Are the Effects of the Cholera Toxin and Isoproterenol on Human Keratinocytes’ Proliferative Potential Dependent on Whether They Are Co-Cultured with Human or Murine Fibroblast Feeder Layers?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human keratinocyte culture has provided the means to treat burns, wounds and skin pathologies. To date, to efficiently culture keratinocytes, cells are cultured on an irradiated feeder layer (iFL), either comprising human (iHFL) or murine (i3T3FL) fibroblasts, and the culture medium is supplemented with a cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) accumulation inducing agent such as isoproterenol (ISO) or cholera toxin (CT). Previous studies have characterized how the feeder layer type and the cAMP inducer type influence epithelial cells' phenotype independently from one another, but it is still unknown if an optimal combination of feeder layer and cAMP inducer types exists. We used sophisticated statistical models to search for a synergetic effect of feeder layer and cAMP inducer types on human keratinocytes' proliferative potential. Our data suggests that, when culturing human keratinocytes, using iHFL over i3T3FL increases population doublings and colony-forming efficiency through signaling pathways involving Ak mouse strain thymoma (Akt, also known as protein kinase B) isoforms 1 to 3, signal transducer and activator of transcription 5 (STAT5), p53, and adenosine monophosphate activated protein kinase α1 (AMPKα1). Both tested cAMP inducers ISO and CT yielded comparable outcomes. However, no significant synergy between feeder layer and cAMP inducer types was detected. We conclude that, to promote human keratinocyte growth in the early passages of culture, co-culturing them with a human feeder layer is preferable to a murine feeder layer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".