Outside Scientist May Have Made STAP Stem Cells -- More Work Needed

Just as Riken called fraud, a respected Hong Kong scientist posted data indicating that he may have made Nature's controversial "acid bath" STAP stem cells-- if he did it via trituration not acid. Other scientists are intrigued. Parts of the Harvard/Riken may be fraudulent-- but some believe it is possible to make stem cells out of mature cells via revised stressor methods. See Bioscience Technology article, "Scientist Said He May Have Made STAP Cells."

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

seems like a good place to start:
http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/Pages/Default.aspx

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

http://www.biosciencetechnology.com...-have-made-stap-cells—just-riken-called-fraud

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

montrelblundell,

They found fraud in the paper by the lead-author in Japan but in principle, as suggested in your posting, the procedure seems like a valid possibility. STAP is an accronym that means Stimulus-Triggered Acquisition of Pluripotency, or STAP cells.

Stem cells are identified by the proteins (coding) found on their exterior. Such coding is not found on embryonic or pluripotent stem cells. It would seem that acid or some "solvent" of some kind along with stress such as reduced or increased surrounding pressures, variations, agitation, light, heat, etc. and/or combinations thereof, might be able to remove these surface markers of protein without killing the cell, reverting the stem cell back to pluripotency, i.e. being able to become any type of cell again. I think that future experiments into many types of solvent mediums and surrounding conditions will eventually yield the results they are looking for. It has been realized that some types of stem cells can be more easily converted by other means, viruses etc. This I suspect is either because there are fewer surface markers to contend with, or that those existing markers are more readily removed by such processing. I think this is the beginning of a great result and discovery, regardless of whether the original researchers did what they claimed they did or not. I think their idea itself will eventually turn out to be very promising.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Thank you. Well, the cells, like ES cells, do express some pluripotency genes, and thus, markers. Oct4, Nanog, and Sox2 are a few. The idea seems to be that certain adult cells can dedifferentiate in response to injury--perhaps especially in response to injury to local stem cells. Cells can act as "replacement" stem cells in certain cases involving injury or stress. Other papers have looked at this, perhaps increasing numbers in the upcoming months, in part thanks to this STAP work. So regardless, it won't be in vain, I think? I agree with many of the things you say there.

 

montrelblundell,

As far as ES cells, I don't recall that these markers can be found on the surface of ES cells. If so I expect they would be permanent markers. From my research stem cells find out what they are supposed to become by chemical signals in their environment. I would expect these chemical signals, proteins, etc. to first become part of the cells exterior to ultimately effect the epi-genetics of the cell. If they would be assimilated into the cell I don't think they could be so readily changed by STAP-like procedures or exterior chemical influences. What is your opinion or related knowledge on this?

 

A stem cell contains our entire DNA. If it transforms into a specialized cell, like muscle cells, it will use only part of the DNA. The question I have is, since stem cells act like single cells, when they divide as non-pluripotent stem cells, are there any single cellular organisms that are able to act like stem cells?

Conceptually this type of single cell would divide into what appears to be closely related genetic mutations. But rather than mutations, it would act more like stem cell type differentiation; same DNA shuffled into other specialized states.

So what you are saying is the surface of the cell can control the DNA? The markers are restricting the DNA, so pluripotency is prevented and if we remove this lock down, the DNA can now be externally tweaked? This makes sense, since the cell body can still remain alive without DNA (red blood cells) but the DNA is not much use, without the cell body providing support.

 

Wellwisher,

"...since stem cells act like single cells, when they divide as non-pluripotent stem cells, are there any single cellular organisms that are able to act like stem cells?"

Stem cells including pluripotent ones, exist in both multi-cellular plants and animals. Single celled plants and animals have no counterpart to stem cells that I know of.

No, not the DNA. There are related hypothesis that upon division what is on the cells surface can become internalized. This would not effect the genetics (DNA) of the cell but might effect the epi-genetics that controls which genes are turned on or off accordingly causing the cell to become more specialized. Also there is the osmosis process providing food for growth. Through this process external chemicals are internalized within the cell which could do the same thing. There are also ion signals, electrically produced by the collective tissue when attached, that could also signal specialization for the cell. There also might be more than one process or chemistry that could do this when stem cells are separated from their normal surroundings, which would probably be a necessity for stem cells to be prompted to lose their specialization identification, signals, or controls.