Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 198

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Skeletal muscle pericyte subtypes differ in their differentiation potential

Open access
Birbrair, Alexander, Zhang, Tan, Wang, Zhong-Min, Messi, Maria Laura, Enikolopov, Grigori N., Mintz, Akiva, Delbono, Osvaldo·2013·Stem Cell Research

Abstract

Neural progenitor cells have been proposed as a therapy for central nervous system disorders, including neurodegenerative diseases and trauma injuries, however their accessibility is a major limitation. We recently isolated Tuj1+ cells from skeletal muscle culture of Nestin-GFP transgenic mice however whether they form functional neurons in the brain is not yet known. Additionally, their isolation from nontransgenic species and identification of their ancestors is unknown. This gap of knowledge precludes us from studying their role as a valuable alternative to neural progenitors. Here, we identified two pericyte subtypes, type-1 and type-2, using a double transgenic Nestin-GFP/NG2-DsRed mouse and demonstrated that Nestin-GFP+/Tuj1+ cells derive from type-2 Nestin-GFP+/NG2-DsRed+/CD146+ pericytes located in the skeletal muscle interstitium. These cells are bipotential as they generate either Tuj1+ cells when cultured with muscle cells or become “classical” α-SMA+ pericytes when cultured alone. In contrast, type-1 Nestin-GFP-/NG2-DsRed+/CD146+ pericytes generate α-SMA+ pericytes but not Tuj1+ cells. Interestingly, type-2 pericyte derived Tuj1+ cells retain some pericytic markers (CD146+/PDGFRβ+/NG2+). Given the potential application of Nestin-GFP+/NG2-DsRed+/Tuj1+ cells for cell therapy, we found a surface marker, the nerve growth factor receptor, which is expressed exclusively in these cells and can be used to identify and isolate them from mixed cell populations in nontransgenic species for clinical purposes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.scr.2012.09.003

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 12 references

Cited by

See all 198

Metadata

Authors
Birbrair, A., Zhang, T., Wang, Z.-M., Messi, M. L., Enikolopov, G. N., Mintz, A., & Delbono, O.
Venue
Stem Cell Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-01
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
67-84
ISSN
1873-5061 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2054417819
Cited by
198
References
12
FWCI
3.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Skeletal muscle pericyte subtypes differ in their differentiation potential. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.scr.2012.09.003
The paper
Birbrair, A., Zhang, T., Wang, Z.-M., Messi, M. L., Enikolopov, G. N., Mintz, A., & Delbono, O. (2013). Skeletal muscle pericyte subtypes differ in their differentiation potential. Stem Cell Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scr.2012.09.003

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.