Hydrogen sulphide increases hepatic differentiation of human tooth pulp stem cells compared with human bone marrow stem cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To determine the differences in stem cell properties, in hepatic differentiation and in the effects of hydrogen sulphide (H2 S) on hepatic differentiation between human bone marrow stem cells (hBMC) and stem cells from human exfoliated primary tooth pulp (SHED). METHODOLOGY: CD117(+) cells were magnetically separated and subjected to hepatic differentiation. CD117(+) cell lineages were characterized for transcription factors indicative of stem cells by qRT-PCR. For the last 9 days of the differentiation, the test cells were exposed to 0.1 ng mL(-1) H2 S. Immunocytochemistry and flow cytometry of albumin, alpha-fetoprotein and carbamoyl phosphate synthetase were carried out after differentiation. Urea concentration and glycogen synthesis were also determined. RESULTS: Genes expressed in SHED were also expressed in BMC. No difference in expression level of hepatic markers was shown by immunofluorescence. SHED showed more positive cells than hBMC (P < 0.01). H2 S increased the number of positive cells in both cultures (P < 0.01). Urea concentration and glycogen synthesis increased significantly after H2 S exposure (P < 0.001 and P < 0.05, respectively). Real-time PCR data were analysed by RT(2) profiler RT-PCR Array Data Analysis version 3.5 (Qiagen), and ELISA data were analysed by Bonferroni's multiple comparison using Windows spss version 16 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA). Bonferroni's multiple comparison test was also carried out after angle transformation for the percentage data of flow cytometer using Windows spss(®) version 16 (SPSS Inc). Statistical significance was accepted at P < 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: Stem cells from human exfoliated primary tooth pulp and BMC have similar properties. The level of hepatic differentiation in SHED compared with BMC was the same or higher. H2 S increased the level of hepatic differentiation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".