4.8 Article

Temporal mechanisms of myogenic specification in human induced pluripotent stem cells

Journal

SCIENCE ADVANCES
Volume 7, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abf7412

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. California Institute of Regenerative Medicine [RT3-07907]
  2. NIH [R01 LM012595, U01 CA198941, U01 DK097430, R01 DK109365, R01 HD084633, R01 HL108735]
  3. NSF [STC CCF-0939370]
  4. Joan and Irwin Jacobs Endowment [P01HL141084]
  5. Joan and Sanford I. Weill Scholars Endowment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This research compares the transcriptomic profiles of hiPSC lines of different myogenic specification levels, revealing temporal differences and the role of β-catenin transcriptional cofactors in mediating cellular interactions and external cues during differentiation.
Understanding the mechanisms of myogenesis in human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) is a prerequisite to achieving patient-specific therapy for diseases of skeletal muscle. hiPSCs of different origin show distinctive kinetics and ability to differentiate into myocytes. To address the unique cellular and temporal context of hiPSC differentiation, we perform a longitudinal comparison of the transcriptomic profiles of three hiPSC lines that display differential myogenic specification, one robust and two blunted. We detail temporal differences in mechanisms that lead to robust myogenic specification. We show gene expression signatures of putative cell subpopulations and extracellular matrix components that may support myogenesis. Furthermore, we show that targeted knockdown of ZIC3 at the outset of differentiation leads to improved myogenic specification in blunted hiPSC lines. Our study suggests that.-catenin transcriptional cofactors mediate cross-talk between multiple cellular processes and exogenous cues to facilitate specification of hiPSCs to mesoderm lineage, leading to robust myogenesis.

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