Stress Forces First Lineage Differentiation of Mouse Embryonic Stem Cells; Validation of a High-Throughput Screen for Toxicant Stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mouse Embryonic Stem Cells (mESCs) are unique in their self-renewal and pluripotency. Hypothetically, mESCs model gestational stress effects or stresses of in vitro fertilization/assisted reproductive technologies or drug/environmental exposures that endanger embryos. Testing mESCs stress responses should diminish and expedite in vivo embryo screening. Transgenic mESCs for green fluorescent protein (GFP) reporters of differentiation use the promoter for platelet-derived growth factor receptor (Pdgfr)a driving GFP expression to monitor hyperosmotic stress-forced mESC proliferation decrease (stunting), and differentiation increase that further stunts mESC population growth. In differentiating mESCs Pdgfra marks the first-lineage extraembryonic primitive endoderm (ExEndo). Hyperosmotic stress forces mESC differentiation gain (Pdgfra-GFP) in monolayer or three-dimensional embryoid bodies. Despite culture with potency-maintaining leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF), stress forces ExEndo as assayed using microplate readers and validated by coexpression of Pdgfra-GFP, Disabled 2 (Dab2), and laminin by immunofluorescence and GFP protein and Dab2 by immunoblot. In agreement with previous reports, Rex1 and Oct4 loss was inversely proportional to increased Pdgfra-GFP mESC after treatment with high hyperosmotic sorbitol despite LIF. The increase in subpopulations of Pdgfra-GFP + cells>background at ∼23% was similar to the previously reported ∼25% increase in Rex1-red fluorescent protein (RFP)-negative subpopulation at matched high sorbitol doses. By microplate reader, there is a ∼7–11-fold increase in GFP at a high nonmorbid and a morbid dose despite LIF, compared with LIF alone. By flow cytometry (FACS), the subpopulation of Pdgfra-GFP + cells>background increases ∼8–16-fold at these doses. Taken together, the microplate, FACS, immunoblot, and immunofluorescence data suggest that retinoic acid or hyperosmotic stress forces dose-dependent differentiation whether LIF is present or not and this is negatively correlated with and possibly compensates for stress-forced diminished ESC population expansion and potency loss.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".