Pluripotency: the third option?

The excitement surrounding cellular reprogramming and the possibility of federal funding for human embryonic stem cell (ESC) research in the US could be overshadowing another promising therapeutic source of stem cells: those derived via parthenogenesis, some researchers say. But later-developed techniques such as induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) could make this approach obsolete, and the final draft of the stem cell guidelines, due out by July 7, might put the nail in the parthenote coffin

Elie Dolgin
Jun 15, 2009
The excitement surrounding cellular reprogramming and the possibility of federal funding for human embryonic stem cell (ESC) research in the US could be overshadowing another promising therapeutic source of stem cells: those derived via parthenogenesis, some researchers say. But later-developed techniques such as induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) could make this approach obsolete, and the final draft of the stem cell guidelines, due out by July 7, might put the nail in the parthenote coffin.
Parthenogenetic embryonic stem cells
Image: International Stem Cell Corporation
"Parthenotes will probably be as good as the two other alternatives" -- ESCs and iPSCs -- for cell replacement therapies, linkurl:Shoukhrat Mitalipov,;http://www.ohsu.edu/oscc/Shoukhrat_Mitalipov.php a developmental biologist at the Oregon National Primate Research Center, told __The Scientist__. "The advantages are much more attractive than the limitations of these cell lines." So what are the advantages? First, parthenogenetic embryonic stem cells (pESCs) are derived from unfertilized eggs and can...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member?