Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 12939249

Quantifying chimeric cardiomyocytes.

Abstract

The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Hans Michael Kvasnicka, Claudia Wickenhauser, Juergen Thiele. 2003-08-26. Quantifying chimeric cardiomyocytes.. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.0000086783.39749.19

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Differential regulation of p63 and p73 expression.

Two homologs of the tumor suppressor p53, named p63 and p73, are each expressed from at least two start sites of mRNA synthesis, yielding full-length, transactivating (TA) isoforms, and also aminoterminally truncated (DeltaN) isoforms that act as antagonists to p53. The expression of TAp73-transcripts is induced by E2F and negatively regulated by transforming growth factor beta (TGFbeta). The DeltaNp73 promoter is induced by p53, resulting in negative feedback to control p53 activity. Here, we have analysed the expression of p63 in comparison with p73. In contrast to the induction of DeltaNp73, the expression of DeltaNp63 was reduced by p53 particularly in human keratinocytes, at the mRNA and protein levels. Accordingly, the 3' promoter of p73, but not that of p63, was activated by p53 in reporter assays. DeltaNp73 mRNA and DeltaNp73 protein, but not the p63 gene products, also accumulated when HaCat cells (lacking functional p53) were grown to high density. TAp73, but not TAp63, expression was suppressed by TGFbeta in these cells, and the TAp73, but not the TAp63, promoter was induced by E2F-1. Thus, in contrast to the functional similarities of their respective products, the expression levels of p63 and p73 are regulated by different mechanisms. This might be responsible for the discordant biological roles of p63 and p73 in development, as well as their deviant expression characteristics in cancer.

Cell Count↗

Do genetic make-up and growth manipulation affect tomato fruit size by cell number, or cell size and DNA endoreduplication?

This work investigated the link between genetic and developmental controls of fruit size and composition. On two isogenic lines (CF12-C and CF14-L), differing by fruit weight and sugar content quantitative trait loci (QTLs) identified previously, basal and tip fruits were characterized at anthesis and at maturity through their growth, dry matter and sugar content, number and size of cells and nuclei DNA content. The influence of competition was assessed by removing either basal or tip ovaries at anthesis. On an intact inflorescence, CF12-C fruits grew less than CF14-L fruits, with 1.67 fewer cell layers and similar cell size, suggesting that genes controlling cell division may be responsible for this fruit size variation. Truss thinning masked the QTL effect on fruit size, mainly by reducing the difference in cell number between the two lines and by promoting cell expansion in tip fruits, so that fruit growth was similar at both positions and for both lines. Thus, in these lines, cell number exerts a control on final fruit size only when there is competition among fruits. Different responses of basal and tip fruits after flower removal suggested that this treatment induced changes in hormonal relationships within the truss. No fixed relationship between DNA endoreduplication and cell size was found, as while cell size and dry matter and sugar contents differed with tomato lines, fruit position and truss size, endoreduplication patterns were the same. CF12-C fruits had a higher dry matter (+0.3% of fresh weight) and carbohydrates (+8% of dry matter) content than CF14-L fruits. The percentage dry matter was independent of truss size but decreased slightly from basal to tip fruits.

Cell Count↗