↓ Skip to main content

RGB marking facilitates multicolor clonal cell tracking

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Medicine, March 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
131 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
295 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
RGB marking facilitates multicolor clonal cell tracking
Published in
Nature Medicine, March 2011
DOI 10.1038/nm.2338
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristoffer Weber, Michael Thomaschewski, Michael Warlich, Tassilo Volz, Kerstin Cornils, Birte Niebuhr, Maike Täger, Marc Lütgehetmann, Jörg-Matthias Pollok, Carol Stocking, Maura Dandri, Daniel Benten, Boris Fehse

Abstract

We simultaneously transduced cells with three lentiviral gene ontology (LeGO) vectors encoding red, green or blue fluorescent proteins. Individual cells were thereby marked by different combinations of inserted vectors, resulting in the generation of numerous mixed colors, a principle we named red-green-blue (RGB) marking. We show that lentiviral vector-mediated RGB marking remained stable after cell division, thus facilitating the analysis of clonal cell fates in vitro and in vivo. Particularly, we provide evidence that RGB marking allows assessment of clonality after regeneration of injured livers by transplanted primary hepatocytes. We also used RGB vectors to mark hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells that generated colored spleen colonies. Finally, based on limiting-dilution and serial transplantation assays with tumor cells, we found that clonal tumor cells retained their specific color-code over extensive periods of time. We conclude that RGB marking represents a useful tool for cell clonality studies in tissue regeneration and pathology.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 295 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 5 2%
Germany 4 1%
United States 3 1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 278 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 84 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 77 26%
Student > Master 21 7%
Student > Bachelor 21 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 19 6%
Other 45 15%
Unknown 28 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 137 46%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 46 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 32 11%
Neuroscience 12 4%
Physics and Astronomy 8 3%
Other 26 9%
Unknown 34 12%
Attention Score in Context

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 28 October 2011.
All research outputs
#15,237,301
of 22,655,397 outputs
Outputs from Nature Medicine
#7,873
of 8,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,678
of 108,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Medicine
#103
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,655,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,452 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 96.2. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 108,610 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 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.