4.6 Article

No shortcuts to pig embryonic stem cells

期刊

THERIOGENOLOGY
卷 74, 期 4, 页码 544-550

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.04.020

关键词

Pig; Embryo; Stem cells

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The establishment of embryonic stem cell (ESC) lines in domestic species could have great impact in the agricultural as well as in the biomedical field. In particular, derivation of pig ESC would find important applications aimed at improving health and production traits of this species through genetic engineering. Similarly, the immunological, morphological, physiological, and functional similarities to the human make the pig a very effective and suitable animal model for biomedical studies and pre-clinical trials. While proven blastocyst-derived mouse and human ESC lines have been established, no validated porcine ESC (pESC) lines are available. In the present manuscript we briefly discuss some of the factors that make the establishment of ESC lines in the pig, and in animal species other than mouse and human, a very slow process. The paucity of information related to morphology, pluripotency markers, differentiation capability hampers a thorough evaluation of the validity of putative lines. These difficulties are further increased by the lack of reliable antibodies, reagents, and in vitro culture systems that could ensure reliable results in the pig and allow for the screening and long-term maintenance of pESC. Data from the literature suggest that similar regulatory pathways are likely to exist among different species. Coupling of these pathways with their distinct expression patterns, the relative concentrations of pluripotency-related molecules, and timing of embryo development, along with supportive micro-environmental conditions, would appear to vary in a species-specific manner. We feel that the understanding of these subtle but meaningful diversities may provide beneficial information about the isolation of genuine porcine embryonic stem cells. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据