4.6 Article

Differentially Expressed Genes Associated with Human Limbal Epithelial Phenotypes: New Molecules That Potentially Facilitate Selection of Stem Cell-Enriched Populations

期刊

INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE
卷 52, 期 3, 页码 1252-1260

出版社

ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.10-5242

关键词

-

资金

  1. Hungarian National Research Fund [OTKA F046321, K75752, K68616, TAMOP-4.2.1/B-09/1/KONV-2010-0007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to identify differentially expressed genes in the human limbal epithelium by microarray analysis. METHODS. Total RNA isolates of human limbal and central corneal epithelia were used after transcription for hybridization on whole human genome expression microarrays. A set of differentially expressed genes detected by both microarrays was established. In the case of eight selected molecules, microarray results were confirmed by qRT-PCR, and protein expression in the cornea was examined by confocal immunofluorescence microscopy. Colocalization with the putative stem cell marker C/EBP delta was also examined. RESULTS. The authors established a database of 126 limbal overexpressed genes. qRT-PCR confirmed microarray results in all examined cases (SPON1, IFITM1, ITM2A, PHLDA1, CXCR4, EZD7, DCT, DKK4). Limbal localization of the protein product of SPON1, IFITM1, ITM2A, CXCR4, and DKK4 was shown with confocal immunofluorescence microscopy. SPON1, IFITM1, and ITM2A signals mostly colocalized with C/EBP delta-positive putative resting limbal stein cells. CONCLUSIONS. By detecting several new differentially expressed genes in the human corneal limbus, this study further expands current knowledge on the molecular signature of limbal epithelial stem cells. Plasma membrane localization of IFITM1 and ITM2A suggests their potential usefulness as targets to select stem cell-enriched populations from the limbal epithelium. (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Set. 2011;52:1252-1260) DOI: 10.1167/iovs.10-5242

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