4.7 Article

Isolation and functional characterization of human erythroblasts at distinct stages: implications for understanding of normal and disordered erythropoiesis in vivo

Journal

BLOOD
Volume 121, Issue 16, Pages 3246-3253

Publisher

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2013-01-476390

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [DK26263, DK32094]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Terminal erythroid differentiation starts from morphologically recognizable proerythroblasts that proliferate and differentiate to generate red cells. Although this process has been extensively studied in mice, its characterization in humans is limited. By examining the dynamic changes of expression of membrane proteins during in vitro human terminal erythroid differentiation, we identified band 3 and alpha 4 integrin as optimal surface markers for isolating 5 morphologically distinct populations at successive developmental stages. Functional analysis revealed that these purified cell populations have distinct mitotic capacity. Use of band 3 and a4 integrin enabled us to isolate erythroblasts at specific developmental stages from primary human bone marrow. The ratio of erythroblasts at successive stages followed the predicted 1:2:4:8:16 pattern. In contrast, bone marrows from myelodysplastic syndrome patients exhibited altered terminal erythroid differentiation profiles. Thus, our findings not only provide new insights into the genesis of the red cell membrane during human terminal erythroid differentiation but also offer a means of isolating and quantifying each developmental stage during terminal erythropoiesis in vivo. Our findings should facilitate a comprehensive cellular and molecular characterization of each specific developmental stage of human erythroblasts and should provide a powerful means of identifying stage-specific defects in diseases associated with pathological erythropoiesis.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available