Bookmark and Share

Stem cells from a single cell?

Scientists have developed a tool to obtain embryonic stem cells from a single human embryo cell, apparently without harming the embryo


[Published 23rd August 2006 05:08 PM GMT]


A new technique plucks single cells from human embryos, generating stable embryonic stem cells lines while apparently leaving the embryo intact, scientists reported online Wednesday in Nature.

"We're able to for the first time show it's possible to create embryonic stem cells without harming the embryo's potential for life. Hopefully this will solve the most basic objection to stem cell research," coauthor Robert Lanza, of Advanced Cell Technology at Worcester, Mass., told The Scientist.

Still, scientists cautioned the technique is still in its infancy, and only time will tell if it can benefit research. For instance, additional studies need to determine how similar or different the cells produced via this technique are to conventional human embryonic stem cell lines, said James Battey, chair of the National Institutes of Health stem cell task force, who did not participate in this study. "We don't know if it's easier or harder to make dopamine-secreting neurons with them, just as an example. The only way to determine what they can and can't do is with experiments," Battey told The Scientist.

The new findings build on a previous study by Lanza and his colleagues, where they showed they could remove single cells from early stage mouse embryos and derive embryonic stem cell lines.

In their latest study, Lanza and his colleagues experimented on 16 unused embryos produced over the course of in vitro fertilization attempts. They used micropipettes to remove individual cells, known as blastomeres, from the eight-to-10-cell-stage embryos. Cells are already routinely removed from embryos during in vitro fertilization for preimplantation genetic diagnosis, a procedure that apparently does not harm the embryo.

The extracted cells were cultured together in the same medium, including mouse feeder cells. Out of 91 blastomeres, the researchers generated two stable human embryonic stem cell lines and 19 embryonic-stem-cell-like outgrowths.

The embryonic stem cell lines apparently behave like lines obtained using conventional techniques -- for instance, the lines were able to sustain undifferentiated proliferation for more than eight months. The cells also had normal chromosomes and expressed pluripotency markers such as Oct-4, SSEA-3, SSEA-4, TRA-1-60, TRA-1-81, nanog, and alkaline phosphatase. These cells readily differentiated into cells of all three germ layers in vitro, and demonstrated their pluripotency by forming teratomas containing tissues from all three germ layers when injected into immune-suppressed mice.

"This is really important work. I'm eagerly awaiting someone to reproduce the experiment to show it stands up to replication," Alberto Hayek at the Whittier Institute for Diabetes in San Diego, also not a coauthor, told The Scientist. He recommended, however, that scientists avoid exposing the embryonic lines to mouse feeder cells to sidestep issues of contamination, instead growing them with human cells or in cell-free conditions.

Arnold Kriegstein at the University of California, San Francisco, who did not participate in this study, called the research "an important advance," but cautioned that the technique remains inefficient, producing relatively few lines from the blastomeres. "The efficiency needs to be improved."

However, when scientists first tried making embryonic stem cell lines, the efficiency was very low, noted Mahendra Rao at Invitrogen, also not a co-author. This new method is not efficient, but "it is still better than how embryonic stem cell derivation started," and is therefore "impressive," he told The Scientist via Email.

Charles Q. Choi
cchoi@the-scientist.com

Links within this article

I. Klimanskaya et al. "Human embryonic stem cell lines derived from single blastomeres." Nature, August 23, 2006 (ahead of print).
http://www.nature.com

Robert Lanza
http://www.advancedcell.com/senior-executive-officers/#Robert%20Lanza,%20M.D.

James Battey
http://stemcells.nih.gov/policy/taskForce/tfMembers.asp

Y Chung, "Embryonic and extraembryonic stem cell lines derived from single mouse blastomeres," Nature, January 12, 2006.
PM_ID: 16227970.

C. Wallace. "Controversy-free stem cells?" The Scientist, October 17, 2005.
http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/22801/

Alberto Hayek
http://www.whittier.org/pages/lab_investigators.html#Chi

D. Monroe. "Eek, No Mouse!" The Scientist, April 25, 2005.
http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/15431/

Arnold Kriegstein
http://stemcell.medschool.ucsf.edu/Faculty/kriegstein_arnold.aspx

K Pallarito, "NIH stem cell chief resigns," The Scientist, April 21, 2006.
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/23340/

Correction (posted August 25): When originally posted, the story said the cells were removed from embryos more than one at a time. The cells were removed individually.


Advertisement

 

Rate this article

Rating: 3.00/5 (1 vote )





Comment on your comment about ACT making profits
by Charlotte Richards

[Comment posted 2006-08-26 01:13:48]
It isn't my understanding that ACT is making a huge profit on their research...I think that they are doing this work to benefit humanity. Why are we all so cynical...



Theological / Christian ethics and human stem cells
by Bill Carmichael

[Comment posted 2006-08-25 13:19:36]
It would appear that mainly the captioned issue has held up stem cell research in a number of advanced industrial economies (such as Germany or even USA), where stem cell research like that done in the UK is still not admissible. Christian ethics, as we all know, are subject to varying interpretations!

Although, like many of your correspondents, I remain sceptical about the final practical outcome of this work, it must surely form a bridgehead in the confrontation with particularly the Catholic church, which can probably no longer a priori hold the lofty high ground of total opposition based on the sanctity of life, in terms even of individual human stem cells.

However, George Orwell sends his greetings!



Holey argument
by Bill Lang

[Comment posted 2006-08-25 13:19:06]
Why do Christians always use the wrong argument - innocent human life?

LINK

Innocent = sinless.
If life begins at conception, the soul begins at conception, and original sin is assigned to the soul eliminating the innocence of the unborn child. The souls of unborn children who die go to Hell because no unsaved soul can enter Heaven. Church doctrine is absolutely clear on this. To be saved, you must be baptized or willingly accept Christ as savior, neither of which is available to the unborn. In late 2005, the Church rejected Limbo for the unborn souls, the only place they can go to wait for the forgiveness of the Messiah and access to Heaven, and offered nothing in its place. This eliminates the argument for the innocence of the unborn, and anyone who goes against this is against the Church.

If life begins at conception, but the soul doesn't begin until birth, then the unborn are as soulless as the beasts of the forest and they do not matter to God.

The real argument for Christians should be that they have to save the unborn soul from going to Hell, and then explain to everyone how unfair that seems because of the 30,000 Hell bound spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) each year in the USA.

But then, if you don't use the 'holey' religious argument, what are you really left with?

Already, the fundamentalist opposition has changed their argument against this valid technique that solved the issue. The only real answer is to eliminate the fundamentalist political power base on this country.



Stem cells from a single cell?
by Bill Lang

[Comment posted 2006-08-24 14:22:55]
Theyᅡメve done a great deal of research to get to this point. Anyone can tell that by reading the article. They should be commended for their efforts.

Iᅡメm hugely hopeful this will allow needed research to get us past the fundamentalist blastomere huggers who found a new cause after getting tired of spiking trees and camping out in the forests. Perhaps we can now get on with ending some suffering and start saving lives.

Iᅡメm hugely skeptical that any amount of research and experimentation will satisfy the fundamentalists. The debate was all about unnecessarily ending a perceived human life. If they find a way to do that, the fundamentalists will simply change the argument. Itᅡメs just their nature. They wonᅡメt stand for a solution because they donᅡメt believe in win-win. For fundamentalists, someone must always lose.

Save the spotted owl, save the trees, save the blastomeres, kill the infidel, and profit is a bad thing.



Stem cells from a single cell?
by suzanne wuerthele

[Comment posted 2006-08-23 22:12:26]
Interesting technique. But it merely replaces one ethical debate with another: If a cell is harvested from an embryo which is to be implanted and become a child, the parents must give consent for the embroy to make the donation. This would likely create a lively debate as to whether parents can ethically give such consent for their future child.

From a practical perspective, would parents choose to use an embryo from which a cell is taken if they have others? Or would they only donate cells from embryos they plan to discard, obviating the need for the new methodology in the first place?



Stem Cells from a Single Cell
by Gary Kinzer

[Comment posted 2006-08-23 20:07:22]
I am hugely skeptical, amazed that a periodical of the reputation of NATURE so easily reports as success the work of a scientist for a company that stands to reap enormous profit from his work; happily, someone is cited as looking forward to outside replication of the reported results.

Moreover, science does not stand outside lived life. Profound ethical questions remain that are rightly and legitimately raised by intelligent, serious people, both of faith and of unfaith. The dialogue and the debate must continue.



The News


Front Cover

Register for FREE Online Access

  • »Current issue
  • »Best Places to Work and Salary surveys
  • »Daily news and monthly contents emails

Register »

Subscribe to the Magazine

  • »Monthly print issues
  • »Unlimited online access
  • »Special offers on books, apparel, and more

Subscribe »

Library Subscriptions
Recommend to a Librarian

Masthead | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy
© 1986-2012 The Scientist