The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Odontogenic capability: bone marrow stromal stem cells versus dental pulp stem cells
Open accessAbstract
Background information. Although adult bone‐marrow‐derived cell populations have been used to make teeth when recombined with embryonic oral epithelium, the differences between dental and non‐dental stem‐cell‐mediated odontogenesis remain an open question. Results. STRO‐1+ (stromal precursor cell marker) DPSCs (dental pulp stem cells) and BMSSCs (bone marrow stromal stem cells) were isolated from rat dental pulp and bone marrow respectively by magnetic‐activated cell‐sorting techniques. Their odontogenic capacity was compared under the same inductive microenvironment produced by ABCs (apical bud cells) from 2‐day‐old rat incisors. Co‐cultured DPSCs/ABCs in vitro showed more active odontogenic differentiation ability than mixed BMSSCs/ABCs, as indicated by the accelerated matrix mineralization, up‐regulated alkaline phosphatase activity, cell‐cycle modification, and the expression of tooth‐specific proteins and genes. After cultured for 14 days in the renal capsules of rat hosts, recombined DPSC/ABC pellets formed typical tooth‐shaped tissues with balanced amelogenesis and dentinogenesis, whereas BMSSC/ABC recombinants developed into atypical dentin—pulp complexes without enamel formation. DPSC and BMSSC pellets in vivo produced osteodentin‐like structures and fibrous connective tissues respectively. Conclusions. DPSCs presented more striking odontogenic capability than BMSSCs under the induction of postnatal ABCs. This report provides critical insights into the selection of candidate cells for tooth regeneration between dental and non‐dental stem cell populations.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
PTEN negatively regulates neural stem cell self-renewal by modulating G 0 -G 1 cell cycle entry
Groszer, M., Erickson, R., Scripture-Adams, D. D., Dougherty, J. D., Le Belle, J., Zack, J. A., Geschwind, D. H., Liu, X., Kornblum, H. I., & Wu, H. (2006) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0509939103 · Cited by 306
Cited by
Tatullo, M., Marrelli, M., Shakesheff, K. M., & White, L. J. (2015) · Journal of Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine · doi:10.1002/term.1899 · Cited by 353
Metadata
- Authors
- Yu, J., Wang, Y., Deng, Z., Tang, L., Li, Y., Shi, J., & Jin, Y.
- Venue
- Biology of the Cell
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-08
- Volume
- 99
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 465-474
- ISSN
- 0248-4900 (ISSN-L)
- 1768-322X
- OpenAlex
- W1977203616
- Cited by
- 207
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.22
- 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: Odontogenic capability: bone marrow stromal stem cells versus dental pulp stem cells. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1042/bc20070013
- The paper
- Yu, J., Wang, Y., Deng, Z., Tang, L., Li, Y., Shi, J., & Jin, Y. (2007). Odontogenic capability: bone marrow stromal stem cells versus dental pulp stem cells. Biology of the Cell. https://doi.org/10.1042/bc20070013
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.