Skip to main content
. 2016 Apr 21;6(5):729–742. doi: 10.1016/j.stemcr.2016.03.009

Figure 1.

Figure 1

miRNA Profiling of OM-MSCs and BM-MSCs

(A) Twenty-seven equivocally expressed (EE) miRNAs in OM-MSCs (n = 4 patient samples) and BM-MSCs (n = 4 patient samples) that associate specifically with MSCs (significance determined at PFDR < 0.05 rejects the null hypothesis and concludes that they are EE).

(B) Twenty-six differentially expressed (DE) miRNAs between both cell types. Table shows the fold change (FC) in expression of BM-MSCs versus OM-MSCs (n = 4 patient samples, significance at PFDR < 0.05 and an FC ≥ 1.5). Two miRNAs of interest, hsa-miR-140-5p and hsa-miR-146a-5p, are highlighted in red.

(C) qPCR confirms miR-140-5p is significantly upregulated in BM-MSCs compared with OM-MSCs (n = 4 patient samples, mean ± SEM, p < 0.05 determined by one-way ANOVA, Tukey's multiple comparison).

(D) qPCR confirms miR-146-5p is upregulated in OM-MSCs compared with BM-MSCs (n = 4 patient samples, mean ± SEM, p < 0.05, determined by one-way ANOVA, Tukey's multiple comparison).

(E) FC in expression of miR-140-5p and miR-146-5p in OM-MSCs versus BM-MSCs.