4.6 Article

Enhanced expression of FNDC5 in human embryonic stem cell-derived neural cells along with relevant embryonic neural tissues

期刊

GENE
卷 557, 期 2, 页码 123-129

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.gene.2014.12.010

关键词

FNDC5; Human embryonic stem cells; Neural differentiation

资金

  1. Royan Institute [920007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Availability of human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) has enhanced the capability of basic and clinical research in the context of human neural differentiation. Derivation of neural progenitor (NP) cells from hESCs facilitates the process of human embryonic development through the generation of neuronal subtypes. We have recently indicated that fibronectin type III domain containing 5 protein (FNDC5) expression is required for appropriate neural differentiation of mouse embryonic stem cells (mESCs). Bioinformatics analyses have shown the presence of three isoforms for human FNDC5 mRNA. To differentiate which isoform of FNDC5 is involved in the process of human neural differentiation, we have used hESCs as an in vitro model for neural differentiation by retinoic acid (RA) induction. The hESC line, Royan H5, was differentiated into a neural lineage in defined adherent culture treated by RA and basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF). We collected all cell types that included hESCs, rosette structures, and neural cells in an attempt to assess the expression of FNDC5 isoforms. There was a contiguous increase in all three FNDC5 isoforms during the neural differentiation process. Furthermore, the highest level of expression of the isoforms was significantly observed in neural cells compared to hESCs and the rosette structures known as neural precursor cells (NPCs). High expression levels of FNDC5 in human fetal brain and spinal cord tissues have suggested the involvement of this gene in neural tube development. Additional research is necessary to determine the major function of FDNC5 in this process. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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