Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Elmabrok Masaoud x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search


Objective—To isolate and characterize mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) from canine muscle and periosteum and compare proliferative capacities of bone marrow-, adipose tissue-, muscle-, and periosteum-derived MSCs (BMSCs, AMSCs, MMSCs, and PMSCs, respectively).

Sample—7 canine cadavers.

Procedures—MSCs were characterized on the basis of morphology, immunofluorescence of MSC-associated cell surface markers, and expression of pluripotency-associated transcription factors. Morphological and histochemical methods were used to evaluate differentiation of MSCs cultured in adipogenic, osteogenic, and chondrogenic media. Messenger ribonucleic acid expression of alkaline phosphatase, RUNX2, OSTERIX, and OSTEOPONTIN were evaluated as markers for osteogenic differentiation. Passage-1 MSCs were counted at 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours to determine tissue-specific MSC proliferative capacity. Mesenchymal stem cell yield per gram of tissue was calculated for confluent passage-1 MSCs.

Results—Successful isolation of BMSCs, AMSCs, MMSCs, and PMSCs was determined on the basis of morphology; expression of CD44 and CD90; no expression of CD34 and CD45; mRNA expression of SOX2, OCT4, and NANOG; and adipogenic and osteogenic differentiation. Proliferative capacity was not significantly different among BMSCs, AMSCs, MMSCs, and PMSCs over a 4-day culture period. Periosteum provided a significantly higher MSC yield per gram of tissue once confluent in passage 1 (mean ± SD of 19,400,000 ± 12,800,000 of PMSCs/g of periosteum obtained in a mean ± SD of 13 ± 1.64 days).

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results indicated that canine muscle and periosteum may be sources of MSCs. Periosteum was a superior tissue source for MSC yield and may be useful in allogenic applications.

Full access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research


Objective—To compare the owner-reported prevalence of behavioral characteristics in dogs obtained as puppies from pet stores with that of dogs obtained as puppies from noncommercial breeders.

Design—Cross-sectional study.

Animals—Dogs obtained as puppies from pet stores (n = 413) and breeder-obtained dogs (5,657).

Procedures—Behavioral evaluations were obtained from a large convenience sample of current dog owners with the online version of the Canine Behavioral Assessment and Research Questionnaire, which uses ordinal scales to rate either the intensity or frequency of the dogs’ behavior. Hierarchic linear and logistic regression models were used to analyze the effects of source of acquisition on behavioral outcomes when various confounding and intervening variables were controlled for.

Results—Pet store–derived dogs received significantly less favorable scores than did breeder-obtained dogs on 12 of 14 of the behavioral variables measured; pet store dogs did not score more favorably than breeder dogs in any behavioral category. Compared with dogs obtained as puppies from noncommercial breeders, dogs obtained as puppies from pet stores had significantly greater aggression toward human family members, unfamiliar people, and other dogs; greater fear of other dogs and nonsocial stimuli; and greater separation-related problems and house soiling.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Obtaining dogs from pet stores versus noncommercial breeders represented a significant risk factor for the development of a wide range of undesirable behavioral characteristics. Until the causes of the unfavorable differences detected in this group of dogs can be specifically identified and remedied, the authors cannot recommend that puppies be obtained from pet stores.

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association