Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Transcriptional Networks Regulating Embryonic Stem Cell Fate Decisions

  • Chapter
Regulatory Networks in Stem Cells

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

Abstract

A comprehensive understanding of the transcriptional regulation of embryonic stem cell (ESC) fate decisions will provide the key to their successful manipulation for therapeutic purposes as well as provide insight into the process of early embryogenesis. Traditional molecular and genetic approaches have been successful in identifying several essential regulators of pluripotency, notably Oct4, Nanog, and Sox2. However, these approaches will not be sufficient to understand the global regulatory control of transcriptional networks. Genome-wide work in model organisms such as Escherichia coli, yeast, and sea urchin reveal that transcriptional networks can be broken down into a small set of evolutionarily conserved network motifs, each with its own biological function. Initial genome-wide studies in ESCs reveal the presence of these same network motifs, providing mechanistic explanations of cell fate decisions. Thus, as is being performed in lower organisms, the drafting of a comprehensive transcriptional network controlling ESC fate will require systematic characterisation of the functional targets of each ESC-expressed transcription factor.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Evans MJ, Kaufman MH. Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature. 1981;292(5819):154–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. 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(12):7634–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Smith AG, Heath JK, Donaldson DD, et al. Inhibition of pluripotential embryonic stem cell differentiation by purified polypeptides. Nature. 1988;336(6200):688–90.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Smith AG, Hooper ML. Buffalo rat liver cells produce a diffusible activity which inhibits the differentiation of murine embryonal carcinoma and embryonic stem cells. Dev Biol. 1987;121(1):1–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Williams RL, Hilton DJ, Pease S, et al. Myeloid leukaemia inhibitory factor maintains the developmental potential of embryonic stem cells. Nature. 1988;336(6200):684–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Nichols J, Evans EP, Smith AG. Establishment of germ-line-competent embryonic stem (ES) cells using differentiation inhibiting activity. Development. 1990;110(4):1341–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Takeda K, Noguchi K, Shi W, et al. Targeted disruption of the mouse Stat3 gene leads to early embryonic lethality. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997;94(8):3801–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ying QL, Nichols J, Chambers I, Smith A. BMP induction of Id proteins suppresses differentiation and sustains embryonic stem cell self-renewal in collaboration with STAT3. Cell. 2003;115(3):281–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Daheron L, Opitz SL, Zaehres H, et al. LIF/STAT3 signaling fails to maintain self-renewal of human embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells. 2004;22(5):770–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Xu RH, Chen X, Li DS, et al. BMP4 initiates human embryonic stem cell differentiation to trophoblast. Nat Biotechnol. 2002;20(12):1261–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. 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(Pt 19):4495–509.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Xu RH, Peck RM, Li DS, Feng X, Ludwig T, Thomson JA. Basic FGF and suppression of BMP signaling sustain undifferentiated proliferation of human ES cells. Nat Methods. 2005;2(3):185–90.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Bendall SC, Stewart MH, Menendez P, et al. IGF and FGF cooperatively establish the regulatory stem cell niche of pluripotent human cells in vitro. Nature. 2007;448(7157):1015–21.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. 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(7150):196–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Brons IG, Smithers LE, Trotter MW, et al. Derivation of pluripotent epiblast stem cells from mammalian embryos. Nature. 2007;448(7150):191–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. 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(4):372–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. 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(5):631–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Chambers I, Colby D, Robertson M, et al. Functional expression cloning of Nanog, a pluripotency sustaining factor in embryonic stem cells. Cell. 2003;113(5):643–55.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Avilion AA, Nicolis SK, Pevny LH, Perez L, Vivian N, Lovell-Badge R. Multipotent cell lineages in early mouse development depend on SOX2 function. Genes Dev. 2003;17(1):126–40.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Beddington RS, Robertson EJ. An assessment of the developmental potential of embryonic stem cells in the midgestation mouse embryo. Development. 1989;105(4):733–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Brivanlou AH, Darnell JE, Jr. Signal transduction and the control of gene expression. Science. 2002;295(5556):813–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Shen-Orr SS, Milo R, Mangan S, Alon U. Network motifs in the transcriptional regulation network of Escherichia coli. Nat Genet. 2002;31(1):64–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Guelzim N, Bottani S, Bourgine P, Kepes F. Topological and causal structure of the yeast transcriptional regulatory network. Nat Genet. 2002;31(1):60–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Saddic LA, Huvermann B, Bezhani S, et al. The LEAFY target LMI1 is a meristem identity regulator and acts together with LEAFY to regulate expression of CAULIFLOWER. Development. 2006;133(9):1673–82.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Swiers G, Patient R, Loose M. Genetic regulatory networks programming hematopoietic stem cells and erythroid lineage specification. Dev Biol. 2006;294(2):525–40.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Odom DT, Zizlsperger N, Gordon DB, et al. Control of pancreas and liver gene expression by HNF transcription factors. Science. 2004;303(5662):1378–81.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Alon U. Network motifs: theory and experimental approaches. Nat Rev. 2007;8(6):450–61.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Lee TI, Rinaldi NJ, Robert F, et al. Transcriptional regulatory networks in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Science. 2002;298 (5594):799–804.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Thieffry D, Huerta AM, Perez-Rueda E, Collado-Vides J. From specific gene regulation to genomic networks: a global analysis of transcriptional regulation in Escherichia coli. Bioessays. 1998;20(5):433–40.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Becskei A, Serrano L. Engineering stability in gene networks by autoregulation. Nature. 2000;405(6786):590–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Dublanche Y, Michalodimitrakis K, Kummerer N, Foglierini M, Serrano L. Noise in transcription negative feedback loops: simulation and experimental analysis. Mol Syst Biol. 2006;2:41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Rosenfeld N, Elowitz MB, Alon U. Negative autoregulation speeds the response times of transcription networks. J Mol Biol. 2002;323(5):785–93.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Maeda YT, Sano M. Regulatory dynamics of synthetic gene networks with positive feedback. J Mol Biol. 2006;359(4): 1107–24.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Becskei A, Seraphin B, Serrano L. Positive feedback in eukaryotic gene networks: cell differentiation by graded to binary response conversion. EMBO J. 2001;20(10):2528–35.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Xiong W, Ferrell JE, Jr. A positive-feedback-based bistable ‘memory module’ that governs a cell fate decision. Nature. 2003;426(6965):460–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Wall ME, Dunlop MJ, Hlavacek WS. Multiple functions of a feed-forward-loop gene circuit. J Mol Biol. 2005;349(3):501–14.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Mangan S, Zaslaver A, Alon U. The coherent feedforward loop serves as a sign-sensitive delay element in transcription networks. J Mol Biol. 2003;334(2):197–204.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Hayot F, Jayaprakash C. A feedforward loop motif in transcriptional regulation: induction and repression. J Theor Biol. 2005;234(1):133–43.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Mangan S, Itzkovitz S, Zaslaver A, Alon U. The incoherent feed-forward loop accelerates the response-time of the gal system of Escherichia coli. J Mol Biol. 2006;356(5):1073–81.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Davidson EH, Rast JP, Oliveri P, et al. A genomic regulatory network for development. Science. 2002;295(5560):1669–78.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Pesce M, Scholer HR. Oct-4: gatekeeper in the beginnings of mammalian development. Stem Cells. 2001;19(4):271–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. 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(3):379–91.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Morrison GM, Brickman JM. Conserved roles for Oct4 homologues in maintaining multipotency during early vertebrate development. Development. 2006;133(10):2011–22.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Yuan H, Corbi N, Basilico C, Dailey L. Developmental-specific activity of the FGF-4 enhancer requires the synergistic action of Sox2 and Oct-3. Gene Dev. 1995;9(21):2635–45.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Ambrosetti DC, Basilico C, Dailey L. Synergistic activation of the fibroblast growth factor 4 enhancer by Sox2 and Oct-3 depends on protein-protein interactions facilitated by a specific spatial arrangement of factor binding sites. Mol Cell Biol. 1997;17(11): 6321–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Okumura-Nakanishi S, Saito M, Niwa H, Ishikawa F. Oct-3/4 and Sox2 regulate Oct-3/4 gene in embryonic stem cells. J Biol Chem. 2005;280(7):5307–17.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Tomioka M, Nishimoto M, Miyagi S, et al. Identification of Sox-2 regulatory region which is under the control of Oct-3/4-Sox-2 complex. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30(14):3202–13.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Chew JL, Loh YH, Zhang W, et al. Reciprocal transcriptional regulation of Pou5f1 and Sox2 via the Oct4/Sox2 complex in embryonic stem cells. Mol Cell Biol. 2005;25(14):6031–46.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Masui S, Nakatake Y, Toyooka Y, et al. Pluripotency governed by Sox2 via regulation of Oct3/4 expression in mouse embryonic stem cells. Nature Cell Biol. 2007;9(6):625–35.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Rodda DJ, Chew JL, Lim LH, et al. Transcriptional regulation of nanog by OCT4 and SOX2. J Biol Chem. 2005;280(26): 24731–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Kuroda T, Tada M, Kubota H, et al. Octamer and Sox elements are required for transcriptional cis regulation of Nanog gene expression. Molecular Cell Biol. 2005;25(6):2475–85.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Loh YH, Wu Q, Chew JL, et al. The Oct4 and Nanog transcription network regulates pluripotency in mouse embryonic stem cells. Nat Genet. 2006;38(4):431–40.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Wu Q, Chen X, Zhang J, et al. Sall4 interacts with Nanog and co-occupies Nanog genomic sites in embryonic stem cells. J Biol Chem. 2006;281(34):24090–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Sakaki-Yumoto M, Kobayashi C, Sato A, et al. The murine homolog of SALL4, a causative gene in Okihiro syndrome, is essential for embryonic stem cell proliferation, and cooperates with Sall1 in anorectal, heart, brain and kidney development. Development. 2006;133(15):3005–13.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Zhang J, Tam WL, Tong GQ, et al. Sall4 modulates embryonic stem cell pluripotency and early embryonic development by the transcriptional regulation of Pou5f1. Nat Cell Biol. 2006;8(10): 1114–23.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Hamatani T, Carter MG, Sharov AA, Ko MS. Dynamics of global gene expression changes during mouse preimplantation development. Dev Cell. 2004;6(1):117–31.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Zhang W, Walker E, Tamplin OJ, Rossant J, Stanford WL, Hughes TR. Zfp206 regulates ES cell gene expression and differentiation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006;34(17):4780–90.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Wang ZX, Kueh JL, Teh CH, et al. Zfp206 is a transcription factor that controls pluripotency of embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells. 2007;25(9):2173–82.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Wang ZX, Teh CH, Kueh JL, Lufkin T, Robson P, Stanton LW. Oct4 and Sox2 directly regulate expression of another pluripotency transcription factor, Zfp206, in embryonic stem cells. J Biol Chem. 2007;282(17):12822–30.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Boyer LA, Lee TI, Cole MF, et al. Core transcriptional regulatory circuitry in human embryonic stem cells. Cell. 2005;122(6): 947–56.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Lim LS, Loh YH, Zhang W, et al. Zic3 is required for maintenance of pluripotency in embryonic stem cells. Mol Biol Cell. 2007;18(4):1348–58.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Herman GE, El-Hodiri HM. The role of ZIC3 in vertebrate development. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2002;99(1–4):229–35.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Nakata K, Nagai T, Aruga J, Mikoshiba K. Xenopus Zic family and its role in neural and neural crest development. Mech Dev. 1998;75(1–2):43–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Warner SJ, Hutson MR, Oh SH, Gerlach-Bank LM, Lomax MI, Barald KF. Expression of ZIC genes in the development of the chick inner ear and nervous system. Dev Dyn. 2003;226(4): 702–12.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Grinblat Y, Sive H. zic Gene expression marks anteroposterior pattern in the presumptive neurectoderm of the zebrafish gastrula. Dev Dyn. 2001;222(4):688–93.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Kitaguchi T, Mizugishi K, Hatayama M, Aruga J, Mikoshiba K. Xenopus Brachyury regulates mesodermal expression of Zic3, a gene controlling left-right asymmetry. Dev. Growth Differ. 2002;44(1):55–61.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Ware SM, Peng J, Zhu L, et al. Identification and functional analysis of ZIC3 mutations in heterotaxy and related congenital heart defects. Am J Hum Genet. 2004;74(1):93–105.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Purandare SM, Ware SM, Kwan KM, et al. A complex syndrome of left-right axis, central nervous system and axial skeleton defects in Zic3 mutant mice. Development. 2002;129(9):2293–302.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Takahashi K, Yamanaka S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell. 2006;126(4):663–76.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Meissner A, Wernig M, Jaenisch R. Direct reprogramming of genetically unmodified fibroblasts into pluripotent stem cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2007;25(10):1177–81.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Wernig M, Meissner A, Foreman R, et al. In vitro reprogramming of fibroblasts into a pluripotent ES-cell-like state. Nature. 2007;448(7151):318–24.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Hooker CW, Hurlin PJ. Of Myc and Mnt. J Cell Sci. 2006;119(Pt 2):208–16.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Cartwright P, McLean C, Sheppard A, Rivett D, Jones K, Dalton S. LIF/STAT3 controls ES cell self-renewal and pluripotency by a Myc-dependent mechanism. Development. 2005;132(5):885–96.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. McMahon SB, Van Buskirk HA, Dugan KA, Copeland TD, Cole MD. The novel ATM-related protein TRRAP is an essential cofactor for the c-Myc and E2F oncoproteins. Cell. 1998;94(3):363–74.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Rowland BD, Peeper DS. KLF4, p21 and context-dependent opposing forces in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006;6(1):11–23.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Chen X, Whitney EM, Gao SY, Yang VW. Transcriptional profiling of Kruppel-like factor 4 reveals a function in cell cycle regulation and epithelial differentiation. J Mol Biol. 2003;326(3): 665–77.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Rowland BD, Bernards R, Peeper DS. The KLF4 tumour suppressor is a transcriptional repressor of p53 that acts as a context-dependent oncogene. Nat Cell Biol. 2005;7(11):1074–82.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Lin T, Chao C, Saito S, et al. p53 induces differentiation of mouse embryonic stem cells by suppressing Nanog expression. Nat Cell Biol. 2005;7(2):165–71.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Nakatake Y, Fukui N, Iwamatsu Y, et al. Klf4 cooperates with Oct3/4 and Sox2 to activate the Lefty1 core promoter in embryonic stem cells. Mol Cell Biol. 2006;26(20):7772–82.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Okita K, Ichisaka T, Yamanaka S. Generation of germline-competent induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature. 2007;448(7151): 313–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Beck F, Erler T, Russell A, James R. Expression of Cdx-2 in the mouse embryo and placenta: possible role in patterning of the extra-embryonic membranes. Dev Dyn. 1995;204(3):219–27.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Chawengsaksophak K, James R, Hammond VE, Kontgen F, Beck F. Homeosis and intestinal tumours in Cdx2 mutant mice. Nature. 1997;386(6620):84–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Strumpf D, Mao CA, Yamanaka Y, et al. Cdx2 is required for correct cell fate specification and differentiation of trophectoderm in the mouse blastocyst. Development. 2005;132(9):2093–102.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Chawengsaksophak K, de Graaff W, Rossant J, Deschamps J, Beck F. Cdx2 is essential for axial elongation in mouse development. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101(20):7641–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Tanaka S, Kunath T, Hadjantonakis AK, Nagy A, Rossant J. Promotion of trophoblast stem cell proliferation by FGF4. Science. 1998;282(5396):2072–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Niwa H, Toyooka Y, Shimosato D, et al. Interaction between Oct3/4 and Cdx2 determines trophectoderm differentiation. Cell. 2005;123(5):917–29.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Morrisey EE, Ip HS, Lu MM, Parmacek MS. GATA-6: a zinc finger transcription factor that is expressed in multiple cell lineages derived from lateral mesoderm. Dev Biol. 1996;177(1):309–22.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Morrisey EE, Tang Z, Sigrist K, et al. GATA6 regulates HNF4 and is required for differentiation of visceral endoderm in the mouse embryo. Genes Dev. 1998;12(22):3579–90.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Fujikura J, Yamato E, Yonemura S, et al. Differentiation of embryonic stem cells is induced by GATA factors. Genes Dev. 2002;16(7):784–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Niwa H. How is pluripotency determined and maintained? Development. 2007;134(4):635–46.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Walker E, Ohishi M, Davey RE, et al. Prediction and testing of novel transcriptional networks regulating embryonic stem cell self-renewal and commitment. Cell Stem Cell. 2007;1(1):16.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Ivanova N, Dobrin R, Lu R, et al. Dissecting self-renewal in stem cells with RNA interference. Nature. 2006;442(7102):533–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Matoba R, Niwa H, Masui S, et al. Dissecting Oct3/4-regulated gene networks in embryonic stem cells by expression profiling. PLoS ONE. 2006;1:e26.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Ramalho-Santos M, Yoon S, Matsuzaki Y, Mulligan RC, Melton DA. ‘Stemness’: transcriptional profiling of embryonic and adult stem cells. Science. 2002;298(5593):597–600.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Ivanova NB, Dimos JT, Schaniel C, Hackney JA, Moore KA, Lemischka IR. A stem cell molecular signature. Science. 2002;298(5593):601–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Brandenberger R, Wei H, Zhang S, et al. Transcriptome characterization elucidates signaling networks that control human ES cell growth and differentiation. Nat Biotechnol. 2004;22(6): 707–16.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Wei CL, Miura T, Robson P, et al. Transcriptome profiling of human and murine ESCs identifies divergent paths required to maintain the stem cell state. Stem Cells. 2005;23(2):166–85.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Zaehres H, Lensch MW, Daheron L, Stewart SA, Itskovitz-Eldor J, Daley GQ. High-efficiency RNA interference in human embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells. 2005;23(3):299–305.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Hough SR, Clements I, Welch PJ, Wiederholt KA. Differentiation of mouse embryonic stem cells after RNA interference-mediated silencing of OCT4 and Nanog. Stem Cells. 2006;24(6):1467–75.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. 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(2):500–10.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Bar-Joseph Z, Gerber GK, Lee TI, et al. Computational discovery of gene modules and regulatory networks. Nat Biotechnol. 2003;21(11):1337–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Gao F, Foat BC, Bussemaker HJ. Defining transcriptional networks through integrative modeling of mRNA expression and transcription factor binding data. BMC Bioinformatics. 2004;5:31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Biomaterials and Biomedical Engineering; University of Toronto, 164 College Street, M5S 3G9, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Emily Walker

  2. Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry, University of Toronto, Institute of Biomaterials and Biomedical Engineering; Institute of Medical Science, 164 College Street, M5S 3G9, Toronto, ON, Canada

    William L. Stanford

Authors
  1. Emily Walker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William L. Stanford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William L. Stanford .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

    Vinagolu K. Rajasekhar MSc, MPhil, PhD

  2. Invitrogen Corporation, Frederick, MD, USA

    Mohan C. Vemuri Ph.D.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

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

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Walker, E., Stanford, W.L. (2009). Transcriptional Networks Regulating Embryonic Stem Cell Fate Decisions. In: Rajasekhar, V.K., Vemuri, M.C. (eds) Regulatory Networks in Stem Cells. Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60327-227-8_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation