Multiple cell and population-level interactions with mouse embryonic stem cell heterogeneity

Development (Cambridge)

Volumn 142, Issue 16, 2015, Pages 2840-2849

  Cannon, Danielle ^a   Corrigan, Adam M ^a   Miermont, Agnes ^a   McDonel, Patrick ^b   Chubb, Jonathan R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b BROAD INSTITUTE OF MIT AND HARVARD   (United States)

Author keywords

Heterogeneity; High content imaging; Nanog; Rex1; Stem cell; Stochastic gene expression; Zfp42

Indexed keywords

PROTEIN REX1; REX PROTEIN; TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR NANOG; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; HOMEODOMAIN PROTEIN; NANOG PROTEIN, MOUSE;

ANIMAL CELL; ARTICLE; CELL CYCLE; CELL DENSITY; CELL HETEROGENEITY; CELL INTERACTION; CELL LINEAGE; CELL MOTILITY; CELL POPULATION; EMBRYO; EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; GENE; GENE EXPRESSION; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MOUSE; NANOG GENE; NONHUMAN; PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL MOTION; CULTURE TECHNIQUE; FLUORESCENCE; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION; METABOLISM; PHYSIOLOGY; STEM CELL NICHE;

ANIMALS; CELL CULTURE TECHNIQUES; CELL CYCLE; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL LINEAGE; CELL MOVEMENT; EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS; FLUORESCENCE; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION, DEVELOPMENTAL; HOMEODOMAIN PROTEINS; MICE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; STEM CELL NICHE;

EID: 84939631183     PISSN: 09501991     EISSN: 14779129     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1242/dev.120741     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Abranches, E., Guedes, A. M. V., Moravec, M., Maamar, H., Svoboda, P., Raj, A. and Henrique, D. (2014). Stochastic NANOG fluctuations allow mouse embryonic stem cells to explore pluripotency. Development 141, 2770-2779.
2. Brooks, R. F. (1981). Random transitions and cell cycle control. Prog. Clin. Biol. Res. 66, 593-601.
3. Brooks, R. F., Bennett, D. C. and Smith, J. A. (1980). Mammalian cell cycles need two random transitions. Cell 19, 493-504.
4. Budirahardja, Y. and Gonczy, P. (2009). Coupling the cell cycle to development. Development 136, 2861-2872.
5. Chambers, I., Colby, D., Robertson, M., Nichols, J., Lee, S., Tweedie, S. and Smith, A. (2003). Functional expression cloning of Nanog, a pluripotency sustaining factor in embryonic stem cells. Cell 113, 643-655.
6. Chambers, I., Silva, J., Colby, D., Nichols, J., Nijmeijer, B., Robertson, M., Vrana, J., Jones, K., Grotewold, L. and Smith, A. (2007). Nanog safeguards pluripotency and mediates germline development. Nature 450, 1230-1234.
7. Corrigan, A. M. and Chubb, J. R. (2014). Regulation of transcriptional bursting by a naturally oscillating signal. Curr. Biol. 24, 205-211.
8. Di Talia, S., Skotheim, J. M., Bean, J. M., Siggia, E. D. and Cross, F. R. (2007). The effects of molecular noise and size control on variability in the budding yeast cell cycle. Nature 448, 947-951.
9. Faddah, D. A., Wang, H., Cheng, A. W., Katz, Y., Buganim, Y. and Jaenisch, R. (2013). Single-cell analysis reveals that expression of nanog is biallelic and equally variable as that of other pluripotency factors in mouse ESCs. Cell Stem Cell 13, 23-29.
10. Hayashi, K., Lopes, S. M. C. d. S., Tang, F. and Surani, M. A. (2008). Dynamic equilibrium and heterogeneity of mouse pluripotent stem cells with distinct functional and epigenetic states. Cell Stem Cell 3, 391-401.
11. Huang, S. (2011). Systems biology of stem cells: three useful perspectives to help overcome the paradigm of linear pathways. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 366, 2247-2259.
12. Huang, S., Eichler, G., Bar-Yam, Y. and Ingber, D. E. (2005). Cell fates as high- dimensional attractor states of a complex gene regulatory network. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 128-701.
13. Kalmar, T., Lim, C., Hayward, P., Munoz-Descalzo, S., Nichols, J., Garcia-Ojalvo, J. and Martinez Arias, A. (2009). Regulated fluctuations in nanog expression mediate cell fate decisions in embryonic stem cells. PLoS Biol. 7, e1000149.
14. Kumar, R. M., Cahan, P., Shalek, A. K., Satija, R., DaleyKeyser, A. J., Li, H., Zhang, J., Pardee, K., Gennert, D., Trombetta, J. J. et al. (2014). Deconstructing transcriptional heterogeneity in pluripotent stem cells. Nature 516, 56-61.
15. Li, V. C. and Kirschner, M. W. (2014). Molecular ties between the cell cycle and differentiation in embryonic stem cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, 9503-9508.
16. Li, V. C., Ballabeni, A. and Kirschner, M. W. (2012). Gap 1 phase length and mouse embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, 12550-12555.
17. Miyanari, Y. and Torres-Padilla, M.-E. (2012). Control of ground-state pluripotency by allelic regulation of Nanog. Nature 483, 470-473.
18. Muramoto, T. and Chubb, J. R. (2008). Live imaging of the Dictyostelium cell cycle reveals widespread S phase during development, a G2 bias in spore differentiation and a premitotic checkpoint. Development 135, 1647-1657.
19. Muramoto, T., Muller, I., Thomas, G., Melvin, A. and Chubb, J. R. (2010). Methylation of H3K4 Is required for inheritance of active transcriptional states. Curr. Biol. 20, 397-406.
20. Murphy, J. S., Landsberger, F. R., Kikuchi, T. and Tamm, I. (1984). Occurrence of cell division is not exponentially distributed: differences in the generation times of sister cells can be derived from the theory of survival of populations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 81, 2379-2383.
21. Plusa, B., Piliszek, A., Frankenberg, S., Artus, J. and Hadjantonakis, A.-K. (2008). Distinct sequential cell behaviours direct primitive endoderm formation in the mouse blastocyst. Development 135, 3081-3091.
22. Pour, M., Pilzer, I., Rosner, R., Smith, Z. D., Meissner, A. and Nachman, I. (2015). Epigenetic predisposition to reprogramming fates in somatic cells. EMBO Rep. 16, 370-378.
23. Sharma, S. V., Lee, D. Y., Li, B., Quinlan, M. P., Takahashi, F., Maheswaran, S., McDermott, U., Azizian, N., Zou, L., Fischbach, M. A. et al. (2010). A chromatin-mediated reversible drug-tolerant state in cancer cell subpopulations. Cell 141, 69-80.
24. Sigal, A., Milo, R., Cohen, A., Geva-Zatorsky, N., Klein, Y., Liron, Y., Rosenfeld, N., Danon, T., Perzov, N. and Alon, U. (2006). Variability and memory of protein levels in human cells. Nature 444, 643-646.
25. Singer, Z. S., Yong, J., Tischler, J., Hackett, J. A., Altinok, A., Surani, M. A., Cai, L. and Elowitz, M. B. (2014). Dynamic heterogeneity and DNA methylation in embryonic stem cells. Mol. Cell 55, 319-331.
26. Stevense, M., Muramoto, T., Muller, I. and Chubb, J. R. (2010). Digital nature of the immediate-early transcriptional response. Development 137, 579-584.
27. Toyooka, Y., Shimosato, D., Murakami, K., Takahashi, K. and Niwa, H. (2008). Identification and characterization of subpopulations in undifferentiated ES cell culture. Development 135, 909-918.
28. Waddington, C. H. (1957). The Strategy of the Genes; a Discussion of Some Aspects of Theoretical Biology. London: Allen & Unwin.
29. Wullstein, L. H., Bjorklund, R. and Eyring, H. (1980). Application of the Eyring- Stover survival theory to soil-related functions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 77, 3767-3768.
30. Xenopoulos, P., Kang, M. and Hadjantonakis, A.-K. (2012). Cell lineage allocation within the inner cell mass of the mouse blastocyst. Results Probl. Cell Differ. 55, 185-202.
31. Xenopoulos, P., Kang, M., Puliafito, A., Di Talia, S. and Hadjantonakis, A. K. (2015). Heterogeneities in Nanog expression drive stable commitment to pluripotency in the mouse blastocyst. Cell Rep. 10, 1508-1520.
32. Ying, Q.-L., Wray, J., Nichols, J., Batlle-Morera, L., Doble, B., Woodgett, J., Cohen, P. and Smith, A. (2008). The ground state of embryonic stem cell self- renewal. Nature 453, 519-523.