Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Fransson, M.

  • Google
  • 1
  • 7
  • 4

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2015Investigation of Human Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Cultured on PLGA or PLGA/Chitosan Electrospun Nanofibers4citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Ajalloueian, Fatemeh
1 / 9 shared
Hilborn, Jöns
1 / 5 shared
Massumi, M.
1 / 1 shared
Magnusson, P. U.
1 / 1 shared
Arpanaei, A.
1 / 1 shared
Tavanai, Hossein
1 / 3 shared
Leblanc, K.
1 / 1 shared
Chart of publication period
2015

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Ajalloueian, Fatemeh
  • Hilborn, Jöns
  • Massumi, M.
  • Magnusson, P. U.
  • Arpanaei, A.
  • Tavanai, Hossein
  • Leblanc, K.
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Investigation of Human Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Cultured on PLGA or PLGA/Chitosan Electrospun Nanofibers

  • Ajalloueian, Fatemeh
  • Hilborn, Jöns
  • Massumi, M.
  • Fransson, M.
  • Magnusson, P. U.
  • Arpanaei, A.
  • Tavanai, Hossein
  • Leblanc, K.
Abstract

We compared the viability, proliferation, and differentiation of human Mesenchymal Stromal Cells (MSC) after culture on poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) and PLGA/chitosan (PLGA/CH) hybrid scaffolds. We applied conventional and emulsion electrospinning techniques, respectively, for the fabrication of the PLGA and PLGA/ CH scaffolds. Electrospinning under optimum conditions resulted in an average fiber diameter of 166 ± 33 nm for the PLGA/CH and 680 ± 175 nm for the PLGA scaffold. The difference between the tensile strength of the PLGA and PLGA/CH nanofibers was not significant, but PLGA/CH showed a significantly lower tensile modulus and elongation at break. However, it should be noted that the extensibility of the PLGA/CH was higher than that of the nanofibrous scaffolds of pure chitosan. As expected, a higher degree of hydrophilicity was seen with PLGA/ CH, as compared to PLGA alone. The biocompatibility of the PLGA and PLGA/CH scaffolds was compared using MTS assay as well as analysis by scanning electron microscopy and confocal microscopy. The results showed that both scaffold types supported the viability and proliferation of human MSC, with significantly higher rates on PLGA/ CH nanofibers. Nonetheless, an analysis of gene expression of MSC grown on either PLGA or PLGA/CH showed a similar differentiation pattern towards bone, nerve and adipose tissues.

Topics
  • scanning electron microscopy
  • strength
  • tensile strength
  • electrospinning
  • biocompatibility
  • confocal microscopy