4.7 Article

Human naive epiblast cells possess unrestricted lineage potential

期刊

CELL STEM CELL
卷 28, 期 6, 页码 1040-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2021.02.025

关键词

-

资金

  1. Wellcome [203151/Z/16/Z]
  2. Medical Research Council of the United Kingdom (MRC) [MC_PC_12009]
  3. MRC [MR/P00072X/1]
  4. Medical Research Council [G1100526/1]
  5. MRC [MC_PC_12009, MR/P00072X/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Classic embryological experiments have shown that early mouse embryos develop through sequential lineage bifurcations. However, human naive embryonic stem cells exhibit the ability to produce blastocyst trophectoderm, unlike their mouse counterparts. This suggests a difference in developmental specification and lineage restriction between human and mouse embryos.
Classic embryological experiments have established that the early mouse embryo develops via sequential lineage bifurcations. The first segregated lineage is the trophectoderm, essential for blastocyst formation. Mouse naive epiblast and derivative embryonic stem cells are restricted accordingly from producing trophectoderm. Here we show, in contrast, that human naive embryonic stem cells readily make blastocyst trophectoderm and descendant trophoblast cell types. Trophectoderm was induced rapidly and efficiently by inhibition of ERK/ mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) and Nodal signaling. Transcriptome comparison with the human embryo substantiated direct formation of trophectoderm with subsequent differentiation into syncytiotrophoblast, cytotrophoblast, and downstream trophoblast stem cells. During pluripotency progression lineage potential switches from trophectoderm to amnion. Live-cell tracking revealed that epiblast cells in the human blastocyst are also able to produce trophectoderm. Thus, the paradigm of developmental specification coupled to lineage restriction does not apply to humans. Instead, epiblast plasticity and the potential for blastocyst regeneration are retained until implantation.

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

4.7
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