4.2 Article

Inhibition of ERK1/2 prevents neural and mesendodermal differentiation and promotes human embryonic stem cell self-renewal

期刊

STEM CELL RESEARCH
卷 5, 期 2, 页码 157-169

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scr.2010.06.002

关键词

-

资金

  1. Medical Research Council
  2. MRC
  3. European Commission
  4. Wellcome Trust [GR077544AIA]
  5. BBSRC [BB/D524908/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  6. MRC [G0500491, G0700785] Funding Source: UKRI
  7. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/D524908/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  8. Medical Research Council [G0500491, G0700785] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Extracellular signal-regulated kinases (ERKs) have many important functions during embryogenesis. However, their role in embryonic stem (ES) cells is controversial. Previous studies reported that, in contrast to mouse ES cells, human ES cells differentiate if ERK1/2 is inhibited. We reexamined the role of ERK1/2 in human ES cells using a chemically defined culture system and found that when ERK1/2 is blocked with specific chemical inhibitors, neural and mesendodermal differentiation is prevented, but cells become sensitive to BMP-induced differentiation. Inhibition of ERK1/2 significantly reduced the clonogenicity of human ES cells by preventing cell adhesion and survival. When this negative effect was avoided, we were able to maintain human ES cell self-renewal for more than 3 months in the presence of ERK1/2 inhibitors in a chemically defined culture system containing FGF2 and activin A but no BMP4. Our results suggest that the functional outcome of FGF/ERK1/2 signaling in human ES cells is influenced by the relative levels of activin A/TGF beta and BMP activity. Moreover, activation of ERK1/2 in human ES cells is required for proper neural and mesendodermal differentiation. In contrast to mouse ES cells, a low level of BMP4 is sufficient to initiate extraembryonic differentiation when ERK1/2 is inhibited. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.2
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