Advertisement

Genetic Lineage Tracing of Biliary Epithelial Cells

  • Teresa Rubio-Tomás
  • Beatriz Aguilar-Bravo
  • Pau Sancho-Bru
Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1905)

Abstract

Lineage tracing of liver cells is a powerful tool to understand liver embryonic development, healthy liver cell homeostasis, tissue repair, and regeneration. Lineage tracing of biliary epithelial cells (BECs) in the adult liver has been used to assess the contribution of the biliary epithelium to liver injury, regeneration, and disease. These studies have shown the contribution of BECs to the expansion of ductular reaction (DR) and liver progenitor cells (LPCs) and eventually the generation of new hepatocytes. Few genetic lineage-tracing mouse models have been proved to trace BECs. This chapter is focused on lineage tracing of BECs in mouse models of liver injury and regeneration. First, we mention different existing approaches to trace the biliary epithelium based on proteins specifically expressed by BECs such as sex-determining region Y-box 9 (SOX9), osteopontin (OPN), and cytokeratin-19 (KRT19). Second, we describe mouse models that can be used to evaluate cell fate during liver injury and regeneration (i.e., partial hepatectomy (PHx), acute liver injury models, and chronic liver damage models such as 3,5-diethoxycarbonyl-1,4-dihydro-collidin (DDC) diet, choline-deficient ethionine-supplemented (CDE) diet, or chronic carbon tetrachloride (CCl4) administration). Third, we suggest possible readouts to assess BECs fate based on immunofluorescence analysis.

Key words

Lineage tracing Liver regeneration Biliary epithelial cells Liver progenitor cells Ductular reaction Chronic liver injury Animal models 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We want to thank Daniel Rodrigo-Torres for the advice during manuscript preparation and the experimental work that this chapter is based on. This work was supported by grants from the Fondo de Investigación Sanitaria Carlos III (FIS), co-financed by the Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER), Unión Europea, “Una manera de hacer Europa” (FIS PI14/00320, PI 17/00673 to PS-B). PS-B and BA-B are funded by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Miguel Servet (CPII16/00041) and PFIS, respectively, and co-financed by the Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Europeo (FEDER), Unión Europea, “Una manera de hacer Europa.”

References

  1. 1.
    Arias IM et al (2009) The liver: biology and pathobiology, 5th edn. John Wiley & Sons, HobokenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gouw ASH, Clouston AD, Theise ND (2011) Ductular reactions in human liver: diversity at the interface. Hepatology 54(5):1853–1863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Okabe M et al (2009) Potential hepatic stem cells reside in EpCAM+ cells of normal and injured mouse liver. Development 136(11):1951–1960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kholodenko IV, Yarygin KN (2017) Cellular mechanisms of liver regeneration and cell-based therapies of liver diseases. Biomed Res Int 2017:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lu W-Y et al (2015) Hepatic progenitor cells of biliary origin with liver repopulation capacity. Nat Cell Biol 17(8):971–983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pu W et al (2016) Mfsd2a+ hepatocytes repopulate the liver during injury and regeneration. Nat Commun 7:13369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schaub JR, Malato Y, Gormond C, Willenbring H (2014) Evidence against a stem cell origin of new hepatocytes in a common mouse model of chronic liver injury. Cell Rep 8(4):933–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huch M et al (2013) In vitro expansion of single Lgr5+ liver stem cells induced by Wnt-driven regeneration. Nature 494(7436):247–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sancho-Bru P et al (2012) Liver progenitor cell markers correlate with liver damage and predict short-term mortality in patients with alcoholic hepatitis. Hepatology 55(6):1931–1941CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guy CD et al (2012) Hedgehog pathway activation parallels histologic severity of injury and fibrosis in human nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology 55(6):1711–1721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grompe M (2017) Fah knockout animals as models for therapeutic liver repopulation. Springer, Cham, pp 215–230Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carpentier R et al (2011) Embryonic ductal plate cells give rise to cholangiocytes, periportal hepatocytes, and adult liver progenitor cells. Gastroenterology 141(4):1432–1438.e4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Español-Suñer R et al (2012) Liver progenitor cells yield functional hepatocytes in response to chronic liver injury in mice. Gastroenterology 143(6):1564–1575.e7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Raven A et al (2017) Cholangiocytes act as facultative liver stem cells during impaired hepatocyte regeneration. Nature 547(7663):350–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yanger K et al (2014) Adult hepatocytes are generated by self-duplication rather than stem cell differentiation. Cell Stem Cell 15(3):340–349Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Guest RV et al (2014) Cell lineage tracing reveals a biliary origin of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Cancer Res 74(4):1005–1010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rodrigo-Torres D et al (2014) The biliary epithelium gives rise to liver progenitor cells. Hepatology 60(4):1367–1377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    He L et al (2017) Enhancing the precision of genetic lineage tracing using dual recombinases. Nat Med 23(12):1488–1498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Solar M et al (2009) Pancreatic exocrine duct cells give rise to insulin-producing beta cells during embryogenesis but not after birth. Dev Cell 17(6):849–860Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kopp JL et al (2011) Sox9+ ductal cells are multipotent progenitors throughout development but do not produce new endocrine cells in the normal or injured adult pancreas. Development 138:653–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Means AL, Xu Y, Zhao A, Ray KC, Gu G (2008) A CK19 CreERT knockin mouse line allows for conditional DNA recombination in epithelial cells in multiple endodermal organs. Genesis 46(6):318–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mitchell C, Willenbring H (2008) A reproducible and well-tolerated method for 2/3 partial hepatectomy in mice. Nat Protoc 3(7):1167–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kellendonk C, Tronche F, Casanova E, Anlag K, Opherk C, Schütz G (1999) Inducible site-specific recombination in the brain. J Mol Biol 285(1):175–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Weber LWD, Boll M, Stampfl A (2003) Hepatotoxicity and mechanism of action of haloalkanes: carbon tetrachloride as a toxicological model. Crit Rev Toxicol 33(2):105–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Thompson MD, Awuah P, Singh S, Monga SPS (2010) Disparate cellular basis of improved liver repair in β-catenin-overexpressing mice after long-term exposure to 3,5-diethoxycarbonyl-1,4-dihydrocollidine. Am J Pathol 177(4):1812–1822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Itoh T, Miyajima A (2014) Liver regeneration by stem/progenitor cells. Hepatology 59(4):1617–1626CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Teresa Rubio-Tomás
    • 1
  • Beatriz Aguilar-Bravo
    • 1
  • Pau Sancho-Bru
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Institut d’Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS)BarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd)BarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations