↓ Skip to main content

Inhibition of TGFβ Signaling Promotes Ground State Pluripotency

Overview of attention for article published in Stem Cell Reviews, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
Title
Inhibition of TGFβ Signaling Promotes Ground State Pluripotency
Published in
Stem Cell Reviews, September 2013
DOI 10.1007/s12015-013-9473-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Seyedeh-Nafiseh Hassani, Mehdi Totonchi, Ali Sharifi-Zarchi, Sepideh Mollamohammadi, Mohammad Pakzad, Sharif Moradi, Azam Samadian, Najmehsadat Masoudi, Shahab Mirshahvaladi, Ali Farrokhi, Boris Greber, Marcos J. Araúzo-Bravo, Davood Sabour, Mehdi Sadeghi, Ghasem Hosseini Salekdeh, Hamid Gourabi, Hans R. Schöler, Hossein Baharvand

Abstract

Embryonic stem (ES) cells are considered to exist in a ground state if shielded from differentiation triggers. Here we show that FGF4 and TGFβ signaling pathway inhibitors, designated R2i, not only provide the ground state pluripotency in production and maintenance of naïve ES cells from blastocysts of different mouse strains, but also maintain ES cells with higher genomic integrity following long-term cultivation compared with the chemical inhibition of the FGF4 and GSK3 pathways, known as 2i. Global transcriptome analysis of the ES cells highlights augmented BMP4 signaling pathway. The crucial role of the BMP4 pathway in maintaining the R2i ground state pluripotency is demonstrated by BMP4 receptor suppression, resulting in differentiation and cell death. In conclusion, by inhibiting TGFβ and FGF signaling pathways, we introduce a novel defined approach to efficiently establish the ground state pluripotency.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Iran, Islamic Republic of 2 2%
Germany 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 94 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 29%
Student > Master 13 13%
Professor 6 6%
Unspecified 6 6%
Other 16 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 46 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 18%
Unspecified 7 7%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Other 4 4%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 October 2018.
All research outputs
#2,165,651
of 12,731,604 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Reviews
#86
of 479 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,701
of 288,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Reviews
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,731,604 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 479 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 288,950 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.