| Title |
Expression profile of long non-coding RNAs during the differentiation of human umbilical cord derived mesenchymal stem cells into cardiomyocyte-like cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Methods in Cell Science, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10616-018-0217-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhong-bao Ruan, Ge-cai Chen, Yin Ren, Li Zhu |
| Abstract |
We aimed to investigate the differentially expressed long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) during the differentiation of human umbilical cord derived mesenchymal stem cells (hUCMSCs) into cardiomyocyte-like cells induced by 5-aza. hUCMSCs were isolated and purified from umbilical cords. After treated with 10 μmol/L 5-Aza for 24 h, hUCMSCs wereas continued to be cultured for 14 days. Comparison of cardiac specific genes and the expression profile of lncRNAs on hUCMSCs between day 14 and day 0 was performed using immunofluorescence staining, immunohistochemistry, Western blot assay, RT-PCR and lncRNA microarray. Results show that well-organized sarcomeric structure and more cTnI and MLC2a staining were seen in hUCMSCs of day 14 after 5-aza-induced compared to those in day 0. Expression of Desmin, Nkx2.5, cTnI and MLC2a of hUCMSCs was much higher on day 14 compared with day 0 (P < 0.01). 41 differentially expressed lncRNAs were found on day 14 hUCMSCs compared those of day 0 were identified. Among them, 25 upregulated and 16 downregulated. Four out of the five upregulated lncRNAs (P = 0.00035, 0.014, 0.016 and 0.005 for uc010vei.1, X72487, BC064139, AK092074) and four out of the five downregulated lncRNAs (P = 0.038, 0.0014, 0.00026 and 0.004 for X85157, uc007keu.1, AK309872, NR_029399) showed significantly different expressions in further validation using RT-PCR. Our results illustrated that there was a dysregulation of the lncRNA profile during the differentiation of hUCMSCs into cardiomyocyte-like cells, which will provide the foundation for further study of the biological functions and mechanism of lncRNAs in the differentiation of hUCMSCs into cardiomyocyte-like cells. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 5 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 60% |
| Other | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 40% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
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 16 April 2018.
All research outputs
#17,534,407
of 25,707,225 outputs
Outputs from Methods in Cell Science
#790
of 1,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,668
of 344,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in Cell Science
#5
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,707,225 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,032 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 344,286 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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 53% of its contemporaries.