Review



cell lines human umbilical vein endothelial cells huvecs atcc pcs 100 010 human dermal microvascular endothelial cells  (ATCC)


Bioz Verified Symbol ATCC is a verified supplier
Bioz Manufacturer Symbol ATCC manufactures this product  
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
  • 99

    Structured Review

    ATCC cell lines human umbilical vein endothelial cells huvecs atcc pcs 100 010 human dermal microvascular endothelial cells
    Cell Lines Human Umbilical Vein Endothelial Cells Huvecs Atcc Pcs 100 010 Human Dermal Microvascular Endothelial Cells, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 5184 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/cell lines human umbilical vein endothelial cells huvecs atcc pcs 100 010 human dermal microvascular endothelial cells/product/ATCC
    Average 99 stars, based on 5184 article reviews
    cell lines human umbilical vein endothelial cells huvecs atcc pcs 100 010 human dermal microvascular endothelial cells - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    99/100 stars

    Images



    Similar Products

    99
    ATCC cell lines human umbilical vein endothelial cells huvecs atcc pcs 100 010 human dermal microvascular endothelial cells
    Cell Lines Human Umbilical Vein Endothelial Cells Huvecs Atcc Pcs 100 010 Human Dermal Microvascular Endothelial Cells, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/cell lines human umbilical vein endothelial cells huvecs atcc pcs 100 010 human dermal microvascular endothelial cells/product/ATCC
    Average 99 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cell lines human umbilical vein endothelial cells huvecs atcc pcs 100 010 human dermal microvascular endothelial cells - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    99/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    95
    PromoCell primary human dermal blood microvascular endothelial cells endothelial cells hdbec
    Primary Human Dermal Blood Microvascular Endothelial Cells Endothelial Cells Hdbec, supplied by PromoCell, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 95/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/primary human dermal blood microvascular endothelial cells endothelial cells hdbec/product/PromoCell
    Average 95 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    primary human dermal blood microvascular endothelial cells endothelial cells hdbec - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    95/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    95
    ATCC primary human dermal microvascular endothelial cells
    Primary Human Dermal Microvascular Endothelial Cells, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 95/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/primary human dermal microvascular endothelial cells/product/ATCC
    Average 95 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    primary human dermal microvascular endothelial cells - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    95/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    95
    ATCC vesicles ecevs primary human dermal microvascular endothelial cells
    Vesicles Ecevs Primary Human Dermal Microvascular Endothelial Cells, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 95/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/vesicles ecevs primary human dermal microvascular endothelial cells/product/ATCC
    Average 95 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    vesicles ecevs primary human dermal microvascular endothelial cells - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    95/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    97
    PromoCell primary human dermal lymphatic microvascular endothelial cells hlecs
    a TEM analysis of control and recombinant AIBP-treated <t>hLECs.</t> Arrows depict caveolae. b Quantification of caveolae in ( a ). n = 35 (control) and n = 36 (AIBP) cells. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. c TEM analysis of caveolae in ECs of the cardinal vein from control and apoa1bp2 −/− zebrafish. Arrows indicate closed caveolae and arrowheads show open caveolae. d Quantification of caveolae in cardinal vein ECs. n = 27 (control) and n = 29 ( apo1bp2 −/− ) cells. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. e Scheme illustration of 4 hydroxy-tamoxifen (4OHT)-induced ubiquitous mEos2-APOA1 expression. f Representative images of control and mEos2-APOA1 expressed embryos after 4OHT treatment. Embryos were imaged at 2 dpf. The white dashed line demarcates the control animals. The results are representative of 3 independent repeats. g Photoconversion and vascular circulation of mEos2-APOA1. The head regions of embryos were exposed to UV light for 1 min to induce photoconversion. h Analysis of mEos2-APOA1 secretion. The specified tail region was imaged, and the maximum RFP-to-GFP signal ratio within the ISV lumen was quantified. n = 8 intersegmental vessels from 2 embryos. Data are presented as mean ± SEM, analyzed using one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-hoc test. i Maxi-projection confocal images of Prox1 + cells in the apoa1bp −/− ; fli1a:egfp zebrafish with control (mEos2-APOA1) and mEos2-APOA1 overexpression (ubi:Gal4-ERT2+mEos2-APOA1) at 4 dpf and immunostained with GFP (green) and Prox1 (red) antibodies. Arrowheads show the Prox1 + LECs in TD. j Quantitative data of Prox1 + LEC in TD (7 somites). n = 10 ( mEos-APOA1 ) and n = 11 ( ubi:Ert2-Gal4; mEos-APOA1 ) embryos. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. CV cardinal vein. Scale bar: 400 nm in a and 500 nm in c ; 100 µm in ( f , g , i ). Source data are prov i ded as a file.
    Primary Human Dermal Lymphatic Microvascular Endothelial Cells Hlecs, supplied by PromoCell, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 97/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/primary human dermal lymphatic microvascular endothelial cells hlecs/product/PromoCell
    Average 97 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    primary human dermal lymphatic microvascular endothelial cells hlecs - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    97/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    96
    PromoCell primary human dermal microvascular ecs
    a TEM analysis of control and recombinant AIBP-treated <t>hLECs.</t> Arrows depict caveolae. b Quantification of caveolae in ( a ). n = 35 (control) and n = 36 (AIBP) cells. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. c TEM analysis of caveolae in ECs of the cardinal vein from control and apoa1bp2 −/− zebrafish. Arrows indicate closed caveolae and arrowheads show open caveolae. d Quantification of caveolae in cardinal vein ECs. n = 27 (control) and n = 29 ( apo1bp2 −/− ) cells. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. e Scheme illustration of 4 hydroxy-tamoxifen (4OHT)-induced ubiquitous mEos2-APOA1 expression. f Representative images of control and mEos2-APOA1 expressed embryos after 4OHT treatment. Embryos were imaged at 2 dpf. The white dashed line demarcates the control animals. The results are representative of 3 independent repeats. g Photoconversion and vascular circulation of mEos2-APOA1. The head regions of embryos were exposed to UV light for 1 min to induce photoconversion. h Analysis of mEos2-APOA1 secretion. The specified tail region was imaged, and the maximum RFP-to-GFP signal ratio within the ISV lumen was quantified. n = 8 intersegmental vessels from 2 embryos. Data are presented as mean ± SEM, analyzed using one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-hoc test. i Maxi-projection confocal images of Prox1 + cells in the apoa1bp −/− ; fli1a:egfp zebrafish with control (mEos2-APOA1) and mEos2-APOA1 overexpression (ubi:Gal4-ERT2+mEos2-APOA1) at 4 dpf and immunostained with GFP (green) and Prox1 (red) antibodies. Arrowheads show the Prox1 + LECs in TD. j Quantitative data of Prox1 + LEC in TD (7 somites). n = 10 ( mEos-APOA1 ) and n = 11 ( ubi:Ert2-Gal4; mEos-APOA1 ) embryos. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. CV cardinal vein. Scale bar: 400 nm in a and 500 nm in c ; 100 µm in ( f , g , i ). Source data are prov i ded as a file.
    Primary Human Dermal Microvascular Ecs, supplied by PromoCell, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/primary human dermal microvascular ecs/product/PromoCell
    Average 96 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    primary human dermal microvascular ecs - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    96/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    97
    ATCC primary human dermal microvascular endothelial cells hdmecs
    Hypoosmotic stress activates OSR1 and SPAK through Piezo1. ( A ) Schematic of a cell responding to osmotic stress, either hyperosmotic or hypoosmotic, resulting in changes in membrane tension and Ca 2+ influx. ( B ) Immunoblot analysis of <t>HDMECs</t> treated with osmotic stress in the presence of DMSO or WNK463 (1 μM) for 5 min. The bar graph is presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments. ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 (unpaired two-tailed t test, nontreated vs. WNK463-treated); # P < 0.05, ## P < 0.01, ### P < 0.001, #### P < 0.0001 (one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparison test within the DMSO group). ( C ) siCTRL- and siPiezo1-treated HDMECs were exposed to osmotic stress for 5 min and analyzed by immunoblotting using the indicated antibodies. The results are expressed as mean ± SD. ns, not significant; * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 (n = 3), unpaired two-tailed t test (siCTRL vs. siPiezo1). ( D and E ) Intracellular Ca 2+ levels were measured in Fluo-8 AM (2 µM)-labeled HDMECs exposed to isotonic, hypertonic (500 mM NaCl), or hypotonic [3:2 (v/v) deionized H 2 O/culture medium mixture] solutions, as indicated by the arrows. Data are expressed as mean ± SD (8 replicates, 2 independent experiments) ( D ). The graph represents the relative Fluo-8 AM intensity measured 3 min after osmotic stress exposure ( E ). Data are shown as mean ± SD. *** P < 0.001 (unpaired two-tailed t test, 8 replicates). ( F ) Ca 2+ -starved HDMECs, maintained in Ca 2+ /Mg 2+ -free HBSS (−Ca 2+ ) containing 0.1% FBS for 1 h, were exposed to osmotic stress in the Ca 2+ -free HBSS for 5 min. Cell lysates were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting. Data are shown as mean ± SD. ** P < 0.01; ns, not significant (n = 3). ( G ) Immunoblot analysis of HDMECs preincubated with DMSO or BAPTA-AM (10 μM) for 10 min, followed by exposure to osmotic stress for 5 min. The results are presented as mean ± SD. ns, not significant; * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 (n = 3), unpaired two-tailed t test (DMSO-treated vs. BAPTA-AM-treated).
    Primary Human Dermal Microvascular Endothelial Cells Hdmecs, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 97/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/primary human dermal microvascular endothelial cells hdmecs/product/ATCC
    Average 97 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    primary human dermal microvascular endothelial cells hdmecs - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    97/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    90
    Lonza primary human dermal microvascular endothelial cells hdbec
    Hypoosmotic stress activates OSR1 and SPAK through Piezo1. ( A ) Schematic of a cell responding to osmotic stress, either hyperosmotic or hypoosmotic, resulting in changes in membrane tension and Ca 2+ influx. ( B ) Immunoblot analysis of <t>HDMECs</t> treated with osmotic stress in the presence of DMSO or WNK463 (1 μM) for 5 min. The bar graph is presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments. ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 (unpaired two-tailed t test, nontreated vs. WNK463-treated); # P < 0.05, ## P < 0.01, ### P < 0.001, #### P < 0.0001 (one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparison test within the DMSO group). ( C ) siCTRL- and siPiezo1-treated HDMECs were exposed to osmotic stress for 5 min and analyzed by immunoblotting using the indicated antibodies. The results are expressed as mean ± SD. ns, not significant; * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 (n = 3), unpaired two-tailed t test (siCTRL vs. siPiezo1). ( D and E ) Intracellular Ca 2+ levels were measured in Fluo-8 AM (2 µM)-labeled HDMECs exposed to isotonic, hypertonic (500 mM NaCl), or hypotonic [3:2 (v/v) deionized H 2 O/culture medium mixture] solutions, as indicated by the arrows. Data are expressed as mean ± SD (8 replicates, 2 independent experiments) ( D ). The graph represents the relative Fluo-8 AM intensity measured 3 min after osmotic stress exposure ( E ). Data are shown as mean ± SD. *** P < 0.001 (unpaired two-tailed t test, 8 replicates). ( F ) Ca 2+ -starved HDMECs, maintained in Ca 2+ /Mg 2+ -free HBSS (−Ca 2+ ) containing 0.1% FBS for 1 h, were exposed to osmotic stress in the Ca 2+ -free HBSS for 5 min. Cell lysates were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting. Data are shown as mean ± SD. ** P < 0.01; ns, not significant (n = 3). ( G ) Immunoblot analysis of HDMECs preincubated with DMSO or BAPTA-AM (10 μM) for 10 min, followed by exposure to osmotic stress for 5 min. The results are presented as mean ± SD. ns, not significant; * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 (n = 3), unpaired two-tailed t test (DMSO-treated vs. BAPTA-AM-treated).
    Primary Human Dermal Microvascular Endothelial Cells Hdbec, supplied by Lonza, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/primary human dermal microvascular endothelial cells hdbec/product/Lonza
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    primary human dermal microvascular endothelial cells hdbec - by Bioz Stars, 2026-02
    90/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    a TEM analysis of control and recombinant AIBP-treated hLECs. Arrows depict caveolae. b Quantification of caveolae in ( a ). n = 35 (control) and n = 36 (AIBP) cells. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. c TEM analysis of caveolae in ECs of the cardinal vein from control and apoa1bp2 −/− zebrafish. Arrows indicate closed caveolae and arrowheads show open caveolae. d Quantification of caveolae in cardinal vein ECs. n = 27 (control) and n = 29 ( apo1bp2 −/− ) cells. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. e Scheme illustration of 4 hydroxy-tamoxifen (4OHT)-induced ubiquitous mEos2-APOA1 expression. f Representative images of control and mEos2-APOA1 expressed embryos after 4OHT treatment. Embryos were imaged at 2 dpf. The white dashed line demarcates the control animals. The results are representative of 3 independent repeats. g Photoconversion and vascular circulation of mEos2-APOA1. The head regions of embryos were exposed to UV light for 1 min to induce photoconversion. h Analysis of mEos2-APOA1 secretion. The specified tail region was imaged, and the maximum RFP-to-GFP signal ratio within the ISV lumen was quantified. n = 8 intersegmental vessels from 2 embryos. Data are presented as mean ± SEM, analyzed using one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-hoc test. i Maxi-projection confocal images of Prox1 + cells in the apoa1bp −/− ; fli1a:egfp zebrafish with control (mEos2-APOA1) and mEos2-APOA1 overexpression (ubi:Gal4-ERT2+mEos2-APOA1) at 4 dpf and immunostained with GFP (green) and Prox1 (red) antibodies. Arrowheads show the Prox1 + LECs in TD. j Quantitative data of Prox1 + LEC in TD (7 somites). n = 10 ( mEos-APOA1 ) and n = 11 ( ubi:Ert2-Gal4; mEos-APOA1 ) embryos. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. CV cardinal vein. Scale bar: 400 nm in a and 500 nm in c ; 100 µm in ( f , g , i ). Source data are prov i ded as a file.

    Journal: Nature Communications

    Article Title: APOA1 binding protein promotes lymphatic cell fate and lymphangiogenesis by relieving caveolae-mediated inhibition of VEGFR3 signaling

    doi: 10.1038/s41467-025-60611-w

    Figure Lengend Snippet: a TEM analysis of control and recombinant AIBP-treated hLECs. Arrows depict caveolae. b Quantification of caveolae in ( a ). n = 35 (control) and n = 36 (AIBP) cells. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. c TEM analysis of caveolae in ECs of the cardinal vein from control and apoa1bp2 −/− zebrafish. Arrows indicate closed caveolae and arrowheads show open caveolae. d Quantification of caveolae in cardinal vein ECs. n = 27 (control) and n = 29 ( apo1bp2 −/− ) cells. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. e Scheme illustration of 4 hydroxy-tamoxifen (4OHT)-induced ubiquitous mEos2-APOA1 expression. f Representative images of control and mEos2-APOA1 expressed embryos after 4OHT treatment. Embryos were imaged at 2 dpf. The white dashed line demarcates the control animals. The results are representative of 3 independent repeats. g Photoconversion and vascular circulation of mEos2-APOA1. The head regions of embryos were exposed to UV light for 1 min to induce photoconversion. h Analysis of mEos2-APOA1 secretion. The specified tail region was imaged, and the maximum RFP-to-GFP signal ratio within the ISV lumen was quantified. n = 8 intersegmental vessels from 2 embryos. Data are presented as mean ± SEM, analyzed using one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-hoc test. i Maxi-projection confocal images of Prox1 + cells in the apoa1bp −/− ; fli1a:egfp zebrafish with control (mEos2-APOA1) and mEos2-APOA1 overexpression (ubi:Gal4-ERT2+mEos2-APOA1) at 4 dpf and immunostained with GFP (green) and Prox1 (red) antibodies. Arrowheads show the Prox1 + LECs in TD. j Quantitative data of Prox1 + LEC in TD (7 somites). n = 10 ( mEos-APOA1 ) and n = 11 ( ubi:Ert2-Gal4; mEos-APOA1 ) embryos. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. CV cardinal vein. Scale bar: 400 nm in a and 500 nm in c ; 100 µm in ( f , g , i ). Source data are prov i ded as a file.

    Article Snippet: Primary human dermal lymphatic microvascular endothelial cells (hLECs) were purchased from PromoCell (Cat # C-12216 and C-12217).

    Techniques: Control, Recombinant, Expressing, Over Expression

    a − d Effect of MβCD on VEGFR3 phosphorylation. a hLECs were growth factor-starved, and treated with 10 mM MβCD for 5, 15, and 30 min, and the resulting cells were further stimulated with 100 ng/mL VEGFC. The resulting cells were lysed and blotted using CAV-1, VEGFR3, GAPDH antibodies. b Quantitative analysis of panel a. Mean ± SD, n = 3 repeats; two-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s post-hoc test. c , hLECs were treated as in panel a. and cell lysates were immunoprecipitated using VEGFR3 antibody. Immunoblotting was performed using anti-phosphotyrosine (4G10) and VEGFR3 antibodies. d Quantitative analysis of ( c ). n = 3 repeats. Data are presented as mean ± SD and were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-hoc test. e , f Effect of AIBP treatment on VEGFR3 distribution in caveolar fractions. e hLECs were incubated with either recombinant AIBP or vehicle control in EBM2 supplemented with 10% FBS for 2 h, and the cells were subjected to sucrose gradient ultracentrifugation. n = 3 repeats. The resulting fractions were collected for Western blot analysis as indicated. Tx treatment; cav: caveolar fraction; n.c non-caveolar fraction. f Quantitative data of ( e ). Mean ± SD; two-way ANOVA with Sidak’s post-hoc test. n = 3 repeats. g , h Effect of AIBP and HDL co-treatment on VEGFR3 signaling. g hLECs were growth factor-starved and treated with HDL, AIBP, or HDL and AIBP in combination, and further stimulated with VEGFC. The resulting cells were lysed and immunoblotted as indicated. h Quantitative data of ERK and AKT activation. Mean ± SD; two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-hoc test. n = 3 repeats. Ctrl: control. i Maxi-projection confocal images of Prox1 + and pErk1/2 + cells in the apoa1bp −/− ; fli1a:egfp zebrafish at 36 hpf following immunostaining using GFP, pErk1/2, and Prox1 antibodies. Dorsal (DA) aorta and cardinal vein (CV) were imaged. Arrows show the Prox1 + LECs with pErk1/2 expression. j Quantitative data of pErk1/2 intensity in Prox1 + LECs. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. n = 146 (control) and n = 166 ( apoa1bp −/− ) cells. Scale bar: 50 µm. Source data are provided as a file.

    Journal: Nature Communications

    Article Title: APOA1 binding protein promotes lymphatic cell fate and lymphangiogenesis by relieving caveolae-mediated inhibition of VEGFR3 signaling

    doi: 10.1038/s41467-025-60611-w

    Figure Lengend Snippet: a − d Effect of MβCD on VEGFR3 phosphorylation. a hLECs were growth factor-starved, and treated with 10 mM MβCD for 5, 15, and 30 min, and the resulting cells were further stimulated with 100 ng/mL VEGFC. The resulting cells were lysed and blotted using CAV-1, VEGFR3, GAPDH antibodies. b Quantitative analysis of panel a. Mean ± SD, n = 3 repeats; two-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s post-hoc test. c , hLECs were treated as in panel a. and cell lysates were immunoprecipitated using VEGFR3 antibody. Immunoblotting was performed using anti-phosphotyrosine (4G10) and VEGFR3 antibodies. d Quantitative analysis of ( c ). n = 3 repeats. Data are presented as mean ± SD and were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-hoc test. e , f Effect of AIBP treatment on VEGFR3 distribution in caveolar fractions. e hLECs were incubated with either recombinant AIBP or vehicle control in EBM2 supplemented with 10% FBS for 2 h, and the cells were subjected to sucrose gradient ultracentrifugation. n = 3 repeats. The resulting fractions were collected for Western blot analysis as indicated. Tx treatment; cav: caveolar fraction; n.c non-caveolar fraction. f Quantitative data of ( e ). Mean ± SD; two-way ANOVA with Sidak’s post-hoc test. n = 3 repeats. g , h Effect of AIBP and HDL co-treatment on VEGFR3 signaling. g hLECs were growth factor-starved and treated with HDL, AIBP, or HDL and AIBP in combination, and further stimulated with VEGFC. The resulting cells were lysed and immunoblotted as indicated. h Quantitative data of ERK and AKT activation. Mean ± SD; two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-hoc test. n = 3 repeats. Ctrl: control. i Maxi-projection confocal images of Prox1 + and pErk1/2 + cells in the apoa1bp −/− ; fli1a:egfp zebrafish at 36 hpf following immunostaining using GFP, pErk1/2, and Prox1 antibodies. Dorsal (DA) aorta and cardinal vein (CV) were imaged. Arrows show the Prox1 + LECs with pErk1/2 expression. j Quantitative data of pErk1/2 intensity in Prox1 + LECs. Data are Mean ± SE; unpaired two-sided t -test with Welch’s correction. n = 146 (control) and n = 166 ( apoa1bp −/− ) cells. Scale bar: 50 µm. Source data are provided as a file.

    Article Snippet: Primary human dermal lymphatic microvascular endothelial cells (hLECs) were purchased from PromoCell (Cat # C-12216 and C-12217).

    Techniques: Phospho-proteomics, Immunoprecipitation, Western Blot, Incubation, Recombinant, Control, Activation Assay, Immunostaining, Expressing

    a Conserved CAV-1 binding site on VEGFR3 in human (Hu), mouse (Ms), and zebrafish (Zf). The conserved amino acids are shown in blue. b Co-immunoprecipitation of endogenous VEGFR3 and CAV-1 in hLECs. Lysates from two 10 cm confluent plates of hLECs were combined, then equally divided for immunoprecipitation using VEGFR3 antibody or control protein A beads. The samples were subsequently immunoblotted for CAV-1 and VEGFR3. c , d VEGFR3 AAA loses its binding to CAV-1. c hLECs were transfected with control EGFP, VEGFR3-EGFP (R3), or VEGFR3 AAA -EGFP (R3 AAA ) using lentivirus-mediated gene transduction. After 72 hours, the resulting cells were lysed and immunoprecipitated with GFP antibody conjugated to agarose beads and immunoblotted using GFP and CAV-1 antibodies. d The input lysates were immunoblotted using GFP, CAV1, or GAPDH antibody as indicated. e Localization of VEGFR3 and VEGFR3 AAA in caveolae. hLECs were transduced with VEGFR3-APEX2 or VEGFR3 AAA -APEX2 Lenti-viral particles, and after 72 h, cells were fixed with 2.5% glutaraldehyde, stained using DAB substrate kit, and pelleted for TEM analysis. An enlarged view of a single caveola, highlighted with a white box, is shown in the top left corner of each image. f – h hLECs were transduced using lentivirus, and the resulting cells were growth factor starved and treated with 100 ng/mL VEGFC for 20 min, cells were then lysed and immunoblotted as indicated. R3/R3 AAA -EGFP denotes detection using GFP antibody. Quantitative data of VEGFR3 activation ( g ), ERK activation ( i ), and AKT activation ( j ) were shown. Mean ± SD; two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-hoc test. n = 3 independent repeats in g , i , j . Endg: endogenous. Scale bar: 400 nm. Source data are provided as a file.

    Journal: Nature Communications

    Article Title: APOA1 binding protein promotes lymphatic cell fate and lymphangiogenesis by relieving caveolae-mediated inhibition of VEGFR3 signaling

    doi: 10.1038/s41467-025-60611-w

    Figure Lengend Snippet: a Conserved CAV-1 binding site on VEGFR3 in human (Hu), mouse (Ms), and zebrafish (Zf). The conserved amino acids are shown in blue. b Co-immunoprecipitation of endogenous VEGFR3 and CAV-1 in hLECs. Lysates from two 10 cm confluent plates of hLECs were combined, then equally divided for immunoprecipitation using VEGFR3 antibody or control protein A beads. The samples were subsequently immunoblotted for CAV-1 and VEGFR3. c , d VEGFR3 AAA loses its binding to CAV-1. c hLECs were transfected with control EGFP, VEGFR3-EGFP (R3), or VEGFR3 AAA -EGFP (R3 AAA ) using lentivirus-mediated gene transduction. After 72 hours, the resulting cells were lysed and immunoprecipitated with GFP antibody conjugated to agarose beads and immunoblotted using GFP and CAV-1 antibodies. d The input lysates were immunoblotted using GFP, CAV1, or GAPDH antibody as indicated. e Localization of VEGFR3 and VEGFR3 AAA in caveolae. hLECs were transduced with VEGFR3-APEX2 or VEGFR3 AAA -APEX2 Lenti-viral particles, and after 72 h, cells were fixed with 2.5% glutaraldehyde, stained using DAB substrate kit, and pelleted for TEM analysis. An enlarged view of a single caveola, highlighted with a white box, is shown in the top left corner of each image. f – h hLECs were transduced using lentivirus, and the resulting cells were growth factor starved and treated with 100 ng/mL VEGFC for 20 min, cells were then lysed and immunoblotted as indicated. R3/R3 AAA -EGFP denotes detection using GFP antibody. Quantitative data of VEGFR3 activation ( g ), ERK activation ( i ), and AKT activation ( j ) were shown. Mean ± SD; two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-hoc test. n = 3 independent repeats in g , i , j . Endg: endogenous. Scale bar: 400 nm. Source data are provided as a file.

    Article Snippet: Primary human dermal lymphatic microvascular endothelial cells (hLECs) were purchased from PromoCell (Cat # C-12216 and C-12217).

    Techniques: Binding Assay, Immunoprecipitation, Control, Transfection, Transduction, Staining, Activation Assay

    Hypoosmotic stress activates OSR1 and SPAK through Piezo1. ( A ) Schematic of a cell responding to osmotic stress, either hyperosmotic or hypoosmotic, resulting in changes in membrane tension and Ca 2+ influx. ( B ) Immunoblot analysis of HDMECs treated with osmotic stress in the presence of DMSO or WNK463 (1 μM) for 5 min. The bar graph is presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments. ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 (unpaired two-tailed t test, nontreated vs. WNK463-treated); # P < 0.05, ## P < 0.01, ### P < 0.001, #### P < 0.0001 (one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparison test within the DMSO group). ( C ) siCTRL- and siPiezo1-treated HDMECs were exposed to osmotic stress for 5 min and analyzed by immunoblotting using the indicated antibodies. The results are expressed as mean ± SD. ns, not significant; * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 (n = 3), unpaired two-tailed t test (siCTRL vs. siPiezo1). ( D and E ) Intracellular Ca 2+ levels were measured in Fluo-8 AM (2 µM)-labeled HDMECs exposed to isotonic, hypertonic (500 mM NaCl), or hypotonic [3:2 (v/v) deionized H 2 O/culture medium mixture] solutions, as indicated by the arrows. Data are expressed as mean ± SD (8 replicates, 2 independent experiments) ( D ). The graph represents the relative Fluo-8 AM intensity measured 3 min after osmotic stress exposure ( E ). Data are shown as mean ± SD. *** P < 0.001 (unpaired two-tailed t test, 8 replicates). ( F ) Ca 2+ -starved HDMECs, maintained in Ca 2+ /Mg 2+ -free HBSS (−Ca 2+ ) containing 0.1% FBS for 1 h, were exposed to osmotic stress in the Ca 2+ -free HBSS for 5 min. Cell lysates were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting. Data are shown as mean ± SD. ** P < 0.01; ns, not significant (n = 3). ( G ) Immunoblot analysis of HDMECs preincubated with DMSO or BAPTA-AM (10 μM) for 10 min, followed by exposure to osmotic stress for 5 min. The results are presented as mean ± SD. ns, not significant; * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 (n = 3), unpaired two-tailed t test (DMSO-treated vs. BAPTA-AM-treated).

    Journal: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

    Article Title: Activation of WNK1 signaling through Piezo1

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.2513155122

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Hypoosmotic stress activates OSR1 and SPAK through Piezo1. ( A ) Schematic of a cell responding to osmotic stress, either hyperosmotic or hypoosmotic, resulting in changes in membrane tension and Ca 2+ influx. ( B ) Immunoblot analysis of HDMECs treated with osmotic stress in the presence of DMSO or WNK463 (1 μM) for 5 min. The bar graph is presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments. ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 (unpaired two-tailed t test, nontreated vs. WNK463-treated); # P < 0.05, ## P < 0.01, ### P < 0.001, #### P < 0.0001 (one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparison test within the DMSO group). ( C ) siCTRL- and siPiezo1-treated HDMECs were exposed to osmotic stress for 5 min and analyzed by immunoblotting using the indicated antibodies. The results are expressed as mean ± SD. ns, not significant; * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 (n = 3), unpaired two-tailed t test (siCTRL vs. siPiezo1). ( D and E ) Intracellular Ca 2+ levels were measured in Fluo-8 AM (2 µM)-labeled HDMECs exposed to isotonic, hypertonic (500 mM NaCl), or hypotonic [3:2 (v/v) deionized H 2 O/culture medium mixture] solutions, as indicated by the arrows. Data are expressed as mean ± SD (8 replicates, 2 independent experiments) ( D ). The graph represents the relative Fluo-8 AM intensity measured 3 min after osmotic stress exposure ( E ). Data are shown as mean ± SD. *** P < 0.001 (unpaired two-tailed t test, 8 replicates). ( F ) Ca 2+ -starved HDMECs, maintained in Ca 2+ /Mg 2+ -free HBSS (−Ca 2+ ) containing 0.1% FBS for 1 h, were exposed to osmotic stress in the Ca 2+ -free HBSS for 5 min. Cell lysates were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting. Data are shown as mean ± SD. ** P < 0.01; ns, not significant (n = 3). ( G ) Immunoblot analysis of HDMECs preincubated with DMSO or BAPTA-AM (10 μM) for 10 min, followed by exposure to osmotic stress for 5 min. The results are presented as mean ± SD. ns, not significant; * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001 (n = 3), unpaired two-tailed t test (DMSO-treated vs. BAPTA-AM-treated).

    Article Snippet: Primary human dermal microvascular endothelial cells (HDMECs) (CRL-3243, ATCC, Manassas, VA) were grown in complete MCDB 131 medium (15-100-CV, Corning, Corning, NY) supplemented with 10% FBS (F0926, MilliporeSigma, St Louis, MO), 1% L-glutamine (25-005-CI, Corning), 1% penicillin/streptomycin (SV30010, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA), 1 μg/mL hydrocortisone (H0888, MilliporeSigma), and 10 ng/mL epidermal growth factor (PHG0311, Thermo Fisher Scientific).

    Techniques: Membrane, Western Blot, Two Tailed Test, Comparison, Labeling, SDS Page