Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 119

1.

Stable methylation at promoters distinguishes epiblast stem cells from embryonic stem cells and the in vivo epiblasts.

Veillard AC, Marks H, Bernardo AS, Jouneau L, Laloë D, Boulanger L, Kaan A, Brochard V, Tosolini M, Pedersen R, Stunnenberg H, Jouneau A.

Stem Cells Dev. 2014 Sep 1;23(17):2014-29. doi: 10.1089/scd.2013.0639. Epub 2014 Jun 12.

2.

Establishment of a primed pluripotent epiblast stem cell in FGF4-based conditions.

Joo JY, Choi HW, Kim MJ, Zaehres H, Tapia N, Stehling M, Jung KS, Do JT, Schöler HR.

Sci Rep. 2014 Dec 17;4:7477. doi: 10.1038/srep07477. Erratum in: Sci Rep. 2015;5:8180.

3.

Neural stem cells derived from epiblast stem cells display distinctive properties.

Jang HJ, Kim JS, Choi HW, Jeon I, Choi S, Kim MJ, Song J, Do JT.

Stem Cell Res. 2014 Mar;12(2):506-16. doi: 10.1016/j.scr.2013.12.012. Epub 2014 Jan 4.

4.

Mouse primed embryonic stem cells could be maintained and reprogrammed on human amnion epithelial cells.

Chen YF, Dong Z, Jiang L, Lai D, Guo L.

Stem Cells Dev. 2013 Jan 15;22(2):320-9. doi: 10.1089/scd.2012.0325. Epub 2012 Nov 7.

PMID:
22985337
5.

Epigenetic reversion of post-implantation epiblast to pluripotent embryonic stem cells.

Bao S, Tang F, Li X, Hayashi K, Gillich A, Lao K, Surani MA.

Nature. 2009 Oct 29;461(7268):1292-5. doi: 10.1038/nature08534.

6.

Derivation of novel human ground state naive pluripotent stem cells.

Gafni O, Weinberger L, Mansour AA, Manor YS, Chomsky E, Ben-Yosef D, Kalma Y, Viukov S, Maza I, Zviran A, Rais Y, Shipony Z, Mukamel Z, Krupalnik V, Zerbib M, Geula S, Caspi I, Schneir D, Shwartz T, Gilad S, Amann-Zalcenstein D, Benjamin S, Amit I, Tanay A, Massarwa R, Novershtern N, Hanna JH.

Nature. 2013 Dec 12;504(7479):282-6. doi: 10.1038/nature12745. Epub 2013 Oct 30. Erratum in: Nature. 2015 Apr 30;520(7549):710.

PMID:
24172903
7.

Reversion of mouse postimplantation epiblast stem cells to a naïve pluripotent state by modulation of signalling pathways.

Gillich A, Bao S, Surani MA.

Methods Mol Biol. 2013;1074:15-29. doi: 10.1007/978-1-62703-628-3_2.

PMID:
23975802
8.

Self-renewing epiblast stem cells exhibit continual delineation of germ cells with epigenetic reprogramming in vitro.

Hayashi K, Surani MA.

Development. 2009 Nov;136(21):3549-56. doi: 10.1242/dev.037747. Epub 2009 Sep 30.

9.

Distinct developmental ground states of epiblast stem cell lines determine different pluripotency features.

Bernemann C, Greber B, Ko K, Sterneckert J, Han DW, Araúzo-Bravo MJ, Schöler HR.

Stem Cells. 2011 Oct;29(10):1496-503. doi: 10.1002/stem.709.

10.

Reduced oxygen concentration enhances conversion of embryonic stem cells to epiblast stem cells.

Takehara T, Teramura T, Onodera Y, Hamanishi C, Fukuda K.

Stem Cells Dev. 2012 May 20;21(8):1239-49. doi: 10.1089/scd.2011.0322. Epub 2011 Oct 18.

PMID:
21861689
11.

Status of genomic imprinting in epigenetically distinct pluripotent stem cells.

Sun B, Ito M, Mendjan S, Ito Y, Brons IG, Murrell A, Vallier L, Ferguson-Smith AC, Pedersen RA.

Stem Cells. 2012 Feb;30(2):161-8. doi: 10.1002/stem.793.

12.

Targets and dynamics of promoter DNA methylation during early mouse development.

Borgel J, Guibert S, Li Y, Chiba H, Schübeler D, Sasaki H, Forné T, Weber M.

Nat Genet. 2010 Dec;42(12):1093-100. doi: 10.1038/ng.708. Epub 2010 Nov 7.

PMID:
21057502
13.

Nuclear transfer-derived epiblast stem cells are transcriptionally and epigenetically distinguishable from their fertilized-derived counterparts.

Maruotti J, Dai XP, Brochard V, Jouneau L, Liu J, Bonnet-Garnier A, Jammes H, Vallier L, Brons IG, Pedersen R, Renard JP, Zhou Q, Jouneau A.

Stem Cells. 2010 Apr;28(4):743-52. doi: 10.1002/stem.400.

14.

Derivation and Culture of Epiblast Stem Cell (EpiSC) Lines.

Rugg-Gunn P.

Cold Spring Harb Protoc. 2017 Jan 3;2017(1):pdb.prot093971. doi: 10.1101/pdb.prot093971.

PMID:
28049783
15.

Dynamic switching of active promoter and enhancer domains regulates Tet1 and Tet2 expression during cell state transitions between pluripotency and differentiation.

Sohni A, Bartoccetti M, Khoueiry R, Spans L, Vande Velde J, De Troyer L, Pulakanti K, Claessens F, Rao S, Koh KP.

Mol Cell Biol. 2015 Mar;35(6):1026-42. doi: 10.1128/MCB.01172-14. Epub 2015 Jan 12.

16.

Comparative FAIRE-seq analysis reveals distinguishing features of the chromatin structure of ground state- and primed-pluripotent cells.

Murtha M, Strino F, Tokcaer-Keskin Z, Sumru Bayin N, Shalabi D, Xi X, Kluger Y, Dailey L.

Stem Cells. 2015 Feb;33(2):378-91. doi: 10.1002/stem.1871.

17.

Loss of the Otx2-Binding Site in the Nanog Promoter Affects the Integrity of Embryonic Stem Cell Subtypes and Specification of Inner Cell Mass-Derived Epiblast.

Acampora D, Omodei D, Petrosino G, Garofalo A, Savarese M, Nigro V, Di Giovannantonio LG, Mercadante V, Simeone A.

Cell Rep. 2016 Jun 21;15(12):2651-64. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2016.05.041. Epub 2016 Jun 9.

18.

Pluripotency in the embryo and in culture.

Nichols J, Smith A.

Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2012 Aug 1;4(8):a008128. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a008128. Review.

19.

From Naive to Primed Pluripotency: In Vitro Conversion of Mouse Embryonic Stem Cells in Epiblast Stem Cells.

Tosolini M, Jouneau A.

Methods Mol Biol. 2016;1341:209-16. doi: 10.1007/7651_2015_208.

PMID:
25720370
20.

Epiblast stem cell subpopulations represent mouse embryos of distinct pregastrulation stages.

Han DW, Tapia N, Joo JY, Greber B, Araúzo-Bravo MJ, Bernemann C, Ko K, Wu G, Stehling M, Do JT, Schöler HR.

Cell. 2010 Nov 12;143(4):617-27. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2010.10.015.

Supplemental Content

Support Center