Cargando…
Comparison of defined culture systems for feeder cell free propagation of human embryonic stem cells
There are many reports of defined culture systems for the propagation of human embryonic stem cells in the absence of feeder cell support, but no previous study has undertaken a multi-laboratory comparison of these diverse methodologies. In this study, five separate laboratories, each with experienc...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer-Verlag
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2855804/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20186512 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11626-010-9297-z |
_version_ | 1782180210873991168 |
---|---|
author | Akopian, Veronika Andrews, Peter W. Beil, Stephen Benvenisty, Nissim Brehm, Jennifer Christie, Megan Ford, Angela Fox, Victoria Gokhale, Paul J. Healy, Lyn Holm, Frida Hovatta, Outi Knowles, Barbara B. Ludwig, Tenneille E. McKay, Ronald D. G. Miyazaki, Takamichi Nakatsuji, Norio Oh, Steve K. W. Pera, Martin F. Rossant, Janet Stacey, Glyn N. Suemori, Hirofumi |
author_facet | Akopian, Veronika Andrews, Peter W. Beil, Stephen Benvenisty, Nissim Brehm, Jennifer Christie, Megan Ford, Angela Fox, Victoria Gokhale, Paul J. Healy, Lyn Holm, Frida Hovatta, Outi Knowles, Barbara B. Ludwig, Tenneille E. McKay, Ronald D. G. Miyazaki, Takamichi Nakatsuji, Norio Oh, Steve K. W. Pera, Martin F. Rossant, Janet Stacey, Glyn N. Suemori, Hirofumi |
collection | PubMed |
description | There are many reports of defined culture systems for the propagation of human embryonic stem cells in the absence of feeder cell support, but no previous study has undertaken a multi-laboratory comparison of these diverse methodologies. In this study, five separate laboratories, each with experience in human embryonic stem cell culture, used a panel of ten embryonic stem cell lines (including WA09 as an index cell line common to all laboratories) to assess eight cell culture methods, with propagation in the presence of Knockout Serum Replacer, FGF-2, and mouse embryonic fibroblast feeder cell layers serving as a positive control. The cultures were assessed for up to ten passages for attachment, death, and differentiated morphology by phase contrast microscopy, for growth by serial cell counts, and for maintenance of stem cell surface marker expression by flow cytometry. Of the eight culture systems, only the control and those based on two commercial media, mTeSR1 and STEMPRO, supported maintenance of most cell lines for ten passages. Cultures grown in the remaining media failed before this point due to lack of attachment, cell death, or overt cell differentiation. Possible explanations for relative success of the commercial formulations in this study, and the lack of success with other formulations from academic groups compared to previously published results, include: the complex combination of growth factors present in the commercial preparations; improved development, manufacture, and quality control in the commercial products; differences in epigenetic adaptation to culture in vitro between different ES cell lines grown in different laboratories. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2855804 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2010 |
publisher | Springer-Verlag |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-28558042010-04-25 Comparison of defined culture systems for feeder cell free propagation of human embryonic stem cells Akopian, Veronika Andrews, Peter W. Beil, Stephen Benvenisty, Nissim Brehm, Jennifer Christie, Megan Ford, Angela Fox, Victoria Gokhale, Paul J. Healy, Lyn Holm, Frida Hovatta, Outi Knowles, Barbara B. Ludwig, Tenneille E. McKay, Ronald D. G. Miyazaki, Takamichi Nakatsuji, Norio Oh, Steve K. W. Pera, Martin F. Rossant, Janet Stacey, Glyn N. Suemori, Hirofumi In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim Article There are many reports of defined culture systems for the propagation of human embryonic stem cells in the absence of feeder cell support, but no previous study has undertaken a multi-laboratory comparison of these diverse methodologies. In this study, five separate laboratories, each with experience in human embryonic stem cell culture, used a panel of ten embryonic stem cell lines (including WA09 as an index cell line common to all laboratories) to assess eight cell culture methods, with propagation in the presence of Knockout Serum Replacer, FGF-2, and mouse embryonic fibroblast feeder cell layers serving as a positive control. The cultures were assessed for up to ten passages for attachment, death, and differentiated morphology by phase contrast microscopy, for growth by serial cell counts, and for maintenance of stem cell surface marker expression by flow cytometry. Of the eight culture systems, only the control and those based on two commercial media, mTeSR1 and STEMPRO, supported maintenance of most cell lines for ten passages. Cultures grown in the remaining media failed before this point due to lack of attachment, cell death, or overt cell differentiation. Possible explanations for relative success of the commercial formulations in this study, and the lack of success with other formulations from academic groups compared to previously published results, include: the complex combination of growth factors present in the commercial preparations; improved development, manufacture, and quality control in the commercial products; differences in epigenetic adaptation to culture in vitro between different ES cell lines grown in different laboratories. Springer-Verlag 2010-02-26 2010 /pmc/articles/PMC2855804/ /pubmed/20186512 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11626-010-9297-z Text en © The Author(s) 2010 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Article Akopian, Veronika Andrews, Peter W. Beil, Stephen Benvenisty, Nissim Brehm, Jennifer Christie, Megan Ford, Angela Fox, Victoria Gokhale, Paul J. Healy, Lyn Holm, Frida Hovatta, Outi Knowles, Barbara B. Ludwig, Tenneille E. McKay, Ronald D. G. Miyazaki, Takamichi Nakatsuji, Norio Oh, Steve K. W. Pera, Martin F. Rossant, Janet Stacey, Glyn N. Suemori, Hirofumi Comparison of defined culture systems for feeder cell free propagation of human embryonic stem cells |
title | Comparison of defined culture systems for feeder cell free propagation of human embryonic stem cells |
title_full | Comparison of defined culture systems for feeder cell free propagation of human embryonic stem cells |
title_fullStr | Comparison of defined culture systems for feeder cell free propagation of human embryonic stem cells |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of defined culture systems for feeder cell free propagation of human embryonic stem cells |
title_short | Comparison of defined culture systems for feeder cell free propagation of human embryonic stem cells |
title_sort | comparison of defined culture systems for feeder cell free propagation of human embryonic stem cells |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2855804/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20186512 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11626-010-9297-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT akopianveronika comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT andrewspeterw comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT beilstephen comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT benvenistynissim comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT brehmjennifer comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT christiemegan comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT fordangela comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT foxvictoria comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT gokhalepaulj comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT healylyn comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT holmfrida comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT hovattaouti comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT knowlesbarbarab comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT ludwigtenneillee comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT mckayronalddg comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT miyazakitakamichi comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT nakatsujinorio comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT ohstevekw comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT peramartinf comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT rossantjanet comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT staceyglynn comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells AT suemorihirofumi comparisonofdefinedculturesystemsforfeedercellfreepropagationofhumanembryonicstemcells |