4.8 Article

Single-Cell Landscape of Transcriptional Heterogeneity and Cell Fate Decisions during Mouse Early Gastrulation

Journal

CELL REPORTS
Volume 20, Issue 5, Pages 1215-1228

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2017.07.009

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Wellcome Trust Strategic Award [105031/D/14/Z]
  2. BBSRC [BB/K010867/1]
  3. Wellcome Trust [095645/Z/11/Z]
  4. KU Leuven (SymBioSys) [PFV/10/016]
  5. BBSRC [BBS/E/T/000PR9819, BBS/E/B/000C0422, BBS/E/B/000C0421] Funding Source: UKRI
  6. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BBS/E/T/000PR9819] Funding Source: researchfish
  7. Cancer Research UK [22231] Funding Source: researchfish
  8. Medical Research Council [MC_PC_12009] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The mouse inner cell mass (ICM) segregates into the epiblast and primitive endoderm (PrE) lineages coincident with implantation of the embryo. The epiblast subsequently undergoes considerable expansion of cell numbers prior to gastrulation. To investigate underlying regulatory principles, we performed systematic single-cell RNA sequencing (seq) of conceptuses from E3.5 to E6.5. The epiblast shows reactivation and subsequent inactivation of the X chromosome, with Zfp57 expression associated with reactivation and inactivation together with other candidate regulators. At E6.5, the transition from epiblast to primitive streak is linked with decreased expression of polycomb subunits, suggesting a key regulatory role. Notably, our analyses suggest elevated transcriptional noise at E3.5 and within the non-committed epiblast at E6.5, coinciding with exit from pluripotency. By contrast, E6.5 primitive streak cells became highly synchronized and exhibit a shortened G1 cell-cycle phase, consistent with accelerated proliferation. Our study systematically charts transcriptional noise and uncovers molecular processes associated with early lineage decisions.

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