The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Mammalian myotube dedifferentiation induced by newt regeneration extract
Open accessAbstract
Newts are capable of regenerating several anatomical structures and organs, including their limbs. This remarkable regenerative capacity is thought to depend on cellular dedifferentiation. Terminally differentiated mammalian cells, by contrast, are normally incapable of reversing the differentiation process. Several factors could explain the absence of cellular dedifferentiation in mammals: ( i ) inadequate expression of genes that initiate dedifferentiation; ( ii ) insufficient intracellular signaling pathways; ( iii ) irreversible expression of differentiation factors; and ( iv ) structural characteristics that make dedifferentiation impossible. To investigate the causes underlying the lack of cellular plasticity in mammalian cells, we examined the effect of an extract derived from newt regenerating limbs on terminally differentiated mouse C2C12 myotubes. Approximately 18% of murine myotubes reentered the cell cycle when treated with regeneration extract, whereas 25% of newt myotubes exhibited cell cycle reentry. The muscle differentiation proteins MyoD, myogenin, and troponin T were reduced to undetectable levels in 15–30% of treated murine myotubes. We observed cellular cleavage in 11% of the treated murine myotubes and approximately 50% of these myotubes continued to cleave to produce proliferating mononucleated cells. These data indicate that mammalian myotubes can dedifferentiate when stimulated with the appropriate factors and suggest that one mechanism preventing dedifferentiation of mammalian cells is inadequate spatial or temporal expression of genes that initiate dedifferentiation.
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
Cited by
Cellular and Molecular Regulation of Muscle Regeneration
CHARGÉ, S. B. P., & RUDNICKI, M. A. (2004) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.00019.2003 · Cited by 2,680
Satellite Cells and the Muscle Stem Cell Niche
Yin, H., Price, F., & Rudnicki, M. A. (2013) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.00043.2011 · Cited by 2,166
Molecular regulation of stem cell quiescence
Cheung, T. H., & Rando, T. A. (2013) · Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology · doi:10.1038/nrm3591 · Cited by 1,148
Dedifferentiation, transdifferentiation and reprogramming: three routes to regeneration
Jopling, C., Boue, S., & Belmonte, J. C. I. (2011) · Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology · doi:10.1038/nrm3043 · Cited by 730
Martin, C. M., Meeson, A. P., Robertson, S. M., Hawke, T. J., Richardson, J. A., Bates, S., Goetsch, S. C., Gallardo, T. D., & Garry, D. J. (2004) · Developmental Biology · doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2003.09.028 · Cited by 655
Metadata
- Authors
- McGann, C. J., Odelberg, S. J., & Keating, M. T.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2001-11-20
- Volume
- 98
- Issue
- 24
- Pages
- 13699-13704
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W1999604714
- Cited by
- 223
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Mammalian myotube dedifferentiation induced by newt regeneration extract. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.221297398
- The paper
- McGann, C. J., Odelberg, S. J., & Keating, M. T. (2001). Mammalian myotube dedifferentiation induced by newt regeneration extract. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.221297398
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.