4.8 Article

Clonal analysis of lineage fate in native haematopoiesis

Journal

NATURE
Volume 553, Issue 7687, Pages 212-+

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nature25168

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [HL128850-01A1, P01HL13147]
  2. Burroughs-Wellcome Fund CASI award
  3. Edward J. Mallinckrodt Fellowship

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Haematopoiesis, the process of mature blood and immune cell production, is functionally organized as a hierarchy, with self-renewing haematopoietic stem cells and multipotent progenitor cells sitting at the very top(1,2). Multiple models have been proposed as to what the earliest lineage choices are in these primitive haematopoietic compartments, the cellular intermediates, and the resulting lineage trees that emerge from them(3-10). Given that the bulk of studies addressing lineage outcomes have been performed in the context of haematopoietic transplantation, current models of lineage branching are more likely to represent roadmaps of lineage potential than native fate. Here we use transposon tagging to clonally trace the fates of progenitors and stem cells in unperturbed haematopoiesis. Our results describe a distinct clonal roadmap in which the megakaryocyte lineage arises largely independently of other haematopoietic fates. Our data, combined with single-cell RNA sequencing, identify a functional hierarchy of unilineage- and oligolineage-producing clones within the multipotent progenitor population. Finally, our results demonstrate that traditionally defined long-term haematopoietic stem cells are a significant source of megakaryocyte-restricted progenitors, suggesting that the megakaryocyte lineage is the predominant native fate of long-term haematopoietic stem cells. Our study provides evidence for a substantially revised roadmap for unperturbed haematopoiesis, and highlights unique properties of multipotent progenitors and haematopoietic stem cells in situ.

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