Replication of influenza A virus in swine umbilical cord epithelial stem-like cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we describe the isolation and characterization of epithelial stem-like cells from the swine umbilical cord and their susceptibility to influenza virus infection. Swine umbilical cord epithelial stem cells (SUCECs) expressed stem cell and pluripotency associated markers such as SSEA-1, SSEA-4, TRA 1-60 and TRA 1-81 and Oct4. Morphologically, cells displayed polygonal morphology and were found to express epithelial markers; pancytokeratin, cytokeratin-18 and occludin; mesenchymal cell markers CD44, CD90 and haematopoietic cell marker CD45 were not detected on these cells. The cells had extensive proliferation and self- renewal properties. The cells also possessed immunomodulatory activity and inhibited the proliferation of T cells. Also, higher levels of anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 were detected in SUCEC-T cell co-cultures. The cells were multipotent and differentiated into lung epithelial cells when cultured in epithelial differentiation media. We also examined if SUCECs are susceptible to infection with influenza virus. SUCECs expressed sialic acid receptors, used by influenza virus for binding to cells. The 2009 pandemic influenza virus and swine influenza virus replicated in these cells. SUCECs due to their differentiation and immunoregulatory properties will be useful as cellular therapy in a pig model for human diseases. Additionally, our data indicate that influenza virus can infect SUCECs and may transmit influenza virus from mother to fetus through umbilical cord and transplantation of influenza virus-infected stem cells may transmit infection to recipients. Therefore, we propose that umbilical cord cells, in addition to other agents, should also be tested for influenza virus before cryopreservation for future use as a cell therapy for disease conditions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".