by RT-PCR were positive; CD44, CD73, CD90, CD105, NANOG, OCT4 analyzed by immunofluorescence and flow cytometry were also positive. The growth curves of different passages were all typically sigmoidal. The different passages cells took on a normal karyotype. In addition, AFSCs were successfully induced to differentiate into adipocytes, osteoblasts and chondrocytes. The results suggested that the AFSCs isolated from ovine maintained normal biological characteristics and their multilineage differentiation potential provides many potential applications in cell-based therapies and tissue engineering. |
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 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 36% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 27% |
| Researcher | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 2 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 2 | 18% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 9% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 March 2018.
All research outputs
#20,014,336
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Methods in Cell Science
#842
of 1,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,631
of 347,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in Cell Science
#8
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,026 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 347,160 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.