Abstract:phenotype (synonyms “D mosaic,” “partial D,” “D deletion,” “epitope-deficient cells,” and “category cells”) is usually recognized only when the individual produces anti-D. Recognition of weak D samples depends on the methods and reagents used for Rh typing. With the increasing sensitivity of both, fewer Rh-positive samples will be categorized as D”. Some of the automated blood typing systems can detect, without using an indirect antiglobulin test for the Du phenotype, weak D samples that were previously detectable only by such a test. These samples are labeled as Rh positive. Many previously weak D samples react unequivocally on manual direct testing with some of the monoclonal antibody-based reagents and, therefore, are classified as Rh positive. Donor samples that are tested for the D“ phenotype by the indirect antiglobulin test and found to be positive must be labeled Rh positive to comply with the standardss of the American Association of Blood Banks, regardless of whether the term “D“” or “weak D” is used to describe them. When testing patients, many practitioners have already eliminated the test for the D‘ phenotype. With today’s anti-D reagents, only a small number of samples that fail to react on initial testing will subsequently react in the test for that phenotype. Changing the designation of a patient’s sample from “D”” to “weak D” does not alter the recommendation to transfuse Rh-positive blood to the patient, nor does it alter the management of a pregnant woman or a woman recently delivered of a child, in terms of whether to administer Rh immune globulin. (The AABB standards state that obstetrical patients who are D positive or Du should be considered Rh positive.) Wider use of the designation “weak D” for all weak expressions of the D antigen would eliminate much of the confusion caused by inconsistent and sometimes erroneous terminology. Red cells would be typed as D positive or D negative on direct testing, and, on this basis alone, the individual would be described as Rh positive or Rh negative. Persons known previously as D‘ may now be referred to as “weak D” or simply as Rh positive, depending on how their red ells react with the particular anti-D reagent used for Rh typing.

A novel luciferase knock-in reporter system for studying transcriptional regulation of the human Sox2 gene

Establishment of a HEK293 cell line by CRISPR/Cas9-mediated luciferase knock-in to study transcriptional regulation of the human SREBP1 gene

[Cloning of Mouse Adam10 Gene Promoter and Construction and Identification of Dual Luciferase Reporter System].

Soil saccharide extraction and detection

Gene Editing to Generate Versatile Human Pluripotent Stem Cell Reporter Lines for Analysis of Differentiation and Lineage Tracing

Generation of transducible versions of transcription factors Oct4 and Sox2

Comprehensive Interrogation of Natural TALE DNA-binding Modules and Transcriptional Repressor Domains

Generation of a biotinylatable Sox2 mouse model to identify Sox2 complexes in vivo

Sox2 acts as a transcriptional repressor in neural stem cells

Generation of a Recombinant Stem Cell-Specific Human SOX2 Protein from Escherichia coli Under Native Conditions

Computational identification of key transcription factors for embryonic and postnatal Sox2+ dental epithelial stem cell

Evaluation of the determinants for improved pluripotency induction and maintenance by engineered SOX17

Engineering and validation of a dual luciferase reporter system for quantitative and systematic assessment of regulatory sequences in Chinese hamster ovary cells

A novel hybrid promoter responsive to pathophysiological and pharmacological regulation

Direct Activation of Human and Mouse Oct4 Genes Using Engineered TALE and Cas9 Transcription Factors.

Glucose uptake and metabolism by red blood cells from fish with different extracellular glucose levels

Structural basis of three different transcription activation strategies adopted by a single regulator SoxS

[Osteotomies for preparing functional stumps for prosthesis attachment].

Nuclear and cytosolic fractions of SOX2 synergize as transcriptional and translational co-regulators of cell fate

The incidence of hemolytic disease of the newborn attributable to anti‐Wra

Reciprocal Transcriptional Regulation of Pou5f1 and Sox2 via the Oct4/Sox2 Complex in Embryonic Stem Cells