Viable Fertile Mice Generated from Fully Pluripotent iPS Cells Derived from Adult Somatic Cells
- 573 Downloads
- 25 Citations
Abstract
Previous studies demonstrated that induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells could produce viable mice through tetraploid complementation, which was thought to be the most stringent test for pluripotency. However, these highly pluripotent iPS cells were previously reported to be generated from fibroblasts of embryonic origin. Achieving fully pluripotent iPS cells from multiple cell types, especially easily accessible adult tissues, will lead to a much greater clinical impact. We successfully generated high-pluripotency iPS cells from adult tail tip fibroblasts (TTF) that resulted in viable, full-term, fertile TTF-iPS animals with no obvious teratoma formation or other developmental abnormalities. Comparison of iPS cells from embryonic origin (MEF), progenitor cells (neural stem cells) or differentiated somatic cells (TTF) reveals that fully pluripotent developmental potential can be reached by each cell type, although with different induction efficiencies. This work provides the means for studying the mechanisms and regulation of direct reprogramming, and has encouraging implications for future clinical applications and therapeutic interventions.
Keywords
iPS cells Tail tip fibroblast (TTF) Fully pluripotent Tetraploid complementation Viable miceNotes
Acknowledgements
This study was supported in part by grants from China National Basic Research Program 2006CB701500 (to Q.Z.), 2007CB947800 (to F.Z.), 2007CB947700 (to L.W.) and the Shanghai Leading Academic Discipline Project S30201 STCSM Project 08dj1400502
Competing Financial Interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Supplementary material
References
- 1.Hanna, J., Wernig, M., Markoulaki, S., Sun, C. W., Meissner, A., Cassady, J. P., et al. (2007). Treatment of sickle cell anemia mouse model with iPS cells generated from autologous skin. Science, 318(5858), 1920–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 2.Zhao, X. Y., Li, W., Lv, Z., Liu, L., Tong, M., Hai, T., et al. (2009). iPS cells produce viable mice through tetraploid complementation. Nature, 461(7260), 86–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 3.Boland, M. J., Hazen, J. L., Nazor, K. L., Rodriguez, A. R., Gifford, W., Martin, G., et al. (2009). Adult mice generated from induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature, 461(7260), 91–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.Nakagawa, M., Koyanagi, M., Tanabe, K., Takahashi, K., Ichisaka, T., Aoi, T., et al. (2008). Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells without Myc from mouse and human fibroblasts. Nature Biotechnology, 26(1), 101–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 5.Stadtfeld, M., Brennand, K., & Hochedlinger, K. (2008). Reprogramming of pancreatic beta cells into induced pluripotent stem cells. Current Biology, 18(12), 890–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.Wernig, M., Meissner, A., Foreman, R., Brambrink, T., Ku, M., Hochedlinger, K., et al. (2007). In vitro reprogramming of fibroblasts into a pluripotent ES-cell-like state. Nature, 448(7151), 318–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 7.Conti, L., Pollard, S. M., Gorba, T., Reitano, E., Toselli, M., Biella, G., et al. (2005). Niche-independent symmetrical self-renewal of a mammalian tissue stem cell. PLoS Biology, 3(9), e283. PMCID: 1184591.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Ying, Q. L., Stavridis, M., Griffiths, D., Li, M., & Smith, A. (2003). Conversion of embryonic stem cells into neuroectodermal precursors in adherent monoculture. Nature Biotechnology, 21(2), 183–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 9.Zeng, F., & Schultz, R. M. (2005). RNA transcript profiling during zygotic gene activation in the preimplantation mouse embryo. Developmental Biology, 283(1), 40–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Brambrink, T., Foreman, R., Welstead, G. G., Lengner, C. J., Wernig, M., Suh, H., et al. (2008). Sequential expression of pluripotency markers during direct reprogramming of mouse somatic cells. Cell Stem Cell, 2(2), 151–9. PMCID: 2276627.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Wakayama, T., & Yanagimachi, R. (1999). Cloning of male mice from adult tail-tip cells. Nature Genetics, 22(2), 127–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Jaenisch, R., & Young, R. (2008). Stem cells, the molecular circuitry of pluripotency and nuclear reprogramming. Cell, 132(4), 567–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Nagy, A., Gocza, E., Diaz, E. M., Prideaux, V. R., Ivanyi, E., Markkula, M., et al. (1990). Embryonic stem cells alone are able to support fetal development in the mouse. Development, 110(3), 815–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 14.Blelloch, R., Wang, Z., Meissner, A., Pollard, S., Smith, A., & Jaenisch, R. (2006). Reprogramming efficiency following somatic cell nuclear transfer is influenced by the differentiation and methylation state of the donor nucleus. Stem Cells, 24(9), 2007–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Waddington, C. H. (1957). The strategy of the genes: a discussion of some aspects of theoretical biology. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
- 16.Inoue, K., Ogonuki, N., Miki, H., Hirose, M., Noda, S., Kim, J. M., et al. (2006). Inefficient reprogramming of the hematopoietic stem cell genome following nuclear transfer. Journal of Cell Science, 119(Pt 10), 1985–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Wakayama, S., Kishigami, S., Van Thuan, N., Ohta, H., Hikichi, T., Mizutani, E., et al. (2005). Propagation of an infertile hermaphrodite mouse lacking germ cells by using nuclear transfer and embryonic stem cell technology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(1), 29–33. PMCID: 544064.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar