Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: Stem Cells. 2019 Mar 14;37(6):766–778. doi: 10.1002/stem.2991

Figure 4. Comparison of Pharmacologic and Genetic Tak1 Inhibition.

Figure 4.

(A) Cell proliferation (BrDU) of Ad.Cre and Ad.LacZ treated Tak1fx-frt/fx-frt adipose-derived stem cells (ASCs); (B) Cell proliferation (Cell counting) of Ad.Cre and Ad.LacZ treated Tak1fx-frt/fx-frt ASCs; (C) Cell proliferation (BrDU) of ASCs treated with NG25; (D) Cell proliferation (Cell counting) of ASCs treated with NG25. (E) ASCs were transfected with siRNAs for TAK1, and TAK1 expression level was analyzed by qPCR. (F) Cell counting showing that siRNAs for TAK1 transfection significantly promote cell proliferation in vitro. (G) BrdU proliferation assay showing that siRNAs for TAK1 transfection significantly promote cell proliferation in vitro (left: ASCs and right: tendon-derived cells (TdCs). (H) osteoblastic differentiation assay showing that siRNAs for TAK1 transfection significantly suppressed the differentiation in vitro (Upper: ALP stained TdCs at day 5 and lower: Alizarin red stained TdCs at day 12). * and # p<0.05; ##p<0.01. Student t-test (*: scramble vs. siRNA-1, #: scramble vs. siRNA-2).