4.7 Article

Formation of Well-defined Embryoid Bodies from Dissociated Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells using Microfabricated Cell-repellent Microwell Arrays

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 4, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep07402

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute for Health of USA (NIH) [NS050243]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology of China [2012CB966300, 2014CB964600]
  3. National Science Foundation (NSF [1055922, 0748129]
  4. William H. Goodwin Endowment Funds
  5. Directorate For Engineering
  6. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys [1346387, 1312970] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A simple, scalable, and reproducible technology that allows direct formation of large numbers of homogeneous and synchronized embryoid bodies (EBs) of defined sizes from dissociated human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) was developed. Non-cell-adhesive hydrogels were used to create round-bottom microwells to host dissociated hiPSCs. No Rho-associated kinase inhibitor (ROCK-i), or centrifugation was needed and the side effects of ROCK-i can be avoided. The key requirement for the successful EB formation in addition to the non-cell-adhesive round-bottom microwells is the input cell density per microwell. Too few or too many cells loaded into the microwells will compromise the EB formation process. In parallel, we have tested our microwell-based system for homogeneous hEB formation from dissociated human embryonic stem cells (hESCs). Successful production of homogeneous hEBs from dissociated hESCs in the absence of ROCK-i and centrifugation was achieved within an optimal range of input cell density per microwell. Both the hiPSC- and hESC-derived hEBs expressed key proteins characteristic of all the three developmental germ layers, confirming their EB identity. This novel EB production technology may represent a versatile platform for the production of homogeneous EBs from dissociated human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs).

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

4.7
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