↓ Skip to main content

Efficient Culturing and Genetic Manipulation of Human Pluripotent Stem Cells

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Efficient Culturing and Genetic Manipulation of Human Pluripotent Stem Cells
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0027495
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert T. Schinzel, Tim Ahfeldt, Frank H. Lau, Youn-Kyoung Lee, Alicia Cowley, Tony Shen, Derek Peters, David H. Lum, Chad A. Cowan

Abstract

Human pluripotent stem cells (hPSC) hold great promise as models for understanding disease and as a source of cells for transplantation therapies. However, the lack of simple, robust and efficient culture methods remains a significant obstacle for realizing the utility of hPSCs. Here we describe a platform for the culture of hPSCs that 1) allows for dissociation and replating of single cells, 2) significantly increases viability and replating efficiency, 3) improves freeze/thaw viability 4) improves cloning efficiency and 5) colony size variation. When combined with standard methodologies for genetic manipulation, we found that the enhanced culture platform allowed for lentiviral transduction rates of up to 95% and electroporation efficiencies of up to 25%, with a significant increase in the total number of antibiotic-selected colonies for screening for homologous recombination. We further demonstrated the utility of the enhanced culture platform by successfully targeting the ISL1 locus. We conclude that many of the difficulties associated with culturing and genetic manipulation of hPSCs can be addressed with optimized culture conditions, and we suggest that the use of the enhanced culture platform could greatly improve the ease of handling and general utility of hPSCs.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Mexico 1 2%
Romania 1 2%
Unknown 61 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 17%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Other 7 11%
Professor 5 8%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 9 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 15%
Chemical Engineering 2 3%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 8 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 19 December 2011.
All research outputs
#15,239,825
of 22,659,164 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#129,767
of 193,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,356
of 242,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,772
of 3,000 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,659,164 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 193,435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 242,419 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 3,000 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.