Single-cell XIST expression in human preimplantation embryos and newly reprogrammed female induced pluripotent stem cells

Stem Cells

Volumn 33, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 1771-1781

  Briggs, Sharon F ^a   Dominguez, Antonia A ^a   Chavez, Shawn L ^a   Reijo Pera, Renee A ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Human; Human induced pluripotent stem cells; Preimplantation embryo development; X chromosome inactivation; XIST RNA

Indexed keywords

LONG UNTRANSLATED RNA; MESSENGER RNA;

ARTICLE; CELL CULTURE; EMBRYO; FEMALE; FIBROBLAST; FLUORESCENCE ACTIVATED CELL SORTING; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; GENE EXPRESSION; HUMAN; OOCYTE; PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL; PREIMPLANTATION EMBRYO; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; REVERSE TRANSCRIPTION POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; STEM CELL; X CHROMOSOME; X CHROMOSOME INACTIVATION; BLASTOCYST; CYTOLOGY; GENETICS; HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; INDUCED PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL; NUCLEAR REPROGRAMMING;

BLASTOCYST; CELLULAR REPROGRAMMING; FEMALE; HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS; HUMANS; INDUCED PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS; X CHROMOSOME INACTIVATION;

EID: 84929715929     PISSN: 10665099     EISSN: 15494918     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/stem.1992     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Lyon MF,. Gene action in the X-chromosome of the mouse (Mus musculus L.). Nature 1961; 190: 372-373.
2. Huynh KD, Lee JT,. Inheritance of a pre- inactivated paternal X chromosome in early mouse embryos. Nature 2003; 426: 857-862.
3. Mak W, Nesterova TB, de Napoles M, et al., Reactivation of the paternal X chromosome in early mouse embryos. Science 2004; 303: 666-669.
4. Okamoto I, Otte AP, Allis CD, et al., Epigenetic dynamics of imprinted X inactivation during early mouse development. Science 2004; 303: 644-649.
5. Matsui J, Goto Y, Takagi N,. Control of Xist expression for imprinted and random X chromosome inactivation in mice. Hum Mol Genet 2001; 10: 1393-1401.
6. Brown CJ, Ballabio A, Rupert JL, et al., A gene from the region of the human X inactivation centre is expressed exclusively from the inactive X chromosome. Nature 1991; 349: 38-44.
7. Clemson CM, McNeil JA, Willard HF, et al., XIST RNA paints the inactive X chromosome at interphase: Evidence for a novel RNA involved in nuclear/chromosome structure. J Cell Biol 1996; 132: 259-275.
8. Marahrens Y, Panning B, Dausman J, et al., Xist-deficient mice are defective in dosage compensation but not spermatogenesis. Genes Dev 1997; 11: 156-166.
9. Penny GD, Kay GF, Sheardown SA, et al., Requirement for Xist in X chromosome inactivation. Nature 1996; 379: 131-137.
10. Brown CJ, Robinson WP,. XIST expression and X-chromosome inactivation in human preimplantation embryos. Am J Hum Genet 1997; 61: 5-8.
11. Daniels R, Zuccotti M, Kinis T, et al., XIST expression in human oocytes and preimplantation embryos. Am J Hum Genet 1997; 61: 33-39.
12. van den Berg IM, Laven JS, Stevens M, et al., X chromosome inactivation is initiated in human preimplantation embryos. Am J Hum Genet 2009; 84: 771-779.
13. Okamoto I, Patrat C, Thepot D, et al., Eutherian mammals use diverse strategies to initiate X-chromosome inactivation during development. Nature 2011; 472: 370-374.
14. Silva SS, Rowntree RK, Mekhoubad S, et al., X-chromosome inactivation and epigenetic fluidity in human embryonic stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008; 105: 4820-4825.
15. Bruck T, Benvenisty N,. Meta-analysis of the heterogeneity of X chromosome inactivation in human pluripotent stem cells. Stem Cell Res 2011; 6: 187-193.
16. Nichols J, Silva J, Roode M, et al., Suppression of Erk signaling promotes ground state pluripotency in the mouse embryo. Development 2009; 136: 3215-3222.
17. Maherali N, Sridharan R, Xie W, et al., Directly reprogrammed fibroblasts show global epigenetic remodeling and widespread tissue contribution. Cell Stem Cell 2007; 1: 55-70.
18. Tchieu J, Kuoy E, Chin MH, et al., Female human iPSCs retain an inactive X chromosome. Cell Stem Cell 2010; 7: 329-342.
19. Amenduni M, De Filippis R, Cheung AY, et al., iPS cells to model CDKL5-related disorders. Eur J Hum Genet 2011; 19: 1246-1255.
20. Ananiev G, Williams EC, Li H, et al., Isogenic pairs of wild type and mutant induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) lines from Rett syndrome patients as in vitro disease model. PLoS One 2011; 6: e25255.
21. Cheung AY, Horvath LM, Grafodatskaya D, et al., Isolation of MECP2-null Rett Syndrome patient hiPS cells and isogenic controls through X-chromosome inactivation. Hum Mol Genet 2011; 20: 2103-2115.
22. Mekhoubad S, Bock C, de Boer AS, et al., Erosion of dosage compensation impacts human iPSC disease modeling. Cell Stem Cell 2012; 10: 595-609.
23. Kim KY, Hysolli E, Tanaka Y, et al., X Chromosome of female cells shows dynamic changes in status during human somatic cell reprogramming. Stem Cell Rep 2014; 2: 896-909.
24. Tomoda K, Takahashi K, Leung K, et al., Derivation conditions impact X-inactivation status in female human induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 2012; 11: 91-99.
25. Marchetto MC, Carromeu C, Acab A, et al., A model for neural development and treatment of Rett syndrome using human induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell 2010; 143: 527-539.
26. Lagarkova MA, Shutova MV, Bogomazova AN, et al., Induction of pluripotency in human endothelial cells resets epigenetic profile on genome scale. Cell Cycle 2010; 9: 937-946.
27. Bogomazova AN, Lagarkova MA, Panova AV, et al., Reactivation of capital HA, Cyrillic chromosome upon reprogramming leads to changes in the replication pattern and 5hmC accumulation. Chromosoma 2014; 123: 117-128.
28. Enver T, Soneji S, Joshi C, et al., Cellular differentiation hierarchies in normal and culture-adapted human embryonic stem cells. Hum Mol Genet 2005; 14: 3129-3140.
29. Lengner CJ, Gimelbrant AA, Erwin JA, et al., Derivation of pre-X inactivation human embryonic stem cells under physiological oxygen concentrations. Cell 2010; 141: 872-883.
30. Anguera MC, Sadreyev R, Zhang Z, et al., Molecular signatures of human induced pluripotent stem cells highlight sex differences and cancer genes. Cell Stem Cell 2012; 11: 75-90.
31. Wong CC, Loewke KE, Bossert NL, et al., Non-invasive imaging of human embryos before embryonic genome activation predicts development to the blastocyst stage. Nat Biotechnol 2010; 28: 1115-1121.
32. Chavez SL, Loewke KE, Han J, et al., Dynamic blastomere behaviour reflects human embryo ploidy by the four-cell stage. Nat Commun 2012; 3: 1251.
33. Kalista T, Freeman HA, Behr B, et al., Donation of embryos for human development and stem cell research. Cell Stem Cell 2011; 8: 360-362.
34. Chavez SL, McElroy SL, Bossert NL, et al., Comparison of epigenetic mediator expression and function in mouse and human embryonic blastomeres. Hum Mol Genet 2014; 23: 4970-4984.
35. Dobson AT, Raja R, Abeyta MJ, et al., The unique transcriptome through day 3 of human preimplantation development. Hum Mol Genet 2004; 13: 1461-1470.
36. Bogomazova AN, Lagarkova MA, Panova AV, et al., Reactivation of X chromosome upon reprogramming leads to changes in the replication pattern and 5hmC accumulation. Chromosoma 2014; 123: 117-128.
37. Henderson JK, Draper JS, Baillie HS, et al., Preimplantation human embryos and embryonic stem cells show comparable expression of stage-specific embryonic antigens. Stem Cells 2002; 20: 329-337.
38. Dominguez AA, Chiang HR, Sukhwani M, et al., Human germ cell formation in xenotranplants of induced pluripotent stem cells carrying X chromosome aneuploidies. Sci Rep 2014; 4: 6432.
39. Cahan P, Daley GQ,. Origins and implications of pluripotent stem cell variability and heterogeneity. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2013; 14: 357-368.
40. Toyooka Y, Shimosato D, Murakami K, et al., Identification and characterization of subpopulations in undifferentiated ES cell culture. Development 2008; 135: 909-918.
41. Narsinh KH, Sun N, Sanchez-Freire V, et al., Single cell transcriptional profiling reveals heterogeneity of human induced pluripotent stem cells. J Clin Invest 2011; 121: 1217-1221.
42. Carey BW, Markoulaki S, Hanna JH, et al., Reprogramming factor stoichiometry influences the epigenetic state and biological properties of induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 2011; 9: 588-598.
43. Sommer CA, Christodoulou C, Gianotti-Sommer A, et al., Residual expression of reprogramming factors affects the transcriptional program and epigenetic signatures of induced pluripotent stem cells. PloS One 2012; 7: e51711.