4.8 Article

Spatiotemporal structure of cell fate decisions in murine neural crest

Journal

SCIENCE
Volume 364, Issue 6444, Pages 971-+

Publisher

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/science.aas9536

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsradet, VR) grant
  2. ERC Consolidator grant STEMMING-FROM-NERVE [N647844]
  3. Paradifference Foundation
  4. Bertil Hallsten Research Foundation
  5. CAREER award [NSF-14-532]
  6. NIH [R01HL131768]
  7. Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsradet) [2016-03645]
  8. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation
  9. Familjen Erling Perssons stiftelse
  10. Russian Science Foundation [18-75-10005]
  11. Swedish Research Council [2015-03387]
  12. Stiftelsen Riksbankens Jubileumsfond (Erik Ronnbergs fond stipend)
  13. RSF [16-15-10237]
  14. Russian Science Foundation [19-15-13023, 18-75-10005] Funding Source: Russian Science Foundation
  15. Swedish Research Council [2015-03387, 2016-03645] Funding Source: Swedish Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Neural crest cells are embryonic progenitors that generate numerous cell types in vertebrates. With single-cell analysis, we show that mouse trunk neural crest cells become biased toward neuronal lineages when they delaminate from the neural tube, whereas cranial neural crest cells acquire ectomesenchyme potential dependent on activation of the transcription factor Twist1. The choices that neural crest cells make to become sensory, glial, autonomic, or mesenchymal cells can be formalized as a series of sequential binary decisions. Each branch of the decision tree involves initial coactivation of bipotential properties followed by gradual shifts toward commitment. Competing fate programs are coactivated before cells acquire fate-specific phenotypic traits. Determination of a specific fate is achieved by increased synchronization of relevant programs and concurrent repression of competing fate programs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available