4.5 Article

Immunophenotypic, immunocytochemistry, ultrastructural, and cytogenetic characterization of mesenchymal stem cells from equine bone marrow

Journal

MICROSCOPY RESEARCH AND TECHNIQUE
Volume 76, Issue 6, Pages 618-624

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jemt.22208

Keywords

mesenchymal stem cells; isolation; differentiation; surface marker; horse

Funding

  1. FAPESP [2009/51431-6]
  2. Fundunesp [Proc.00571/09]
  3. CNPQ [Proc. 481350/2009-8]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to isolate, culture, and characterize mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) from horse bone marrow (BM) using the techniques of flow cytometry, immunocytochemistry, cytogenetics, and electron microscopy. Immunophenotypic analysis revealed the presence of MSCs with high expression of the CD90 marker, lower expression of the CD44 marker, and absent expression of the CD34 marker. In assays of differentiation, the positive response to osteogenic (OST), chondrogenic (CDG), and adipogenic (ADP) differentiation signals was observed and characterized by deposition of calcium-rich extracellular matrix (OST), proteoglycans and collagen II (CDG) and intracellular deposition of fat drops (ADP). In immunocytochemical characterization, MSCs were immunopositive for CD44, vimentin, and PCNA, and they were negative for CD13. In the ultrastructural analysis of MSCs, the most outstanding characteristic was the presence of rough endoplasmic reticulum with very dilated cisterns filled with a low electrodensity material. Additionally, MSCs had normal karyotypes (2n=64) as evidenced by cytogenetic analysis, and aneuploidy in metaphase was not observed. The protocols for isolating, culturing, and characterizing equine MSCs used in this study were shown to be appropriate for the production of a cell population with a good potential for differentiation and without aneuploidy that can be used to study future cellular therapies. Microsc. Res. Tech. 76:618624, 2013. (c) 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available