136 research outputs found

    Musashi1 expression cells derived from mouse embryonic stem cells can be enriched in side population isolated by fluorescence activated cell sorter

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Purifying stem cells is an inevitable process for further investigation and cell-therapy. Sorting side population (SP) cells is generally regarded as an effective method to enrich for progenitor cells. This study was to explore whether sorting SP could enrich for the Musashi1 (Msi1) positive cells from Msi1 high expression cells (Msi1<sup>high </sup>cells) derived from mouse embryonic stem cells (ESCs) in vitro.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In this study, Msi1<sup>high </sup>cell population derived from ESCs were stained by Hoechst 33342, and then the SP and non-SP (NSP) fractions were analyzed and sorted by fluorescence activated cell sorter. Subsequently, the expressions of Msi1 and other markers for neural and intestinal stem cells in SP and NSP were respectively detected. SP and NSP cells were hypodermically engrafted into the backs of NOD/SCID mice to form grafts. The developments of neural and intestinal epithelial cells in these grafts were investigated. SP fraction was identified and isolated from Msi1<sup>high </sup>cell population. The expression of Msi1 in SP fraction was significantly higher than that in NSP fraction and unsorted Msi1<sup>high </sup>cells (<it>P</it>< 0.05). Furthermore, the markers for neural cells and intestinal epithelial cells were more highly expressed in the grafts from SP fraction than those from NSP fraction (<it>P</it>< 0.05).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>SP fraction, isolated from Msi1<sup>high </sup>cells, contains almost all the Msi1-positive cells and has the potential to differentiate into neural and intestinal epithelial cells in vivo. Sorting SP fraction could be a convenient and practical method to enrich for Msi1-positive cells from the differentiated cell population derived from ESCs.</p

    Observation of the Singly Cabibbo-Suppressed Decay Ī›c+ā†’Ī£āˆ’K+Ļ€+\Lambda_{c}^{+}\to \Sigma^{-}K^{+}\pi^{+}

    Full text link
    The singly Cabibbo-suppressed decay Ī›c+ā†’Ī£āˆ’K+Ļ€+\Lambda_{c}^{+}\to \Sigma^{-}K^{+}\pi^{+} is observed for the first time with a statistical significance of 6.4Ļƒ6.4\sigma by using 4.5 fbāˆ’1^{-1} of e+eāˆ’e^+e^- collision data collected at center-of-mass energies between 4.600 and 4.699 GeV with the BESIII detector at BEPCII. The absolute branching fraction of Ī›c+ā†’Ī£āˆ’K+Ļ€+\Lambda_{c}^{+}\to \Sigma^{-}K^{+}\pi^{+} is measured to be (3.8Ā±1.3statĀ±0.2syst)Ɨ10āˆ’4(3.8\pm1.3_{\rm stat}\pm0.2_{\rm syst})\times 10^{-4} in a model-independent approach. This is the first observation of a Cabibbo-suppressed Ī›c+\Lambda_{c}^{+} decay involving Ī£āˆ’\Sigma^- in the final state. The ratio of branching fractions between Ī›c+ā†’Ī£āˆ’K+Ļ€+\Lambda_{c}^{+}\to \Sigma^{-}K^{+}\pi^{+} and the Cabibbo-favored decay Ī›c+ā†’Ī£āˆ’Ļ€+Ļ€+\Lambda_{c}^{+}\to \Sigma^- \pi^+\pi^+ is calculated to be (0.4Ā±0.1)sc2(0.4 \pm 0.1)s_{c}^{2}, where scā‰”sinā”Īøc=0.2248s_{c} \equiv \sin\theta_c = 0.2248 with Īøc\theta_c the Cabibbo mixing angle. This ratio significantly deviates from 1.0sc21.0s_{c}^{2} and provides important information for the understanding of nonfactorization contributions in Ī›c+\Lambda_{c}^{+} decays.Comment: 8 pages, 2 figure

    Updated measurements of the M1 transition Ļˆ(3686)ā†’Ī³Ī·c(2S)\psi(3686) \to \gamma \eta_{c}(2S) with Ī·c(2S)ā†’KKĖ‰Ļ€\eta_{c}(2S) \to K \bar{K} \pi

    Full text link
    Based on a data sample of (27.08Ā±0.14)Ɨ108Ā Ļˆ(3686)(27.08 \pm 0.14 ) \times 10^8~\psi(3686) events collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, the M1 transition Ļˆ(3686)ā†’Ī³Ī·c(2S)\psi(3686) \to \gamma \eta_{c}(2S) with Ī·c(2S)ā†’KKĖ‰Ļ€\eta_{c}(2S) \to K\bar{K}\pi is studied, where KKĖ‰Ļ€K\bar{K}\pi is K+Kāˆ’Ļ€0K^{+} K^{-} \pi^{0} or KS0KĀ±Ļ€āˆ“K_{S}^{0}K^{\pm}\pi^{\mp}. The mass and width of the Ī·c(2S)\eta_{c}(2S) are measured to be (3637.8Ā±0.8(stat)Ā±0.2(syst))(3637.8 \pm 0.8 (\rm {stat}) \pm 0.2 (\rm {syst})) MeV/c2c^{2} and (10.5Ā±1.7(stat)Ā±3.5(syst))(10.5 \pm 1.7 (\rm {stat}) \pm 3.5 (\rm {syst})) MeV, respectively. The product branching fraction B(Ļˆ(3686)ā†’Ī³Ī·c(2S))ƗB(Ī·c(2S)ā†’KKĖ‰Ļ€)\mathcal{B}\left(\psi(3686) \rightarrow \gamma \eta_{c}(2 S)\right) \times \mathcal{B}(\eta_{c}(2 S) \rightarrow K \bar{K} \pi) is determined to be (0.97Ā±0.06(stat)Ā±0.09(syst))Ɨ10āˆ’5(0.97 \pm 0.06 (\rm {stat}) \pm 0.09 (\rm {syst})) \times 10^{-5}. Using BR(Ī·c(2S)ā†’KKĖ‰Ļ€)=(1.86āˆ’0.49+0.68)%\mathcal{BR}(\eta_{c}(2S)\to K\bar{K}\pi)=(1.86^{+0.68}_{-0.49})\%, we obtain the branching fraction of the radiative transition to be BR(Ļˆ(3686)ā†’Ī³Ī·c(2S))=(5.2Ā±0.3(stat)Ā±0.5(syst)āˆ’1.4+1.9(extr))Ɨ10āˆ’4\mathcal{BR}(\psi(3686) \to \gamma \eta_{c}(2S)) = (5.2 \pm 0.3 (\rm {stat}) \pm 0.5 (\rm {syst}) ^{+1.9}_{-1.4} (extr)) \times 10^{-4}, where the third uncertainty is due to the quoted BR(Ī·c(2S)ā†’KKĖ‰Ļ€)\mathcal{BR}(\eta_{c}(2S) \to K\bar{K}\pi)
    • ā€¦
    corecore