Seeding efficiency, plating efficiency, and population doublings of human skin fibroblastlike cells: Results of replicate testing
Abstract
Using skin fibroblastlike cells from 10 healthy volunteers, 12 to 54 yr old, we measured, in replicates, seeding efficiency (SE), plating efficiency (PE), and population doublings (PD) during 2 wk of growth and the cumulative replicative life span (CRLS). We determined the effects of donor age and of in vitro cell age on the test results and test precision. We found that (a) On the average, SE was 82% +/- 24 SD, PE was 12% +/- 9 SD, PD was 7.3 doublings +/- 2.5 SD, and CRLS was 31.1 doublings +/- 9.6 SD. (b) Plating efficiency and PD correlated well with each other and with CRLS whereas SE did not correlate with PE, PD, or CRLS. (c) Plating efficiency and PD were affected negatively by increasing passage levels and by donor ages, but the influence of age was evident only for cells from early passages. Seeding efficiency was not affected by either of the two variables. (d) Variations in PD from early passages explained half of the donor-to-donor variation in CRLS whereas PD from later passages had little or no predictive power. (e) Of the two short term tests, PD had better precision than PE. For replicate runs with cells from early passages the coefficient of variation was 44% for PE and 15% for PD. The results show that PD for cells from early passages in mass culture give rapid results, which express the in vitro replicating potential of cells from different donors with greater precision than do measurements of CRLS.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Such parameters (seeding efficiency, plating efficiency, proliferation rate) may change with increasing population doublings or use of different cell culture conditions.
“Such parameters may change with increasing population doublings (Vracko et al., 1983) or use of different cell culture conditions (Chan et al., 2008).”
From Guidance document on Good cell and tissue culture practice 2.0 (GCCP 2.0) (2021) · cites this paper as Vracko et al., 1983
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Guidance document on Good cell and tissue culture practice 2.0 (GCCP 2.0)
Pamies, D. (2021) · ALTEX · doi:10.14573/altex.2111011 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
- Authors
- Vracko, R., McFarland, B. H., & Pecoraro, R. E.
- Venue
- In Vitro
- Published
- 1983-06
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 504-514
- ISSN
- 0073-5655
- 1475-2689
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review