The Molecular Basis of Embryonic Stem Cell Self-Renewal

Chapter
Part of the Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine book series (STEMCELL)

Abstract

Peri-implantation stage embryos are a source of pluripotent cells that can be cultured indefinitely in vitro as a stable, self-renewing population. By definition, these cell populations have the capacity to differentiate into all cell types of the adult. Consequently, these cells are of special interest to developmental biologists and have significant potential in the area of cell replacement therapy. In this chapter we discuss the hallmarks of pluripotent cells derived from murine and human embryos and compare signaling pathways and transcription factor networks required for the self-renewing, pluripotent state. Maintenance of pluripotent cells derived from murine and human embryos requires different culture conditions for their in vitro maintenance, indicative of distinct differences at the molecular level and developmental nonequivalence. This chapter will evaluate the literature in terms of what is critical, from a signal transduction perspective, for maintenance of pluripotency and will highlight common themes that exist between embryonically derived stem cell populations. Recent findings describing epiblast stem cells (EpiScs), a self-renewing pluripotent cell type derived from post-implantation stage embryos, will be discussed with respect to embryonic stem cells and primitive ectoderm. EpiScs seem to be more closely related to hESCs than mESCs, posing some interesting questions as to the developmental equivalence of hESCs and mESCs. Finally, the new revolution of reprogramming from a differentiated state to an induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cell state will be discussed in relation to what we know about self-renewal regulatory networks and how this technology promises to revolutionize stem cell–based regenerative therapy.

Keywords

Embryonic stem cell Pluripotency Self-renewal 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Hogan B, Beddington R, Constantini F, et al. Manipulating the mouse embryo. 2nd ed. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 1994.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stern CD. Gastrulation: from cells to embryo. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rossant J. Stem cells and lineage development in the mammalian blastocyst. Reprod Fertil Dev. 2007;19:111–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nagy A, Gertsenstein M, Vintersten K, et al. Manipulating the mouse embryo. 3rd ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 2003. pp. 131–40.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coucavanis E, Martin GR. Signals for death and survival: a two-step mechanism for cavitation in the vertebrate embryo. Cell. 1995;83:279–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Martin GR. Isolation of a pluripotent cell line from early mouse embryos cultured in medium conditioned by teratocarcinoma stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981;78:7634–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Evans MJ, Kaufman MH. Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature. 1981;292:154–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zwaka TP, Thomson JA. Differentiation of human embryonic stem cells occurs through symmetric cell division. Stem Cells. 2005;23:146–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Beddington RS, Robertson EJ. An assessment of the developmental potential of embryonic stem cells in the midgestation mouse embryo. Development. 1989;105:733–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shimosato D, Shiki M, Niwa H. Extra-embryonic endoderm cells derived from ES cells induced by GATA factors acquire the character of XEN cells. BMC Dev Biol. 2007;7:80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fujikura J, Yamato E, Yonemura S, et al. Differentiation of embryonic stem cells is induced by GATA factors. Genes Dev. 2002;16:784–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cartwright P, McLean C, Sheppard A, et al. LIF/STAT3 controls ES cell self-renewal and pluripotency by a Myc-dependent mechanism. Development. 2005;132:885–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    White J, Dalton S. Cell cycle control of embryonic stem cells. Stem Cell Rev. 2005;1:131–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nichols J, Zevnik B, Anastassiadis K, et al. Formation of pluripotent stem cells in the mammalian embryo depends on the POU transcription factor Oct4. Cell. 1998;95:379–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mitsui K, Tokuzawa Y, Itoh H, et al. The homeoprotein Nanog is required for maintenance of pluripotency in mouse epiblast and ES cells. Cell. 2003;113:631–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chambers I, Colby D, Robertson M, et al. Functional expression cloning of Nanog, a pluripotency sustaining factor in embryonic stem cells. Cell. 2003;113:643–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Avilion AA, Nicolis SK, Pevny LH, et al. Multipotent cell lineages in early mouse development depend on SOX2 function. Genes Dev. 2003;17:126–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Niwa H. How is pluripotency determined and maintained? Development 2007;134:635–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Boiani M, Scholer HR. Regulatory networks in embryo-derived pluripotent stem cells. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2005;6: 872–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Solter D, Knowles BB. Monoclonal antibody defining a stage-specific mouse embryonic antigen (SSEA-1). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1978;75:5565–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oka M, Tagoku K, Russell TL, et al. CD9 is associated with leukemia inhibitory factor-mediated maintenance of embryonic stem cells. Mol Biol Cell. 2002;13:1274–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nash R, Neves L, Faast R, et al. The lectin Dolichos biflorus agglutinin recognizes glycan epitopes on the surface of murine embryonic stem cells: a new tool for characterizing pluripotent cells and early differentiation. Stem Cells. 2007;25: 974–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brimble SN, Sherrer ES, Uhl EW, et al. The cell surface glycosphingolipids SSEA-3 and SSEA-4 are not essential for human ESC pluripotency. Stem Cells. 2007;25:54–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Thomson JA, Itskovitz-Eldor J, Shapiro SS, et al. Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts. Science. 1998;282:1145–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reubinoff BE, Pera MF, Fong CY, et al. Embryonic stem cell lines from human blastocysts: somatic differentiation in vitro. Nat Biotechnol. 2000;18:399–404.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Brons IG, Smithers LE, Trotter MW, et al. Derivation of pluripotent epiblast stem cells from mammalian embryos. Nature. 2007;448:191–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tesar PJ, Chenoweth JG, Brook FA, et al. New cell lines from mouse epiblast share defining features with human embryonic stem cells. Nature. 2007;448:196–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Smith AG, Heath JK, Donaldson DD, et al. Inhibition of pluripotential embryonic stem cell differentiation by purified polypeptides. Nature. 1988;336:688–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wakayama S, Hikichi T, Suetsugu R, et al. Efficient establishment of mouse embryonic stem cell lines from single blastomeres and polar bodies. Stem Cells. 2007;25:986–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Klimanskaya I, Chung Y, Becker S, et al. Derivation of human embryonic stem cells from single blastomeres. Nat Protoc. 2007;2:1963–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Stead E, White J, Faast R, et al. Pluripotent cell division cycles are driven by ectopic Cdk2, cyclin A/E and E2F activities. Oncogene. 2002;21:8320–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Matsuda T, Nakamura T, Nakao K, et al. STAT3 activation is sufficient to maintain an undifferentiated state of mouse embryonic stem cells. EMBO J. 1999;18:4261–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Niwa H, Burdon T, Chambers I, et al. Self-renewal of pluripotent embryonic stem cells is mediated via activation of STAT3. Genes Dev. 1998;12:2048–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Raz R, Lee CK, Cannizzaro LA, et al. Essential role of STAT3 for embryonic stem cell pluripotency. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999;96:2846–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Nichols J, Chambers I, Taga T, et al. Physiological rationale for responsiveness of mouse embryonic stem cells to gp130 cytokines. Development. 2001;128:2333–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Humphrey RK, Beattie GM, Lopez AD, et al. Maintenance of pluripotency in human embryonic stem cells is STAT3 independent. Stem Cells. 2004;22:522–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Umehara H, Kimura T, Ohtsuka S, et al. Efficient derivation of embryonic stem cells by inhibition of glycogen synthase kinase-3. Stem Cells. 2007;25:2705–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ying QL, Nichols J, Chambers I, et al. BMP induction of Id proteins suppresses differentiation and sustains embryonic stem cell self-renewal in collaboration with STAT3. Cell. 2003;115: 281–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Qi X, Li TG, Hao J, et al. BMP4 supports self-renewal of embryonic stem cells by inhibiting mitogen-activated protein kinase pathways. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101:6027–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Takahashi K, Murakami M, Yamanaka S. Role of the phosphoinositide 3-kinase pathway in mouse embryonic stem (ES) cells. Biochem Soc Trans. 2005;33:1522–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Storm MP, Bone HK, Beck CG, et al. Regulation of Nanog expression by phosphoinositide 3-kinase-dependent signaling in murine embryonic stem cells. J Biol Chem. 2007;282:6265–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Paling NR, Wheadon H, Bone HK, et al. Regulation of embryonic stem cell self-renewal by phosphoinositide 3-kinase-dependent signaling. J Biol Chem. 2004;279:48063–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Welham MJ, Storm MP, Kingham E, et al. Phosphoinositide 3-kinases and regulation of embryonic stem cell fate. Biochem Soc Trans. 2007;35:225–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Watanabe S, Umehara H, Murayama K, et al. Activation of Akt signaling is sufficient to maintain pluripotency in mouse and primate embryonic stem cells. Oncogene. 2006;25:2697–707.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Cross DA, Alessi DR, Cohen P, et al. Inhibition of glycogen synthase kinase-3 by insulin mediated by protein kinase B. Nature. 1995;378:785–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sato N, Meijer L, Skaltsounis L, et al. Maintenance of pluripotency in human and mouse embryonic stem cells through activation of Wnt signaling by a pharmacological GSK-3-specific inhibitor. Nat Med. 2004;10:55–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Burdon T, Stracey C, Chambers I, et al. Suppression of SHP-2 and ERK signalling promotes self-renewal of mouse embryonic stem cells. Dev Biol. 1999;210:30–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kunath T, Saba-El-Leil MK, Almousailleakh M, et al. FGF stimulation of the Erk1/2 signalling cascade triggers transition of pluripotent embryonic stem cells from self-renewal to lineage commitment. Development. 2007;134: 2895–902PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Xu RH, Peck RM, Li DS, et al. Basic FGF and suppression of BMP signaling sustain undifferentiated proliferation of human ES cells. Nat Methods. 2005;2:185–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Amit M, Carpenter MK, Inokuma MS, et al. Clonally derived human embryonic stem cell lines maintain pluripotency and proliferative potential for prolonged periods of culture. Dev Biol. 2000;227:271–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Levenstein ME, Ludwig TE, Xu RH, et al. Basic fibroblast growth factor support of human embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Stem Cells. 2006;24:568–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Greber B, Lehrach H, Adjaye J. Fibroblast growth factor 2 modulates transforming growth factor beta signaling in mouse embryonic fibroblasts and human ESCs (hESCs) to support hESC self-renewal. Stem Cells. 2007;25:455–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Wang G, Zhang H, Zhao Y, et al. Noggin and bFGF cooperate to maintain the pluripotency of human embryonic stem cells in the absence of feeder layers. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2005;330:934–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Vallier L, Alexander M, Pedersen RA. Activin/Nodal and FGF pathways cooperate to maintain pluripotency of human embryonic stem cells. J Cell Sci. 2005;118:4495–509.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Babaie Y, Herwig R, Greber B, et al. Analysis of Oct4-dependent transcriptional networks regulating self-renewal and pluripotency in human embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells. 2007;25: 500–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Ogawa K, Saito A, Matsui H, et al. Activin-Nodal signaling is involved in propagation of mouse embryonic stem cells. J Cell Sci. 2007;120:55–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Herpin A, Cunningham C. Cross-talk between the bone morphogenetic protein pathway and other major signaling pathways results in tightly regulated cell-specific outcomes. FEBS J. 2007;274:2977–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Xu RH, Chen X, Li DS, et al. BMP4 initiates human embryonic stem cell differentiation to trophoblast. Nat Biotechnol. 2002;20:1261–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Levine AJ, Brivanlou AH. GDF3, a BMP inhibitor, regulates cell fate in stem cells and early embryos. Development. 2006;133: 209–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    McLean AB, D’Amour KA, Jones KL, et al. Activin A efficiently specifies definitive endoderm from human embryonic stem cells only when phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase signaling is suppressed. Stem Cells. 2007;25:29–38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    D’Amour KA, Agulnick AD, et al. Efficient differentiation of human embryonic stem cells to definitive endoderm. Nat Biotechnol. 2005;23:1534–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Li J, Wang G, Wang C, et al. MEK/ERK signaling contributes to the maintenance of human embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Differentiation. 2007;75:299–307.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Ludwig TE, Levenstein ME, Jones JM, et al. Derivation of human embryonic stem cells in defined conditions. Nat Biotechnol. 2006;24:185–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Wang L, Schulz TC, Sherrer EC, et al. Self-renewal of human embryonic stem cells requires insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor and ERBB2 receptor signaling. Blood. 2007;110:4111–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Calaveri F, Scholer HR. Nanog: a new recruit to the embryonic stem cell orchestra. Cell. 2003;113:551–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Niwa H, Miyazaki J, Smith, AG. Quantitative expression of Oct-3/4 defines differentiation, dedifferentiation or self-renewal of ES cells. Nat Genet. 2000;24:372–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Matin MM, Walsh JR, Gokhale PJ, et al. Specific knockdown of Oct4 and beta2-microglobulin expression by RNA interference in human embryonic stem cells and embryonic carcinoma cells. Stem Cells. 2004;22:659–68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Wang J, Rao S, Chu J, et al. A protein interaction network for pluripotency of embryonic stem cells. Nature. 2006;444:364–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Lutz W, Leon J, Eilers M. Contributions of Myc to tumorigenesis. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2002;1602:61–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Ryan KM, Birnie GD. Myc oncogenes: the enigmatic family. Biochem J. 1996;314:713–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Takahashi K, Yamanaka S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell. 2006;126:663–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Yu J, Vodyanik MA, Smuga-Otto K, et al. Induced pluripotent stem cell lines derived from human somatic cells. Science. 2007;318:1917–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Meissner A, Wernig M, Jaenisch R. Direct reprogramming of genetically unmodified fibroblasts into pluripotent stem cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2007;25:1177–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Fernandez PC, Frank SR, Wang L, et al. Genomic targets of the human c-Myc protein. Genes Dev. 2003;17:1115–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Knoepfler PS, Zhang XY, Cheng PF, et al. Myc influences global chromatin structure. EMBO J. 2006;25:2723–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press, a part of Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, a part of Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyPaul D. Coverdell Center for Biomedical and Health SciencesAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations