Erratum: Genome editing reveals a role for OCT4 in human embryogenesis (Nature (2017) 550 (67-73) DOI: 10.1038/nature24033);Genome editing reveals a role for OCT4 in human embryogenesis

Nature

Volumn 550, Issue 7674, 2017, Pages 67-73

  Fogarty, Norah M E ^a   McCarthy, Afshan ^a   Snijders, Kirsten E ^b   Powell, Benjamin E ^a   Kubikova, Nada ^c   Blakeley, Paul ^a   Lea, Rebecca ^a   Elder, Kay ^d   Wamaitha, Sissy E ^a   Kim, Daesik ^e   Maciulyte, Valdone ^a   Kleinjung, Jens ^a   Kim, Jin Soo ^e,f   Wells, Dagan ^c   Vallier, Ludovic ^b,g   Bertero, Alessandro ^b,h   Turner, James M A ^a   Niakan, Kathy K ^a  

^a THE FRANCIS CRICK INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^d John Radcliffe Hospital ^*  (United Kingdom)

^e Seoul National University   (South Korea)

^f Institute for Basic Science   (South Korea)

^g WELLCOME TRUST SANGER INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

^h UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GUIDE RNA; OCTAMER TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR 4; TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR CDX2; TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR NANOG; POU5F1 PROTEIN, HUMAN;

EMBRYO; EMBRYONIC DEVELOPMENT; GENE; GENE EXPRESSION; GENOME; MOLECULAR ANALYSIS; PROTEIN; RNA;

ARTICLE; BLASTOCYST; CRISPR-CAS9 SYSTEM; DIPLOIDY; ECTODERM; EMBRYO; EMBRYO DEVELOPMENT; GENE EDITING; GENE EXPRESSION; GENE FUNCTION; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN DEVELOPMENT; HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; PREIMPLANTATION EMBRYO; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TRANSCRIPTOMICS; ZYGOTE; ANIMAL; CELL LINEAGE; CRISPR CAS SYSTEM; CYTOLOGY; DEFICIENCY; EMBRYOLOGY; ENZYME SPECIFICITY; FEMALE; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION; GENETICS; GERM LAYER; MALE; MAMMALIAN EMBRYO; METABOLISM;

ANIMALS; BLASTOCYST; CELL LINEAGE; CRISPR-CAS SYSTEMS; ECTODERM; EMBRYO, MAMMALIAN; EMBRYONIC DEVELOPMENT; FEMALE; GENE EDITING; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION, DEVELOPMENTAL; GERM LAYERS; HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS; HUMANS; MALE; MICE; NANOG HOMEOBOX PROTEIN; OCTAMER TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR-3; SUBSTRATE SPECIFICITY; ZYGOTE;

EID: 85030775556     PISSN: 00280836     EISSN: 14764687     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nature24292     Document Type: Erratum

References (50)

1. Chen, A. E. et al. Optimal timing of inner cell mass isolation increases the efficiency of human embryonic stem cell derivation and allows generation of sibling cell lines. Cell Stem Cell 4, 103-106 (2009).
2. Niakan, K. K. & Eggan, K. Analysis of human embryos from zygote to blastocyst reveals distinct gene expression patterns relative to the mouse. Dev. Biol. 375, 54-64 (2013).
3. Blakeley, P. et al. Defining the three cell lineages of the human blastocyst by single-cell RNA-seq. Development 142, 3613 (2015).
4. Jinek, M. et al. A programmable dual-RNA-guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science 337, 816-821 (2012).
5. Kang, X. et al. Introducing precise genetic modifications into human 3PN embryos by CRISPR/Cas-mediated genome editing. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 33, 581-588 (2016).
6. Tang, L. et al. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human zygotes using Cas9 protein. Mol. Genet. Genomics 292, 525-533 (2017).
7. Liang, P. et al. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human tripronuclear zygotes. Protein Cell 6, 363-372 (2015).
8. Ma, H. et al. Correction of a pathogenic gene mutation in human embryos. Nature 548, 413-419 (2017).
9. Frum, T. et al. Oct4 cell-autonomously promotes primitive endoderm development in the mouse blastocyst. Dev. Cell 25, 610-622 (2013).
10. Nichols, J. et al. Formation of pluripotent stem cells in the mammalian embryo depends on the POU transcription factor Oct4. Cell 95, 379-391 (1998).
11. Bertero, A. et al. Optimized inducible shRNA and CRISPR/Cas9 platforms for in vitro studies of human development using hPSCs. Development 143, 4405-4418 (2016).
12. Hsu, P. D. et al. DNA targeting specificity of RNA-guided Cas9 nucleases. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 827-832 (2013).
13. Niwa, H., Masui, S., Chambers, I., Smith, A. G. & Miyazaki, J. Phenotypic complementation establishes requirements for specific POU domain and generic transactivation function of Oct-3/4 in embryonic stem cells. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22, 1526-1536 (2002).
14. Schöler, H. R., Ruppert, S., Suzuki, N., Chowdhury, K. & Gruss, P. New type of POU domain in germ line-specific protein Oct-4. Nature 344, 435-439 (1990).
15. Kim, D. et al. Digenome-seq: Genome-wide profiling of CRISPR-Cas9 off-target effects in human cells. Nat. Methods 12, 237-243 (2015).
16. Kim, D., Kim, S., Kim, S., Park, J. & Kim, J. S. Genome-wide target specificities of CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases revealed by multiplex Digenome-seq. Genome Res. 26, 406-415 (2016).
17. Wang, H. et al. One-step generation of mice carrying mutations in multiple genes by CRISPR/Cas-mediated genome engineering. Cell 153, 910-918 (2013).
18. Le Bin, G. C. et al. Oct4 is required for lineage priming in the developing inner cell mass of the mouse blastocyst. Development 141, 1001-1010 (2014).
19. Yen, S. T. et al. Somatic mosaicism and allele complexity induced by CRISPR/ Cas9 RNA injections in mouse zygotes. Dev. Biol. 393, 3-9 (2014).
20. Cho, S. W., Lee, J., Carroll, D., Kim, J. S. & Lee, J. Heritable gene knockout in Caenorhabditis elegans by direct injection of Cas9-sgRNA ribonucleoproteins. Genetics 195, 1177-1180 (2013).
21. Shin, H. Y. et al. CRISPR/Cas9 targeting events cause complex deletions and insertions at 17 sites in the mouse genome. Nat. Commun. 8, 15464 (2017).
22. Capmany, G., Taylor, A., Braude, P. R. & Bolton, V. N. The timing of pronuclear formation, DNA synthesis and cleavage in the human 1-cell embryo. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 2, 299-306 (1996).
23. Balakier, H., MacLusky, N. J. & Casper, R. F. Characterization of the first cell cycle in human zygotes: Implications for cryopreservation. Fertil. Steril. 59, 359-365 (1993).
24. Kim, S., Kim, D., Cho, S. W., Kim, J. & Kim, J. S. Highly efficient RNA-guided genome editing in human cells via delivery of purified Cas9 ribonucleoproteins. Genome Res. 24, 1012-1019 (2014).
25. Vera-Rodriguez, M., Chavez, S. L., Rubio, C., Reijo Pera, R. A. & Simon, C. Prediction model for aneuploidy in early human embryo development revealed by single-cell analysis. Nat. Commun. 6, 7601 (2015).
26. Wells, D. et al. Clinical utilisation of a rapid low-pass whole genome sequencing technique for the diagnosis of aneuploidy in human embryos prior to implantation. J. Med. Genet. 51, 553-562 (2014).
27. Maurer, M. et al. Chromosomal aneuploidies and early embryonic developmental arrest. Int. J. Fertil. Steril. 9, 346-353 (2015).
28. Wong, C. C. et al. Non-invasive imaging of human embryos before embryonic genome activation predicts development to the blastocyst stage. Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 1115-1121 (2010).
29. Macaulay, I. C. et al. G&T-seq: Parallel sequencing of single-cell genomes and transcriptomes. Nat. Methods 12, 519-522 (2015).
30. Yan, L. et al. Single-cell RNA-seq profiling of human preimplantation embryos and embryonic stem cells. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 20, 1131-1139 (2013).
31. Roode, M. et al. Human hypoblast formation is not dependent on FGF signalling. Dev. Biol. 361, 358-363 (2012).
32. Kuijk, E. W. et al. The roles of FGF and MAP kinase signaling in the segregation of the epiblast and hypoblast cell lineages in bovine and human embryos. Development 139, 871-882 (2012).
33. Suzuki, T., Asami, M. & Perry, A. C. Asymmetric parental genome engineering by Cas9 during mouse meiotic exit. Sci. Rep. 4, 7621 (2014).
34. Egli, D., Zuccaro, M. V., Kosicki, M., Church, G. M., Bradley, A. & Jasin, M. Inter-homologue repair in fertilized human eggs? Preprint at http://dx.doi. org/10.1101/181255 (2017).
35. Auton, A. et al. A global reference for human genetic variation. Nature 526, 68-74 (2015).
36. Ran, F. A. et al. Genome engineering using the CRISPR-Cas9 system. Nat. Protocols 8, 2281-2308 (2013).
37. Cong, L. et al. Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science 339, 819-823 (2013).
38. Brinkman, E. K., Chen, T., Amendola, M. & van Steensel, B. Easy quantitative assessment of genome editing by sequence trace decomposition. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, e168 (2014).
39. Güell, M., Yang, L. & Church, G. M. Genome editing assessment using CRISPR Genome Analyzer (CRISPR-GA). Bioinformatics 30, 2968-2970 (2014).
40. Park, J., Lim, K., Kim, J. S. & Bae, S. Cas-analyzer: An online tool for assessing genome editing results using NGS data. Bioinformatics 33, 286-288 (2017).
41. Fragouli, E. et al. Analysis of implantation and ongoing pregnancy rates following the transfer of mosaic diploid-aneuploid blastocysts. Hum. Genet. 136, 805-819 (2017).
42. Lou, X., Kang, M., Xenopoulos, P., Muñoz-Descalzo, S. & Hadjantonakis, A. K. A rapid and efficient 2D/3D nuclear segmentation method for analysis of early mouse embryo and stem cell image data. Stem Cell Reports 2, 382-397 (2014).
43. Vallier, L. Serum-free and feeder-free culture conditions for human embryonic stem cells. Methods Mol. Biol. 690, 57-66 (2011).
44. Kim, D. et al. TopHat2: Accurate alignment of transcriptomes in the presence of insertions, deletions and gene fusions. Genome Biol. 14, R36 (2013).
45. Liao, Y., Smyth, G. K. & Shi, W. featureCounts: An efficient general purpose program for assigning sequence reads to genomic features. Bioinformatics 30, 923-930 (2014).
46. Bacher, R. et al. SCnorm: Robust normalization of single-cell RNA-seq data. Nat. Methods 14, 584-586 (2017).
47. Risso, D., Ngai, J., Speed, T. P. & Dudoit, S. Normalization of RNA-seq data using factor analysis of control genes or samples. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 896-902 (2014).
48. Anders, S., Pyl, P. T. & Huber, W. HTSeq-A Python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data. Bioinformatics 31, 166-169 (2015).
49. Love, M. I., Huber, W. & Anders, S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 15, 550 (2014).
50. Mortazavi, A., Williams, B. A., McCue, K., Schaeffer, L. & Wold, B. Mapping and quantifying mammalian transcriptomes by RNA-Seq. Nat. Methods 5, 621-628 (2008).