4.6 Article

Whole embryonic detection of maternal microchimeric cells highlights significant differences in their numbers among individuals

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 16, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261357

关键词

-

资金

  1. Takeda Science Foundation
  2. [17K19547]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research indicates that during pregnancy in placental mammals, maternal microchimeric cells (MMc cells) may vary in number, with differences even among embryos in normal pregnancies. This variability suggests unknown underlying mechanisms affecting the presence of MMc cells.
During pregnancy in placental mammals, small numbers of maternal cells (maternal microchimeric cells, or MMc cells) migrate into the fetus and persist decades, or perhaps for the rest of their lives, and higher frequencies of MMc cells are reported to correlate with variety of phenomena, such as immune tolerance, tissue repair, and autoimmune diseases. While detection of these MMc cells is considered in all pregnancies, their frequency differs largely according to tissue type and disease cases, and it remains unclear whether the number of MMc cells differs significantly among embryos in normal pregnancies. Here, for the first time, we developed a whole embryonic detection method for MMc cells using transgenic mice and counted live MMc cells in each individual embryo. Using this technique, we found that the number of MMc cells was comparable in most of the analyzed embryos; however, around 500 times higher number of MMc cells was detected in one embryo at the latest stage. This result suggests that the number of MMc cells could largely differ in rare cases with unknown underlying mechanisms. Our methodology provides a basis for testing differences in the numbers of MMc cells among individual embryos and for analyzing differences in MMc cell type repertoires in future studies. These data could provide a hint toward understanding the mechanisms underlying the variety of apparently inconsistent MMc-related phenomena.

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

4.6
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