↓ Skip to main content

Reprogramming resistant genes: in-depth comparison of gene expressions among iPS, ES, and somatic cells

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
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
Reprogramming resistant genes: in-depth comparison of gene expressions among iPS, ES, and somatic cells
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2013.00007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalia Polouliakh

Abstract

Transcription factor-based reprogramming reverts adult cells to an embryonic state, yielding potential for generating different tissue types. However, recent reports indicated the substantial differences in pattern of gene expression between induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells and embryonic stem cells (ESC). In this study, we compare gene expression signatures of different iPS and ES cell lines and relate expression profiles of differently expressed genes to their expression status in somatic cells. As a result, we discovered that genes resistant to reprogramming comprise two major clusters, which are reprogramming dependent "Induced Genes" and somatic origin "Inherited Genes," both exhibiting preferences in methylation marks. Closer look into the Induced Genes by means of the transcription regulation analysis predicted several groups of genes with various roles in reprogramming and transcription factor DNA binding model. We believe that our results are a helpful source for biologists for further improvement of iPS cell technology.

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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
Switzerland 1 2%
Portugal 1 2%
Argentina 1 2%
South Africa 1 2%
Unknown 42 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 27%
Researcher 12 25%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 13%
Professor 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 8%
Materials Science 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 9 19%
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 30 January 2013.
All research outputs
#20,180,477
of 22,694,633 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#9,285
of 13,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,695
of 280,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#243
of 398 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,694,633 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,495 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 280,671 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 398 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.