4.2 Article

Osteogenic differentiation of BMSCs on MoS2 composite nanofibers with different cell seeding densities

Journal

APPLIED NANOSCIENCE
Volume 10, Issue 9, Pages 3703-3716

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s13204-020-01473-0

Keywords

Molybdenum disulphide; Nanofibers; Cell seeding density; Osteogenesis

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China Youth Fund [81900977, U1904176]
  2. Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation [2019A1515010592]
  3. Guangzhou Science and Technology Planning Project [201904010150]
  4. Guangdong Financial Fund for High-Calibre Hospital Construction [174-2018-XMZC-0001-03-0125/D-19]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Molybdenum disulphide (MoS2) exhibits unique properties that are useful for various biomedical applications. Owing to its distinct characteristics and osteogenic differentiation promotion effect, this material has been studied extensively. However, the effect of cell density on osteogenic differentiation between MoS2-based biomaterials and cells is still unknown. In this study, we used MoS2/polyacrylonitrile (PAN) composite nanofibres as substrates to evaluate the effect of cellular density on the osteogenic differentiation of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs). We created different experimental groups with increasing cell seeding densities and investigated cellular behaviours, biocompatibility, proliferation and osteogenic properties. The results show that MoS2/PAN composite nanofibres can positively regulate osteogenic differentiation. More importantly, in the presence of standard culture conditions, 1.0 x 10(4) cells/cm(2) is the most efficient and suitable cell seeding density for BMSCs osteogenic differentiation. Our findings suggest that the optimal cell density for osteogenesis is vital for the osteogenic differentiation of BMSCs when these cells are cultured onto MoS2-based biomaterials.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available