Proteome adaptation in cell reprogramming proceeds via distinct transcriptional networks

Nature Communications

Volumn 5, Issue , 2014, Pages

  Benevento, Marco ^a,b   Tonge, Peter D ^c   Puri, Mira C ^c,d   Hussein, Samer M I ^c   Cloonan, Nicole ^e   Wood, David L ^e   Grimmond, Sean M ^e   Nagy, Andras ^c,d   Munoz, Javier ^a,b,f   Heck, Albert J R ^a,b  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b NETHERLANDS PROTEOMICS CENTRE   (Netherlands)

^c MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^f INSTITUTO DE SALUD CARLOS III   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DOXYCYCLINE; MESSENGER RNA; PROTEOME;

ADAPTATION; BIOACTIVITY; CELLS AND CELL COMPONENTS; GENE EXPRESSION; MASS SPECTROMETRY; PROTEOMICS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS;

ANIMAL CELL; ARTICLE; CELL STRUCTURE; CELL SUBPOPULATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMBRYO; GENE EXPRESSION; GENETIC TRANSCRIPTION; ION EXCHANGE CHROMATOGRAPHY; MASS SPECTROMETRY; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; NUCLEAR REPROGRAMMING; ONCOGENE C MYC; PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; PROTEOMICS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SOMATIC CELL; TANDEM MASS SPECTROMETRY; TRANSGENE; UPREGULATION;

EID: 84923002071     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20411723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms6613     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Takahashi, K. & Yamanaka, S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell 126, 663-676 (2006).
2. Chin, M. H., Pellegrini, M., Plath, K. & Lowry, W. E. Molecular analyses of human induced pluripotent stem cells and embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 7, 263-269 (2010).
3. Hawkins, R. D. et al. Distinct epigenomic landscapes of pluripotent and lineage-committed human cells. Cell Stem Cell 6, 479-491 (2010).
4. Maherali, N. et al. Directly reprogrammed fibroblasts show global epigenetic remodeling and widespread tissue contribution. Cell Stem Cell 1, 55-70 (2007).
5. Mikkelsen, T. S. et al. Dissecting direct reprogramming through integrative genomic analysis. Nature 454, 49-55 (2008).
6. Okita, K., Ichisaka, T. & Yamanaka, S. Generation of germline-competent induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 448, 313-317 (2007).
7. Wernig, M. et al. In vitro reprogramming of fibroblasts into a pluripotent ES-cell-like state. Nature 448, 318-324 (2007).
8. Boland, M. J. et al. Adult mice generated from induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 461, 91-94 (2009).
9. Kang, L., Wang, J., Zhang, Y., Kou, Z. & Gao, S. iPS cells can support full-term development of tetraploid blastocyst-complemented embryos. Cell Stem Cell 5, 135-138 (2009).
10. Zhao, X. et al. iPS cells produce viable mice through tetraploid complementation. Nature 461, 86-90 (2009).
11. Stadtfeld, M. et al. Aberrant silencing of imprinted genes on chromosome 12qF1 in mouse induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 465, 175-181 (2010).
12. Yu, J. et al. Induced pluripotent stem cell lines derived from human somatic cells. Science 318, 1917-1920 (2007).
13. Lowry, W. E. et al. Generation of human induced pluripotent stem cells from dermal fibroblasts. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 2883-2888 (2008).
14. Benevento, M. & Munoz, J. Role of mass spectrometry-based proteomics in the study of cellular reprogramming and induced pluripotent stem cells. Expert Rev. Proteomics 9, 379-399 (2012).
15. Park, I.-H. et al. Reprogramming of human somatic cells to pluripotency with defined factors. Nature 451, 141-146 (2008).
16. Hanna, J. et al. Direct reprogramming of terminally differentiated mature B lymphocytes to pluripotency. Cell 133, 250-264 (2008).
17. Loh, Y.-H. et al. Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells from human blood. Blood 113, 5476-5479 (2009).
18. Eminli, S., Utikal, J., Arnold, K., Jaenisch, R. & Hochedlinger, K. Reprogramming of neural progenitor cells into induced pluripotent stem cells in the absence of exogenous Sox2 expression. Stem Cells 26, 2467-2474 (2008).
19. Pijnappel, W. W. M. P. et al. A central role for TFIID in the pluripotent transcription circuitry. Nature 495, 516-519 (2013).
20. Krizhanovsky, V. & Lowe, S. W. Stem cells: the promises and perils of p53. Nature 460, 1085-1086 (2009).
21. Wang, W. et al. Rapid and efficient reprogramming of somatic cells to induced pluripotent stem cells by retinoic acid receptor gamma and liver receptor homolog 1. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 18283-18288 (2011).
22. Rais, Y. et al. Deterministic direct reprogramming of somatic cells to pluripotency. Nature 502, 65-70 (2013).
23. Huangfu, D. et al. Induction of pluripotent stem cells by defined factors is greatly improved by small-molecule compounds. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 795-797 (2008).
24. Feng, B., Ng, J.-H., Heng, J.-C. D. & Ng, H.-H. Molecules that promote or enhance reprogramming of somatic cells to induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 4, 301-312 (2009).
25. Wernig, M. et al. A drug-inducible transgenic system for direct reprogramming of multiple somatic cell types. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 916-924 (2008).
26. Markoulaki, S. et al. Transgenic mice with defined combinations of drug-inducible reprogramming factors. Nat. Biotechnol. 27, 169-171 (2009).
27. Woltjen, K. et al. piggyBac transposition reprograms fibroblasts to induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 458, 766-770 (2009).
28. Plath, K. & Lowry, W. E. Progress in understanding reprogramming to the induced pluripotent state. Nat. Rev. Genet. 12, 253-265 (2011).
29. Li, R. et al. A mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition initiates and is required for the nuclear reprogramming of mouse fibroblasts. Cell Stem Cell 7, 51-63 (2010).
30. Samavarchi-Tehrani, P. et al. Functional genomics reveals a BMP-driven mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition in the initiation of somatic cell reprogramming. Cell Stem Cell 7, 64-77 (2010).
31. Schwanháusser, B. et al. Global quantification of mammalian gene expression control. Nature 473, 337-342 (2011).
32. Altelaar, A. F. M., Munoz, J. & Heck, A. J. R. Next-generation proteomics: towards an integrative view of proteome dynamics. Nat. Rev. Genet. 14, 35-48 (2013).
33. Mann, M., Kulak, N. A., Nagaraj, N. & Cox, J. The coming age of complete, accurate, and ubiquitous proteomes. Mol. Cell 49, 583-590 (2013).
34. Munoz, J. et al. The quantitative proteomes of human-induced pluripotent stem cells and embryonic stem cells. Mol. Syst. Biol. 7, 550 (2011).
35. Phanstiel, D. H. et al. Proteomic and phosphoproteomic comparison of human ES and iPS cells. Nat. Methods 8, 821-827 (2011).
36. Hansson, J. et al. Highly coordinated proteome dynamics during reprogramming of somatic cells to pluripotency. Cell Rep. 2, 1579-1592 (2012).
37. Tonge, P. D. et al. Divergent reprogramming routes lead to alternative stem cell states. Nature doi: 10.1038/nature14047 (2014).
38. Hussein, S. M. I. et al. Genome-wide characterization of the routes to pluripotency. Nature doi: 10.1038/nature14046 (2014).
39. Clancy, J. L. et al. Small RNA changes en route to distinct cellular states of induced pluripotency. Nat. Commun. 5, 5522 doi:10.1038/ncomms6522 (2014).
40. Lee, D.-S. et al. An epigenomic roadmap to induced pluripotency reveals DNA methylation as a reprogramming modulator. Nat. Commun. 5, 5619 doi:10.1038/ncomms6619 (2014).
41. Muller, F. J. et al. Regulatory networks define phenotypic classes of human stem cell lines. Nature 455, 401-405 (2008).
42. Ohi, Y. et al. Incomplete DNA methylation underlies a transcriptional memory of somatic cells in human iPS cells. Nat. Cell Biol. 13, 541-549 (2011).
43. Polo, J. M. et al. Cell type of origin influences the molecular and functional properties of mouse induced pluripotent stem cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 848-855 (2010).
44. Gao, Y. et al. Replacement of Oct4 by Tet1 during iPSC induction reveals an important role of DNA methylation and hydroxymethylation in reprogramming. Cell Stem Cell 12, 453-469 (2013).
45. Pasini, D. et al. JARID2 regulates binding of the Polycomb repressive complex 2 to target genes in ES cells. Nature 464, 306-310 (2010).
46. Caretti, G., Di Padova, M., Micales, B., Lyons, G. E. & Sartorelli, V. The Polycomb Ezh2 methyltransferase regulates muscle gene expression and skeletal muscle differentiation. Genes Dev. 18, 2627-2638 (2004).
47. Lachmann, A. et al. ChEA: transcription factor regulation inferred from integrating genome-wide ChIP-X experiments. Bioinformatics 26, 2438-2444 (2010).
48. Schug, T. T., Berry, D. C., Shaw, N. S., Travis, S. N. & Noy, N. Opposing effects of retinoic acid on cell growth result from alternate activation of two different nuclear receptors. Cell 129, 723-733 (2007).
49. Galan-Caridad, J. M. et al. Zfx controls the self-renewal of embryonic and hematopoietic stem cells. Cell 129, 345-357 (2007).
50. Thompson, A. et al. Tandem mass tags: a novel quantification strategy for comparative analysis of complex protein mixtures by MS/MS. Anal. Chem. 75, 1895-1904 (2003).
51. Gauci, S. et al. Lys-N and trypsin cover complementary parts of the phosphoproteome in a refined SCX-based approach. Anal. Chem. 81, 4493-4501 (2009).
52. Elias, J. E. & Gygi, S. P. Target-decoy search strategy for increased confidence in large-scale protein identifications by mass spectrometry. Nat. Methods 4, 207-214 (2007).
53. Saeed, A. I. et al. TM4 microarray software suite. Methods Enzymol. 411, 134-193 (2006).
54. Rigbolt, K. T. G., Vanselow, J. T. & Blagoev, B. GProX, a user-friendly platform for bioinformatics analysis and visualization of quantitative proteomics data. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 10, O110.007450 (2011).
55. Chen, E. Y. et al. Expression2Kinases: mRNA profiling linked to multiple upstream regulatory layers. Bioinformatics 28, 105-111 (2012).
56. Curtis, R. E., Yuen, A., Song, L., Goyal, A. & Xing, E. P. TVNViewer: an interactive visualization tool for exploring networks that change over time or space. Bioinformatics 27, 1880-1881 (2011).