4.7 Article

Isolation of tissue-resident vascular endothelial stem cells from mouse liver

期刊

NATURE PROTOCOLS
卷 15, 期 3, 页码 1066-1081

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41596-019-0276-x

关键词

-

资金

  1. Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED)-PRIME grant [19gm6210009h0002]
  2. Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED)-AMED grant [19cm0106508h0004, 19gm5010002s1103]
  3. Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED)-JSPS KAKENHI grant [19K22562]
  4. Takeda Science Foundation
  5. Princess Takamatsu Cancer Research Foundation
  6. Daiichi-Sankyo Foundation of Life Science
  7. SGH Foundation
  8. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [19K22562] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Endothelial cells (ECs) are fundamental components of the blood vessels that comprise the vascular system; facilitate blood flow; and regulate permeability, angiogenesis, inflammatory responses and homeostatic tissue maintenance. Accumulating evidence suggests there is EC heterogeneity in vivo. However, isolation of fresh ECs from adult mice to investigate this further is challenging. Here, we describe an easy and reproducible protocol for isolation of different types of ECs and CD157(+) vascular-resident endothelial stem cells (VESCs) by mechano-enzymatic tissue digestion followed by fluorescence-activated cell sorting. The procedure was established on liver tissue but can be used to isolate ECs from other organs with minimal modification. Preparation of single-cell suspensions can be completed in 2.5 h. We also describe assays for EC clonal and network formation, as well as transcriptomic analysis of isolated ECs. The protocol enables isolation of primary ECs and VESCs that can be used for a wide range of downstream analyses in vascular research. Various types of endothelial cells and CD157(+) vascular-resident endothelial stem cells are isolated from mice by mechano-enzymatic tissue digestion followed by fluorescence-activated cell sorting.

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