↓ Skip to main content

LEUKEMIA INHIBITORY FACTOR AS AN ANTI-APOPTOTIC MITOGEN FOR PLURIPOTENT MOUSE EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS IN A SERUM-FREE MEDIUM WITHOUT FEEDER CELLS

Overview of attention for article published in In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Animal, January 2005
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
LEUKEMIA INHIBITORY FACTOR AS AN ANTI-APOPTOTIC MITOGEN FOR PLURIPOTENT MOUSE EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS IN A SERUM-FREE MEDIUM WITHOUT FEEDER CELLS
Published in
In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Animal, January 2005
DOI 10.1290/0502010.1
Pubmed ID
Authors

MIHO FURUE, TETSUJI OKAMOTO, YOHEI HAYASHI, HITOSHI OKOCHI, MANABU FUJIMOTO, YASUFUMI MYOISHI, TAKANORI ABE, KIYOSHI OHNUMA, GORDON H. SATO, MAKOTO ASASHIMA, J. DENRY SATO

Abstract

We have developed a serum-free medium, designated ESF7, in which leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) clearly stimulated murine embryonic stem (ES) cell proliferation accompanied by increased expression of nanog and Rex-1 and decreased FGF-5 expression. These effects were dependent on the concentration of LIF. The ES cells maintained in ESF7 medium for more than 2 yr retained an undifferentiated phenotype, as manifested by the expression of the transcription factor Oct-3/4, the stem cell marker SSEA-1, and alkaline phosphatase. Withdrawal of LIF from ESF7 medium resulted in ES cell apoptosis. Addition of serum to ESF7 medium promoted ES cell differentiation. Addition of BMP4 promoted ES cell differentiation into simple epithelial-like cells. In contrast, FGF-2 promoted ES cell differentiation into neuronal and glial-like cells. Under serum-free culture conditions, LIF was sufficient to stimulate cell proliferation, it inhibited cell differentiation, and it maintained self-renewal of ES cells. Because this simple serum-free adherent monoculture system supports the long-term propagation of pluripotent ES cells in vitro, it will allow the elucidation of ES cell responses to growth factors under defined conditions.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 54 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 20%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 16%
Student > Master 7 13%
Other 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 5 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 11%
Neuroscience 1 2%
Chemistry 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 October 2016.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Animal
#176
of 853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,859
of 151,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age from In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Animal
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 853 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 151,221 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.