Some authors use these terms interchangeably, with no clear distinction at all. The current use of terms describing stem cell potentiality is inconsistent and can be confusing, in particular the widely used term pluripotency and its distinction from totipotency. Many active researchers in the field might find it boring to discuss terminology, but interesting facts behind the arguments should indeed attract their attention. The rapid progress in the stem cell field, in particular in cell reprogramming, combined with certain recent observations from experimental embryology, has ignited a new discussion on stem cell terminology. It is concluded that we should start contemplating not only the terminology but also, even more urgently, the ethical implications of the perspective of constructing embryonic anlagen in humans. The present commentary takes up this discussion and confronts it with recent reports on ‘engineering' viable fish embryos or gastrulating human germ disc models using ‘pluripotent'/omnipotent cells, as well as on symmetry breaking in aggregates of mouse embryonic stem cells. For cells possessing a complete differentiation potential (but lacking an autonomous embryo-structuring capacity) the term omnipotency (or, as recently proposed, plenipotency) has been coined. The current use of terms describing stem cell potentiality is inconsistent and can be confusing, in particular the widely used term pluripotency and its distiction from totipotency.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |