4.6 Article

Dynamic interaction networks in a hierarchically organized tissue

期刊

MOLECULAR SYSTEMS BIOLOGY
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1038/msb.2010.71

关键词

cellular networks; hematopoiesis; intercellular signaling; self-renewal; stem cells

资金

  1. Insception Biosciences
  2. Guggenheim Foundation
  3. Canadian Stem Cell Network
  4. Natural Sciences and Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
  5. Ontario Genomics Institute

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Intercellular (between cell) communication networks maintain homeostasis and coordinate regenerative and developmental cues in multicellular organisms. Despite the importance of intercellular networks in stem cell biology, their rules, structure and molecular components are poorly understood. Herein, we describe the structure and dynamics of intercellular and intracellular networks in a stem cell derived, hierarchically organized tissue using experimental and theoretical analyses of cultured human umbilical cord blood progenitors. By integrating high-throughput molecular profiling, database and literature mining, mechanistic modeling, and cell culture experiments, we show that secreted factor-mediated intercellular communication networks regulate blood stem cell fate decisions. In particular, self-renewal is modulated by a coupled positive-negative intercellular feedback circuit composed of megakaryocyte-derived stimulatory growth factors (VEGF, PDGF, EGF, and serotonin) versus monocyte-derived inhibitory factors (CCL3, CCL4, CXCL10, TGFB2, and TNFSF9). We reconstruct a stem cell intracellular network, and identify PI3K, Raf, Akt, and PLC as functionally distinct signal integration nodes, linking extracellular, and intracellular signaling. This represents the first systematic characterization of how stem cell fate decisions are regulated non-autonomously through lineage-specific interactions with differentiated progeny. Molecular Systems Biology 6: 417; published online 5 October 2010; doi: 10.1038/msb.2010.71

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据