4.5 Article

Definitive Endoderm Formation from Plucked Human Hair-Derived Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells and SK Channel Regulation

期刊

STEM CELLS INTERNATIONAL
卷 2013, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2013/360573

关键词

-

资金

  1. Medical Faculty of Ulm University (Bausteinprogramm) [L. SBR.0011]
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [KL 2544/1-1, SL BO1718/4-1]
  3. German Foundation for Heart Research [F/34/11]
  4. Boehringer-Ingelheim BIU [N5, C1]
  5. virtual Helmholtz-Institute
  6. Else-Kroner-Fresenius-Stiftung [2011_ A200]
  7. Baden-Wurttemberg Stiftung
  8. Eliteprogramme for Postdocs

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pluripotent stem cells present an extraordinary powerful tool to investigate embryonic development in humans. Essentially, they provide a unique platform for dissecting the distinct mechanisms underlying pluripotency and subsequent lineage commitment. Modest information currently exists about the expression and the role of ion channels during human embryogenesis, organ development, and cell fate determination. Of note, small and intermediate conductance, calcium-activated potassium channels have been reported to modify stem cell behaviour and differentiation. These channels are broadly expressed throughout human tissues and are involved in various cellular processes, such as the after-hyperpolarization in excitable cells, and also in differentiation processes. To this end, human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) generated from plucked human hair keratinocytes have been exploited in vitro to recapitulate endoderm formation and, concomitantly, used to map the expression of the SK channel (SKCa) subtypes over time. Thus, we report the successful generation of definitive endoderm from hiPSCs of ectodermal origin using a highly reproducible and robust differentiation system. Furthermore, we provide the first evidence that SKCas subtypes are dynamically regulated in the transition from a pluripotent stem cell to a more lineage restricted, endodermal progeny.

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

4.5
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