Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2022 Mar 23;219(4):e20211789. doi: 10.1084/jem.20211789

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© 2022 Matsubara et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike–No Mirror Sites license for the first six months after the publication date (see http://www.rupress.org/terms/). After six months it is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 4.0 International license, as described at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).

PMC Copyright notice

Figure 9. — Angiocrine factors and oxygen regulate odontoblasts maturation. (A) Schematic diagram depicting the organ culture procedure for dental pulps. (B) qPCR analysis for dental pulps cultured for 24 h (control [Cont] n = 3, serum-free n = 3, hypoxia n = 3). (C) UMAP plots showing expression of genes known to promote odontoblast maturation. Arrowheads indicate POTCs. (D) qPCR analysis for dental pulps cultured for 24 h (Cont n = 4, Vegfr2^iΔEC n = 4, Vegfr2^iΔEC + Tgfb n = 4, Vegfr2^iΔEC + PTN n = 4). (E) CellPhoneDB analysis predicting intercellular interactions among various cell types in the dental pulp. The number of receptor–ligand interactions for POTCs (dotted square) was highest in OB1 and OB2 cells (solid square). (F) Dot plot indicating an array of receptor–ligand couples, with dot color and size representing the strength and significance of the predicted interaction between cell types. (G) Schematic diagram depicting the bidirectional interaction between odontoblasts and blood vessels. Data are presented as means ± SD. Comparisons between two groups were evaluated using a two-sided Student’s t test.