BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Review
Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Stem Cells. Apr 26, 2026; 18(4): 118621
Published online Apr 26, 2026. doi: 10.4252/wjsc.v18.i4.118621
Table 3 Müller glia reprogramming “minimal experimental standard” - non-negotiable evidence hierarchy for conversion claims
Evidence tier
What must be demonstrated
Minimum required controls
Readouts that count as “orthogonal”
Pass/fail interpretation rule
Typical artifact this prevents
Tier 1: Genetic lineage tracingConverted neurons are MG-originMG-specific inducible CreERT2; quantify recombination efficiencyReporter-independent validationNo tracing = claim not interpretableMis-assigned cellular origin
Tier 2: Vector specificity/promoter leakage controlTransgene expression is cell-type restrictedAAV-GFAP leakage tests; alternative promoters; no-virus controlsSpatial mapping of transgene vs cell identityLeakage unresolved = conversion invalid“Apparent conversion”
Tier 3: Single-cell identity triangulationTrue fate switch vs stress mimicryInjury-only vs intervention; batch controlsscRNA ± ATAC; stress signatures; GRN congruenceMarker-only = insufficientStress-induced pseudo-neurons
Tier 4: Morphology + protein-level confirmationNeuronal morphology consistentBlinded morphometrics; layer localizationImmunostaining + morphology metricsPartial markers without morphology = weakMarker contamination
Tier 5 Physiology + circuit-level functionFunctional maturation & integrationElectrophysiology controls; synapse evidencePatch clamp; stimulus responses; connectivity proxiesNo function = not therapeuticImmature “neuron-like” cells
Tier 6: Contextual reproducibilityRobust across injury paradigmsExcitotoxic vs mechanical injurySame validation stack across modelsSingle-context only = fragileContext-dependent artifacts


Write to the Help Desk