"Pluripotency markers" refers to specific biological indicators or characteristics that scientists use to identify or determine if a cell has the potential to develop into different types of cells or tissues in the body.
Full definition
(A) Expression
of pluripotency markers from iPSCs (HiPSC - 1 control) generated following retroviral transduction of unsorted HUF1 cells.
These data show that
pluripotency markers in the expanded clones are maintained at levels comparable to those in the parental line, ChiPSC18.
RT - PCR analysis of RNA samples from EBs on days 3, 6 and 9 revealed a gradual decrease in expression of
endogenous pluripotency markers such as Nanog, Rex1, Oct4 and Sox2 as compared to their expression in undifferentiated iPS cells (Figure 4B, upper panel).
Furthermore, data from RT - PCR analysis showed that transgenic 4 factors were completely silenced and endogenous
pluripotency markers Oct4, Sox2, Rex1 as well as Nanog were successfully activated (Figure 3C).
Whitehead Institute researchers have determined that the transcription factor Nanog, which plays a critical role in the self - renewal of embryonic stem cells, is expressed in a manner similar to
other pluripotency markers.
Individual, edited (CD81 knockout) hiPS cells were expanded into clonal lines and analyzed for expression of CD81 and three
pluripotency markers via flow cytometry using antibodies against CD81, Oct ‑ 4, TRA ‑ 1 ‑ 60, and SSEA - 4.
But Dppa5a is a well known
mESC pluripotency marker, and Ckb is known to be highly abundant in brain (NSC's are neural stem cells).
Control and gesicle - treated hiPS cells were assessed for AcGFP1 expression (green), labeled with an antibody specific to
pluripotency marker Oct ‑ 4, visualized with a fluorescent - labeled secondary antibody (red), and nuclear - labeled with DAPI (blue).
We also interrogated the population of sorted, CD81 - negative cells for the expression
of pluripotency markers (Figure 4, Panel B) and identified that successfully edited hiPS cells were 92.6 % Oct ‑ 4 positive, 99.7 % TRA ‑ 1 ‑ 60 positive, and 99.99 % SSEA - 4 positive.
To determine pluripotency and AcGFP1 knockout efficiency in gesicle - treated cells, cells were labeled with a fluorescently labeled antibody specific to
the pluripotency marker SSEA - 4.
Pluripotency was maintained in all edited clonal lines, as evidenced by the persistent expression of the three
pluripotency markers.
After, cells were analyzed by flow cytometry or immunocytochemistry for AcGFP1 and
pluripotency markers.
Mouse NPCs were efficiently reprogrammed into typical iPS cells, where endogenous expression of
pluripotency markers was fully activated and transgenes were completely silenced.
Towards the center of the colony, ∼ 40 % of the cells had lost expression of
all pluripotency markers, and we found a number of cells that were null - expressing no markers of pluripotency or lineage commitment, only the housekeeping gene cyclophilin a. However, many cells in this region still expressed Oct - 4.
The lack of co-expression of
pluripotency markers and lineage specific markers at the protein level despite robust co-expression of transcripts of both classes of gene suggests a role for post-translational regulation of expression, perhaps by small RNAs.
Expression of
pluripotency markers was highest and most consistent at the edge of the colony, where most cells expressed between 3 — 5 of the pluripotency markers shown (Figure 2b — c).
SSEA - 3 positive cells accounted for most of the colony forming ability, and they expressed higher levels of
pluripotency markers than did the SSEA - 3 negative compartment.
In the edge and the middle zones, we observed a proportion of cells expressing a combination of
pluripotency markers and lineage specific genes.