Concise Review: Epigenetic Mechanisms Contribute to Pluripotency and Cell Lineag - 《stemcells》干细胞学杂志干细胞之家



免疫细胞治疗专区	欢迎关注干细胞微信公众号

12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 31 下一页

返回列表

查看: 639866\|回复: 304	go Concise Review: Epigenetic Mechanisms Contribute to Pluripotency and Cell Lineag [复制链接]

江边孤钓

版主

Rank: 7 Rank: 7 Rank: 7

积分: 0
威望: 0
包包: 483

楼主

发表于 2009-3-5 01:01 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览 |打印

作者：Qiong Gan, Tadashi Yoshida, Oliver G. McDonald, Gary K. Owens作者单位：Department of Molecular Physiology and Biological Physics, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA 3 s2 |: B- q5 ~


      $ L2 a' u! o& S. u; r4 t; I. y* ?



         4 m, w% d$ ~1 e( c/ \
         3 w; A1 V+ W! a* M
                  * z) m& \% f* T, M( V  V
      7 \4 ?* y* J' O  x- g- b

      " J) l2 K/ I. E' r1 _% A: V
      【摘要】
   Epigenetic mechanisms, such as histone modifications and DNA methylation, have been shown to play a key role in the regulation of gene transcription. Results of recent studies indicate that a novel "bivalent" chromatin structure marks key developmental genes in embryonic stem cells (ESCs), wherein a number of untranscribed lineage-control genes, such as Sox1, Nkx2-2, Msx1, Irx3, and Pax3, are epigenetically modified with a unique combination of activating and repressive histone modifications that prime them for potential activation (or repression) upon cell lineage induction and differentiation. However, results of these studies also showed that a subset of lineage-control genes, such as Myf5 and Mash1, were not marked by these histone modifications, suggesting that distinct epigenetic mechanisms might exist for lineage-control genes in ESCs. In this review article, we summarize evidence regarding possible mechanisms that control these unique histone modifications at lineage-control gene loci in ESCs and consider their possible contribution to ESC pluripotency. In addition, we propose a novel "histone modification pulsing" model wherein individual pluripotent stem cells within the inner cell mass of blastocysts undergo transient asynchronous histone modifications at these developmental gene loci, thereby conferring differential responsiveness to environmental cues and morphogenic gradients important for cell lineage determination. Finally, we consider how these rapid histone modification exchanges become progressively more stable as ESCs undergo differentiation and maturation into specialized cell lineages.
      【关键词】 Embryonic stem cells Pluripotency Epigenetics Histone modifications
   INTRODUCTION

Embryonic stem cells (ESCs), which are derived from the inner cell mass of the mammalian blastocysts, possess an unlimited potential for self-renewal and the capacity to differentiate into all kinds of somatic cell types in vitro and in vivo . These studies provide compelling evidence indicating that these factors play a critical role in the maintenance of the pluripotency of ESCs, although their precise mechanism of action is not well-understood, and as yet, very little is known regarding the minimal complement of genes that are sufficient for maintenance of ESC pluripotency.9 @+ ]& w8 r/ w6 |4 ^+ G, ~, _

For decades, a major challenge for developmental biologists has been to elucidate mechanisms whereby a structurally and functionally heterogeneous organism is built from genetically homogeneous cells. A particularly perplexing question has been to determine how pluripotent stem cells within close proximity to one another within a developing blastocyst and thus exposed to very similar (if not identical) environmental cues, ultimately form different cell lineages , it is unclear how cells interpret the graded signals of morphogens to exhibit precise gene expression patterns that lead to formation of distinct cell lineages. Moreover, whereas it is easy to see how morphogenic gradients are produced and perpetuated once heterogeneous cell types are formed, this is conceptually much more difficult at the earlier stages of development, when cells are relatively "homogeneous." As such, the morphogen gradient theory alone is not enough to explain the very complicated cell lineage determination and cell differentiation processes that occur during development of highly complex higher organisms, including the human.5 V  O4 o( L5 g3 `1 P0 ]

Epigenetic mechanisms are defined as a heritable code other than the genomic sequence and include post-translational modifications to the histones .)
( J5 [2 o/ Z/ s; \8 b7 K8 y6 T& O  O
Histone Modifications Profoundly Influence Gene Transcription

Genomic DNA in eukaryotic nuclei is packaged into a compact structure known as chromatin. The fundamental unit of chromatin is the nucleosome, which is composed of two copies each of four core histones¡ªH2A, H2B, H3, and H4¡ªwrapped by 146 bp of DNA .% t* [. T, F7 x6 B* ]8 e2 ?

Remarkably, histone modifications and the chromatin patterns they encode can spread over kilobase lengths of genomic DNA in a self-propagating fashion after establishment from a central nucleation point. These patterns are then faithfully transmitted from parent to daughter cell afterward, even in the absence of the initial nucleation signal, giving rise to the concept of epigenetic inheritance  and O.G. McDonald and G.K. Owens, unpublished observations). In summary, the results of the preceding studies provide clear evidence illustrating that histone modifications not only are the marks reflecting the status of transcriptional activity of the genes, but also actively participate in the regulation of gene transcription in differentiated somatic cells.
- a% e# P$ q6 U/ B8 e- X2 _
Many Key Developmental Genes Display Histone Modification Patterns Specific to ESCs, Which Make the Genes Permissive for Activation in Response to Appropriate Environmental Cues8 C% x' f  `$ K. f% p# O/ ]  |7 r
4 X1 t- c7 i" `; u9 W; V
There is evidence that histone modifications play an important role in the regulation of gene expression patterns in ESCs. As is the case in the active gene loci in differentiated somatic cell types, it has been shown that the promoter region of active genes in ESCs, such as Oct4 and Nanog, is marked by acetylation of H3 and H4 and that these histone modifications are important for active gene transcription . These results indicate that ESCs employ similar epigenetic mechanisms for active gene transcription as compared with differentiated somatic cells. However, recent evidence suggests that there are some unique histone modification mechanisms in ESCs for silencing the lineage-control genes, which are not actively transcribed in ESCs but which may be activated later during differentiation.

Azuara et al.  showed that the chromatin of key developmental genes, including Sox, Hox, Pax, and Pou gene family members, displayed a unique histone modification patterns in mouse ESCs, in that the genes contained large stretches of repressive H3 Lys-27 methylation, while simultaneously harboring activating H3 Lys-4 methylation around the transcriptional start sites. They termed this unusual combination of modifications as "bivalent" histone modifications. Of key importance, they demonstrated that these apparently conflicting histone modifications were indeed present at the same physical chromosomes by using sequential ChIP assays for H3 Lys-27 methylation and H3 Lys-4 methylation and concluded that bivalent modification patterns were not due to the presence of two distinct subpopulations of ESCs containing solely H3 Lys-4 methylation or H3 Lys-27 methylation. They also showed that bivalent histone modification patterns resolved during the differentiation from ESCs into a neuronal cell lineage, in that only H3 Lys-4 methylation remained within neuron-specific gene promoters in neuronal precursors, whereas H3 Lys-27 methylation disappeared from these neuron-specific promoters. Conversely, promoters of other genes that remained silent in neurons lost H3 Lys-4 methylation, whereas they retained enrichment for H3 Lys-27 methylation. Taken together, these studies provide evidence that key lineage-control genes in ESCs are marked with a unique combination of activating and repressive histone modifications, which are normally present exclusively in euchromatin or heterochromatin, respectively, in differentiated somatic cells.# }: E# C+ N; D

Figure 1. Embryonic stem cells (ESCs) exhibit unique histone modification patterns for priming the lineage-control genes for later activation. (A): The histone modification patterns of lineage-control genes in ESCs are classified into three groups: genes marked by "bivalent" histone modifications which consist of activating H3 Lys-4 methylation and repressive H3 Lys-27 methylation, genes not marked by any known or detectable histone modifications, and genes marked only by activating H3 Lys-4 methylation. These genes are poised for activation with the appropriate environmental cues and signals. (B): In differentiated somatic cells, the inactive lineage-control genes are stably silenced by repressive epigenetic modifications. These inactive lineage-control genes are normally resistant to transcriptional activation. (C): The actively transcribed lineage-control genes are marked by activating histone modifications in both ESCs and differentiated somatic cells, which are accompanied with an open chromatin structure. Abbreviations: ES, embryonic stem; H3 Lys-4, H3 at lysine 4; H3 Lys-27, H3 at lysine 27.
; Z4 t1 e3 N" P- }8 F* G4 C$ H
Azuara et al. . Such a permissive chromatin conformation at lineage-control gene loci in ESCs would make these genes accessible for chromatin remodeling complexes and transcription factors for subsequent transcriptional initiation in response to appropriate environmental cues. When ESCs are committed to differentiate into a particular lineage, the repressive histone modifications would be removed from the required lineage-control gene loci and the activating modifications would be maintained, thereby allowing initiation of transcription. On the contrary, when ESCs undergo induction to other cell lineages, the activating histone modifications would be removed from the unnecessary lineage-control gene loci while repressive modifications would be maintained, and the genes would be stably silenced. As such, the bivalent histone modifications at the lineage-control gene loci are likely to behave as the initial platform for either later activation or inactivation in ESCs, and such a transcriptional-permissive status of lineage-control genes may play a key role in the maintenance of pluripotency in ESCs.
( I* u6 K1 d; `1 k* |* N8 |; M
However, the bivalent histone modifications were not detected at promoter loci of the multiple lineage-control genes, including Myf5 and Mash1  also showed that a number of key developmental genes in ESCs were marked only by H3 Lys-4 methylation (e.g., Pbx3) or did not exhibit either H3 Lys-4 methylation or H3 Lys-27 methylation (e.g., Foxp1). Given their important roles in cell lineage determination, it is likely that these genes are also permissive for activation at later developmental stages through as-yet-uncharacterized epigenetic mechanisms. Taken together, results thus far suggest that only a subset of key developmental genes and lineage-control genes in ESCs display the bivalent chromatin architecture in ESCs, while other lineage-control genes display different histone modification patterns. The functional consequences of these differences are not yet clear, although it could be a result of different kinetics of histone modification exchange at these gene loci, as described in a later section of this review.
! ~6 x# G3 l% ~; ~, `8 q
What Factors and Mechanisms Program the Unique Histone Modification Patterns in ESCs?

At present, it remains unclear why only a subset of lineage-control genes exhibit bivalent histone modification patterns in ESCs, and the precise mechanisms whereby the bivalent histone modifications are programmed into the selective lineage-control gene loci are unknown. The hierarchical activation model used for hematopoietic cell lineage determination . The reasons why these cell lineage-specific genes contain activating histone modifications within ESCs are not at all clear, but these results clearly suggest that the epigenetic priming mechanisms do not appear solely on the key lineage-control genes.

Because the bivalent modification patterns are specific for ESCs, it is interesting to speculate that ESC-selective transcription factors, such as Oct4, Nanog, and Sox2, may participate in programming these unique modifications at key developmental gene loci. Boyer et al. . These results suggest that the assembly of bivalent histone modifications is not fully explained by these ESC-selective transcription factors. Rather, it seems likely that additional ESC-selective transcription factors that have not yet been identified may contribute to the formation of bivalent histone modifications.

The specific cis-regulatory elements present within promoters of lineage-control genes may also be a determinant for the presence of bivalent histone modification patterns in ESCs. Indeed, Bernstein et al. . Thus, it would be interesting to determine whether the DNA methylation status of CpG islands at key lineage-control gene loci between ESCs and differentiated cell types is different and whether these CpG islands are responsible for recruiting trans-acting factors that might be important in programming bivalent histone modifications.

Finally, one must also consider the possibility that the failure to detect ESC-specific histone modifications within some lineage-control genes represents a false-negative. Although this is not an example from the lineage-control genes, it has been reported that activating histone modifications appeared only at the intergenic locus, but not the promoter regions of the pre-B cell-specific 5-VpreB1 genes in mouse ESCs . In this example, activating histone modifications were expanded and augmented from the intergenic locus toward the promoter regions during B-cell lineage differentiation. Thus, it is possible that histone modifications may exist outside of the regions covered by the PCR primers used in ChIP assays.

In summary, there is compelling evidence for the formation of bivalent histone modifications at key lineage-control gene loci in ESCs. However, the specific mechanisms that give rise to these bivalent histone modifications and their precise role in control of embryonic stem pluripotency and subsequent lineage determination remain to be determined.( Q6 ]- S2 k' ^/ F% G+ p) U
- A; h3 _; b, v, u$ y
Lineage-Control Genes May Be Primed by Rapid Exchange of Histone Modifications in ESCs# U5 e9 s% t4 _
  e% |( H7 @" N0 }4 O' y
Our discussion thus far has focused on consideration of different histone modification patterns at distinct lineage-control gene loci in ESCs. However, it is possible that all or most lineage-control genes use a common histone modification-based mechanism for keeping them in a transcription-permissive state, but it has not been observed at multiple lineage-control gene loci due to technical limitations of ChIP assays. In this section, we will propose a histone modification pulsing model in which individual ESCs exhibit stochastic changes in histone modification patterning at specific lineage-control gene loci. That is, at any given instant in time, a particular ESC may exhibit a unique repertoire of histone modifications at critical lineage-control gene loci that in turn alter their response to environmental cues. Indeed, such a model may reconcile experimental evidence to date.  {) Q( G7 P3 y/ T% @! c$ A

In this model, all or most of lineage-control genes within ESCs are dynamically associated with histone modifications that exhibit different kinetics and stoichiometries (Fig. 2). For example, some lineage-control gene loci such as Sox1, Nkx2-2, Msx1, Irx3, and Pax3, whose promoter was observed by ChIP assays to contain bivalent chromatin patterns, are associated with cyclic histone modification patterning that occurs with a higher frequency and/or a longer duration. In contrast, the exchange rate of histone modifications of other lineage-control gene loci such as Myf5 and Mash1, whose promoter was not observed to contain bivalent chromatin patterns, may exhibit lower frequencies or shorter duration, such that ChIP assays lack sufficient "sensitivity" to detect these modifications. Because individual ESCs would be expected to be asynchronous with respect to these transient locus-selective histone modification exchanges, the probability and sensitivity in detecting histone modifications using mass-averaging methods such as ChIP assays would thus be dependent on the following variables: (a) the fraction of ESCs within the entire population that exhibits a particular histone modification at a given locus and point in time, (b) the amplitude or magnitude of the enrichment of histone modifications, and (c) the sensitivity of methods available to detect that change, including the affinity of antibodies for specific histone modifications. As such, the data that some lineage-control gene loci exhibited unique histone modification patterns in ESCs would suggest that these patterns were present in a larger fraction of individual ESCs at a given time point and/or were of greater amplitude due to tighter packing of modified histones within a given DNA sequence. In contrast, the data that other loci did not have detectable modifications in ESCs would suggest that the modifications appeared very transiently in individual ESCs and thus fell below the threshold for detection in ChIP assays. During the differentiation of ESCs, such dynamic histone modification patterns would become more stable, leading to the higher levels of histone modifications in differentiated somatic cells. This model would be fully consistent with observations from many laboratories  that levels of histone modifications are much higher or are much expanded along the gene loci in differentiated somatic cells than those in ESCs, because a far greater fraction of cells would be expected to simultaneously exhibit the histone modifications.
7 I) R( g! R' k/ N6 ?8 @
Figure 2. All or most of lineage-control genes in embryonic stem cells (ESCs) may be dynamically primed with histone modifications that exhibit a variety of kinetics and stoichiometries. Results of recent studies suggest that only a subset of lineage-control genes are primed with "bivalent" histone modifications in mouse ESCs  and assumes that individual ESCs exhibit stochastic and asynchronous histone modification patterning at specific gene loci. The net result would be that individual ESCs within the population could exhibit a unique repertoire of histone modifications at key developmental loci at a given point in time. Abbreviation: ES, embryonic stem.
$ w% I( n, D4 R( r4 ?' C" z) W
Indeed, a series of highly innovative studies by Misteli and colleagues . They also presented evidence that the hyperdynamic binding of histone proteins to DNA was required for the pluripotent potential of ESCs by experimentally modulating the dynamic features of proteins in ESCs. Of importance, they presented compelling evidence that the hyperdynamic state of histone proteins in ESCs was not a function of high rates of cell replication, in that the hyperdynamic feature was observed in ESCs at any time point in the cell cycle. Moreover, an absolutely critical advantage of these studies is that the FRAP technology permits assessments of chromatin protein dynamics at the single-cell level such that authors were able to directly compare the dynamics in both growing and nongrowing cells and observed no differences. Thus, these results suggest that the dynamic exchange of chromatin proteins, including histones within intact chromatin in ESCs, was not a function of cell replication, but, rather suggest that they may be one of the key determinants for the pluripotency of ESCs. As such, this rapid histone exchange rate is a potential mechanism whereby histone modifications might be dynamically deposited on and off the chromatin template at lineage-control genes in ESCs over time.1 I0 D+ Y0 S. ]2 `6 [
) ~9 Z2 H* \6 g4 K- x" W  W
There are, however, several major unresolved questions about this model. First, virtually nothing is known regarding what factors and mechanisms control the dynamic rate of histone modification exchanges at gene loci within ESCs. Although it is possible that ESC-selective transcription factors and/or specific cis-regulatory elements determine the dynamics of histone modifications, as yet there is no direct evidence that this is the case. Second, it is unknown whether dynamic changes in histone modification patterning of a given gene locus in a given cell type are caused by the exchange of histone proteins containing alternative histone modifications or by in situ modification of existing histones on DNA through dynamic recruitment of histone-modifying enzymes (e.g., exchange of histone acetyltransferase vs. histone deacetylase enzymes). The latter could be tested by real-time measurements of diffusion rates, dissociation rates, and residence times of histone-modifying enzymes on chromatin within single cells and selected gene loci using methods similar to those employed for Polycomb proteins , thus raising the possibility of eventually increasing the sensitivity of CHIP assays to the single-cell level. In summary, although the histone modification pulsing model provides an intriguing mechanism that may contribute to the pluripotency of ESCs, the model also raises multiple questions that require extensive further studies and development of revolutionary new methodologies, including the real-time imaging of the histone modification status at specific genomic loci at the single-cell level.

Asynchronous Histone Modification Pulsing May Play a Role in the Initial Formation of Heterogeneous Cell Populations in the Developing Embryo
) i8 e% U' M8 A8 k3 O- P$ u; x
One of the most intriguing and poorly understood areas in developmental biology is how morphologically homogeneous pluripotent stem cells within the inner cell mass of a blastocyst respond differentially to virtually identical local environmental cues, leading to development of heterogeneous cell populations. Whereas this is obviously a very complex process involving many interactive mechanisms, including possible partitioning of the egg cytoplasm, maternal imprinting, and many other mechanisms , it is interesting to postulate that the distinct responsiveness of individual pluripotent stem cells within the developing blastocyst is caused at least in part by the asynchronous dynamic nature of histone modification patterning. That is, adjacent pluripotent stem cells in a blastocyst may respond differently to very similar or identical environmental cues because of the difference in the histone modification status at particular developmental gene loci at a given instant in time. As such, it is interesting to hypothesize that the histone modification pulsing model may be important for creating spatial and temporal cell heterogeneity during the embryonic development, as well as for maintaining pluripotency in ESCs./ g4 N" L$ B/ t- e
. i) Y1 x" Q5 F3 p
According to the histone modification pulsing model, all or most of the key lineage-control genes in pluripotent stem cells are predicted to exhibit a variable exchange rate of histone modifications such as H3 Lys-4 methylation and H3 Lys-27 methylation within their chromatin. Although Bernstein et al.  clearly showed that these histone modifications were present simultaneously on the same physical chromosome loci as determined by the sequential ChIP assays in mouse ESCs, it is still possible that the kinetics of each histone modification pattern (e.g., H3 Lys-4 methylation vs. H3 Lys-27 methylation) is asynchronous in individual cells. A simple diagram to illustrate this principle is shown in Figure 3. In this model, the pluripotent stem cell A (Fig. 3) would exhibit a permissive chromatin architecture consisting of the appearance of activating H3 Lys-4 methylation and absence of repressive H3 Lys-27 methylation at a particular key lineage-control gene locus at a particular time point Z. In contrast, other pluripotent stem cells might contain both repressive H3 Lys-27 methylation and activating H3 Lys-4 methylation (Fig. 3, cell B) or contain only repressive H3 Lys-27 methylation (Fig. 3, cell C) at the same gene locus at the same time point Z. At the time point Z, this particular lineage-control gene would be able to exhibit a response to the appropriate developmental stimuli only in pluripotent stem cell A, but not in pluripotent stem cells B and C. The morphogenic signals and ESC-selective transcription factors could "catch" the responsive gene at time Z and then go on to activate the transcription/expression in pluripotent stem cell A, but this would be prevented by the presence of repressive H3 Lys-27 methylation at the same loci in pluripotent stem cells B and C. Although there is no evidence suggesting that genes lacking both H3 Lys-4 methylation and H3 Lys-27 methylation exhibit (or do not exhibit) a response to developmental stimuli, asynchronous dynamics in histone modification patterns between individual pluripotent stem cells may contribute to the formation of heterogeneous cell populations from the apparently identical pluripotent stem cells that share an identical or virtually identical repertoire of local environmental signals and cues.$ X1 Y- N+ X4 M7 P9 t9 v0 V

Figure 3. Dynamic exchange of histone modifications in pluripotent stem cells may play a role in the initial formation of heterogeneous cell populations in the developing embryo. When appropriate developmental cues appear at specific time point Z during development, a particular lineage-control gene will be activated only in pluripotent stem cell A, because the chromatin of this gene, which consists of activating H3 Lys-4 methylation but not repressive H3 Lys-27 methylation, is able to exhibit a response. On the contrary, the same gene will not respond to the same stimuli in pluripotent stem cells B and C at the same time point Z, because they are modulated by both H3 Lys-27 methylation and H3 Lys-4 methylation (cell B) or only H3 Lys-27 methylation (cell C). There is no evidence suggesting that genes lacking both H3 Lys-4 methylation and H3 Lys-27 methylation exhibit (or do not exhibit) a response to developmental stimuli. In this manner, the dynamic character of histone modifications in pluripotent stem cells may contribute to the establishment of heterogeneous cell populations within the developing blastocyst from an initial homogeneous cell population. Abbreviations: ES, embryonic stem; H3 Lys-4, H3 at lysine 4; H3 Lys-27, H3 at lysine 27.4 r0 J$ n7 K: e9 b, h- _
& q% s' _2 w3 E* ~
This initial activation process of the lineage-control gene could then be amplified by subsequent mechanisms, such as the epigenetic inheritance process described earlier, as well as downstream effects of the initial gene activation event. The "pulsing" histone modifications could be further strengthened spatially and temporally by spreading along chromatin and be inherited through cell division, thereby stably programming activation or silencing after the initial nucleation event and effectively extinguishing the ESC-specific histone modification pulsing from these loci in differentiated cell lineages. For example, it has been demonstrated that a single pulse of transcription at silent genes in ESCs can result in replacement of Polycomb proteins and H3 Lys-27 methylation from Fab7 transgene promoters integrated into Hox gene loci, with the Trithorax proteins and H3 Lys-4 methylation . As such, the gene loci with bivalent histone modifications in pluripotent stem cells could be resolved into chromatin containing only activating modifications such as H3 Lys-4 methylation (if the gene is activated) or repressive modifications such as H3 Lys-27 methylation (if the gene remains silent), once differentiation was triggered. Once a heterogeneous cell population is initially established in this manner, there may be little difficulty in maintaining and extending differentiation through establishment of defined gradients of morphogenic factors and the controlled availability of metabolites, hormones, and secreted matrix components that can promote maturation of individual cell populations to their particular destinies.( y4 ]3 k' s9 l8 O# o. p

Perspectives8 ^4 b8 j# ?, C" Y7 o
# _7 n- {$ r% M% O/ z& F
In this review, we have proposed a novel histone modification pulsing model that may play an important role in the maintenance of pluripotency and cell lineage determination in ESCs. One very intriguing question is whether re-establishment of an asynchronous hyperdynamic state can restore pluripotency in differentiated somatic cells. Recent nuclear transfer studies have provided clear evidence that somatic cell nuclei can be reprogrammed into pluripotent ESCs, embryos, and even live animals . Indeed, it is interesting to speculate that one might use measurements of the hyperdynamic nature of histone modifications as a possible means to estimate reprogramming efficiency after nuclear transfer and nuclear hybridization or for the evaluation of plasticity of stem cells.
/ o3 ~* h7 R( y. b" O4 Y
Further studies are also needed to expand these sorts of analyses to a larger repertoire of activating and repressive histone modification patterns in ESCs. For example, studies have shown that methylation of H3 Lys-36 and H3 Lys-79 and phosphorylation of H3 Serine-10 are correlated with actively transcribed genes , and a multitude of other modifications are being discovered and linked to gene activation/silencing. Given that the balance between activating and repressive histone modifications is important for the maintenance of pluripotency of ESCs as well as for the cell lineage determination, extensive studies regarding a greater repertoire of histone modifications in ESCs will likely provide novel insights into this field.
8 a0 Q& A6 B1 D
Finally, ESCs are expected to be prime candidates for cell transplantation and regenerative therapies for a wide range of human diseases. As such, an understanding of epigenetic mechanisms that control pluripotency and lineage determination in ESCs will undoubtedly contribute to development of improved methods for therapeutic applications of ESCs. Moreover, such studies are likely to provide novel insights regarding the potential contribution of epigenetic reprogramming mechanisms in control of plasticity and pluripotency of somatic stem cell populations and thereby advance applications of these cells for treatment of human disease.
3 H# L6 Z; S4 ]
DISCLOSURES

G.K.O. has acted as a consultant to, has served as an officer or board member of, and has had a financial interest in Setagon, Inc. during the last 2 years.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS3 S; m* I) P0 A  {# D2 H9 Y* p. J% e

This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grants R01HL38854, P01HL19242, and R21HL071976 to G.K.O. and by an American Heart Association National Scientist Development Grant (0635253N) to T.Y.
      【参考文献】
+ R8 O+ D- z: f  ^6 o5 U
7 D" [5 }9 B' X' B: E
Evans MJ, Kaufman MH. Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature 1981;292:154¨C156.2 k/ y' v3 a& }5 ^7 g2 v/ Q
) T9 B9 y) D  B* u, z
Bradley A, Evans M, Kaufman MH et al. Formation of germ-line chimaeras from embryo-derived teratocarcinoma cell lines. Nature 1984;309:255¨C256.5 z% M. |( j+ \- c

Nichols J, Zevnik B, Anastassiadis K et al. Formation of pluripotent stem cells in the mammalian embryo depends on the POU transcription factor Oct4. Cell 1998;95:379¨C391.7 z7 K" j  m& S4 o

Chambers I, Colby D, Robertson M et al. Functional expression cloning of Nanog, a pluripotency sustaining factor in embryonic stem cells. Cell 2003;113:643¨C655.# b% W1 z& X7 o- X+ J. q

Mitsui K, Tokuzawa Y, Itoh H et al. The homeoprotein nanog is required for maintenance of pluripotency in mouse epiblast and ES cells. Cell 2003;113:631¨C642.6 T/ s0 R/ M, ?* C' {
. _% }& P/ L% d% H# c7 b# N
Botquin V, Hess H, Fuhrmann G et al. New POU dimer configuration mediates antagonistic control of an osteopontin preimplantation enhancer by Oct-4 and Sox-2. Genes Dev 1998;12:2073¨C2090.& u6 g! c" a8 ^- N, S1 K' z

Nichols J, Chambers I, Taga T et al. Physiological rationale for responsiveness of mouse embryonic stem cells to gp130 cytokines. Development 2001;128:2333¨C2339.5 T" c& x" t" p2 G8 v; G. a/ R
- J% `2 ~: ^9 g5 l+ N2 N
Ying QL, Nichols J, Chambers I et al. BMP induction of Id proteins suppresses differentiation and sustains embryonic stem cell self-renewal in collaboration with STAT3. Cell 2003;115:281¨C292.; t+ p" `  t4 Q) z8 T6 ^
* Q8 A6 o8 ^4 C( L2 o3 E4 `: X
Boiani M, Scholer HR. Regulatory networks in embryo-derived pluripotent stem cells. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2005;6:872¨C881.; n& L7 F/ [  u& x( |

Niwa H, Miyazaki J, Smith AG. Quantitative expression of Oct-3/4 defines differentiation, dedifferentiation or self-renewal of ES cells. Nat Genet 2000;24:372¨C376./ r" R2 ?; m3 s6 J  ?
( `) D0 g) T+ E# V4 }
Smith AG. Embryo-derived stem cells: Of mice and men. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 2001;17:435¨C462." W/ B  r5 ^4 P1 ^2 y

Keller GM. In vitro differentiation of embryonic stem cells. Curr Opin Cell Biol 1995;7:862¨C869.

Tabata T, Takei Y. Morphogens, their identification and regulation. Development 2004;131:703¨C712.
- D& ^( s, B% l% V. z3 O
Jenuwein T, Allis CD. Translating the histone code. Science 2001;293:1074¨C1080.0 b% ^# I9 c8 v

Bird AP, Wolffe AP. Methylation-induced repression¨Cbelts, braces, and chromatin. Cell 1999;99:451¨C454.
! a" A% t* h; ^3 p, j
Ahmad K, Henikoff S. Histone H3 variants specify modes of chromatin assembly. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2002;99:16477¨C16484.; w& e$ E8 K/ e
' e! Z1 P4 l5 f' a/ v6 q2 `
Sheardown SA, Duthie SM, Johnston CM et al. Stabilization of Xist RNA mediates initiation of X chromosome inactivation. Cell 1997;91:99¨C107.
# {4 `; C9 o( M- I
Azuara V, Perry P, Sauer S et al. Chromatin signatures of pluripotent cell lines. Nat Cell Biol 2006;8:532¨C538.
& F4 ~$ D5 I5 {6 S/ D
Bernstein BE, Mikkelsen TS, Xie X et al. A bivalent chromatin structure marks key developmental genes in embryonic stem cells. Cell 2006;125:315¨C326.0 ~' @% n2 I( \" I

Margueron R, Trojer P, Reinberg D. The key to development: Interpreting the histone code? Curr Opin Gene Dev 2005;15:163¨C176.- ]* ]1 ^: Z4 d, ~( V$ O2 A

Luger K, Mader AW, Richmond RK et al. Crystal structure of the nucleosome core particle at 2.8 &Aring; resolution. Nature 1997;389:251¨C260.

Narlikar GJ, Fan HY, Kingston RE. Cooperation between complexes that regulate chromatin structure and transcription. Cell 2002;108:475¨C487.& S, M  @  w- {7 V
4 G$ q" B* i$ T3 m  o* N9 }% b
Struhl K. Histone acetylation and transcriptional regulatory mechanisms. Genes Dev 1998;12:599¨C606.

Santos-Rosa H, Schneider R, Bannister AJ et al. Active genes are tri-methylated at K4 of histone H3. Nature 2002;419:407¨C411.9 l4 W$ S  ^5 L: o  k" X

Schubeler D, MacAlpine DM, Scalzo D et al. The histone modification pattern of active genes revealed through genome-wide chromatin analysis of a higher eukaryote. Genes Dev 2004;18:1263¨C1271.
" ~. l* x2 l$ D* b- `4 \! i- ?
Shogren-Knaak M, Ishii H, Sun JM et al. Histone H4¨CK16 acetylation controls chromatin structure and protein interactions. Science 2006;311:844¨C847.

Kingston RE, Narlikar GJ. ATP-dependent remodeling and acetylation as regulators of chromatin fluidity. Genes Dev 1999;13:2339¨C2352.6 E, Y) g% ^% z3 N

Pray-Grant MG, Daniel JA, Schieltz D et al. Chd1 chromodomain links histone H3 methylation with SAGA- and SLIK-dependent acetylation. Nature 2005;433:434¨C438.

Fischle W, Wang Y, Jacobs SA et al. Molecular basis for the discrimination of repressive methyl-lysine marks in histone H3 by Polycomb and HP1 chromodomains. Genes Dev 2003;17:1870¨C1881.

Hall IM, Shankaranarayana GD, Noma Ki et al. Establishment and maintenance of a heterochromatin domain. Science 2002;297:2232¨C2237.
* L& q/ }6 L7 o4 x, N4 c
Plath K, Fang J, Mlynarczyk-Evans SK et al. Role of histone H3 lysine 27 methylation in X inactivation. Science 2003;300:131¨C135.3 q$ h/ Q( L/ p, A. s/ b
0 u6 o2 u4 l3 c; j  O9 e2 {9 h
Koyanagi M, Baguet A, Martens J et al. EZH2 and histone 3 trimethyl lysine 27 associated with Il4 and Il13 gene silencing in TH1 cells. J Biol Chem 2005;280:31470¨C31477.
6 ~5 D5 n3 i+ F: [) Z* ]
Nakayama J, Rice JC, Strahl BD et al. Role of histone H3 lysine 9 methylation in epigenetic control of heterochromatin assembly. Science 2001;292:110¨C113.# o: L/ S2 O! U: P$ c- o. ]6 k
2 P; U+ |* p/ z& j) ?) D# x0 h
Cavalli G, Paro R. Epigenetic inheritance of active chromatin after removal of the main transactivator. Science 1999;286:955¨C958./ Q% p3 D9 O2 G# G) W0 Y4 `

Chakrabarti SK, Francis J, Ziesmann SM et al. Covalent histone modifications underlie the developmental regulation of insulin gene transcription in pancreatic beta cells. J Biol Chem 2003;278:23617¨C23623.; `/ L0 k/ ?! Z4 ?

Fish JE, Matouk CC, Rachlis A et al. The expression of endothelial nitric-oxide synthase is controlled by a cell-specific histone code. J Biol Chem 2005;280:24824¨C24838.

Edelstein LC, Pan A, Collins T. Chromatin modification and the endothelial-specific activation of the E-selectin gene. J Biol Chem 2005;280:11192¨C11202.$ ?2 x: o; R% m- V4 l& E3 l

McDonald OG, Wamhoff BR, Hoofnagle MH et al. Control of SRF binding to CArG box chromatin regulates smooth muscle gene expression in vivo. J Clin Invest 2006;116:36¨C48.
3 ?( `9 D/ F# @% T' H
Hattori N, Nishino K, Ko YG et al. Epigenetic control of mouse Oct-4 gene expression in embryonic stem cells and trophoblast stem cells. J Biol Chem 2004;279:17063¨C17069.( U" J) v' q. u8 `
; t+ _  ?  ~5 P3 M
Kimura H, Tada M, Nakatsuji N et al. Histone code modifications on pluripotential nuclei of reprogrammed somatic cells. Mol Cell Biol 2004;24:5710¨C5720.4 u  y2 r; J0 a5 c

O'Neill LP, VerMilyea MD, Turner BM. Epigenetic characterization of the early embryo with a chromatin immunoprecipitation protocol applicable to small cell populations. Nat Genet 2006;38:835¨C841.
" O* q3 U5 X1 \- d. _' _5 y  F
Jiang G, Yang F, Sanchez C et al. Histone modification in constitutive heterochromatin versus unexpressed euchromatin in human cells. J Cell Biochem 2004;93:286¨C300.

Williams RRE, Azuara V, Perry P et al. Neural induction promotes large-scale chromatin reorganisation of the Mash1 locus. J Cell Sci 2006;119:132¨C140.  P$ e. _: J* m  H* A. d: J

Pownall ME, Gustafsson MK, Emerson CP Jr. Myogenic regulatory factors and the specification of muscle progenitors in vertebrate embryos. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 2002;18:747¨C783.
: w2 ~: Z' A/ l! A! Q. d
Akashi K. Lineage promiscuity and plasticity in hematopoietic development. Ann NY Acad Sci 2005;1044:125¨C131.  n8 O1 s7 F  O4 y0 Y2 t# z: X
- G2 i( b3 I6 z5 k# n( X9 y- G
Ballas N, Grunseich C, Lu DD et al. REST and its corepressors mediate plasticity of neuronal gene chromatin throughout neurogenesis. Cell 2005;121:645¨C657., r2 |- R0 e3 b! u8 w
; W& i2 m; h* [  @/ T* n
Szutorisz H, Canzonetta C, Georgiou A et al. Formation of an active tissue-specific chromatin domain initiated by epigenetic marking at the embryonic stem cell stage. Mol Cell Biol 2005;25:1804¨C1820.8 k) R- _( D$ M3 M' o3 k4 o, u  j
9 b) n4 U$ H0 t; h8 R
Boyer LA, Lee TI, Cole MF et al. Core transcriptional regulatory circuitry in human embryonic stem cells. Cell 2005;122:947¨C956.8 I# E1 h8 @8 k" t* K' Q& o

Loh YH, Wu Q, Chew JL et al. The Oct4 and Nanog transcription network regulates pluripotency in mouse embryonic stem cells. Nat Genet 2006;38:431¨C440.

Lee TI, Jenner RG, Boyer LA et al. Control of developmental regulators by Polycomb in human embryonic stem cells. Cell 2006;125:301¨C313.
4 n- ?! G8 a# E' ]: ^
Boyer LA, Plath K, Zeitlinger J et al. Polycomb complexes repress developmental regulators in murine embryonic stem cells. Nature 2006;441:349¨C353., [) Q( a# M/ }

Lee JH, Skalnik DG. CpG-binding protein (CXXC finger protein 1) is a component of the mammalian Set1 histone H3-Lys4 methyltransferase complex, the analogue of the yeast Set1/COMPASS complex. J Biol Chem 2005;280:41725¨C41731.
, i4 u3 y1 \8 f$ \2 [$ S% c. ]
Kremenskoy M, Kremenska Y, Ohgane J et al. Genome-wide analysis of DNA methylation status of CpG islands in embryoid bodies, teratomas, and fetuses. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2003;311:884¨C890.2 ?3 u" B! @& q* I- e) m

Meshorer E, Yellajoshula D, George E et al. Hyperdynamic plasticity of chromatin proteins in pluripotent embryonic stem cells. Dev Cell 2006;10:105¨C116.
" U) X2 C" b- g0 q7 t6 m+ }
Phair RD, Scaffidi P, Elbi C et al. Global nature of dynamic protein-chromatin interactions in vivo: Three-dimensional genome scanning and dynamic interaction networks of chromatin proteins. Mol Cell Biol 2004;24:6393¨C6402.8 E) b+ V* X- B2 _- j. }3 |
1 P, K9 u2 Q& M# d$ s
Ficz G, Heintzmann R, Arndt-Jovin DJ. Polycomb group protein complexes exchange rapidly in living Drosophila. Development 2005;132:3963¨C3976.
6 S0 @5 V$ i6 y6 m" I% [+ v6 e( Z+ ?
McNally JG, Muller WG, Walker D et al. The glucocorticoid receptor: Rapid exchange with regulatory sites in living cells. Science 2000;287:1262¨C1265.

Voss TC, Demarco IA, Day RN. Quantitative imaging of protein interactions in the cell nucleus. Biotechniques 2005;38:413¨C424.
' w6 C% F, r. |. g
Demarco IA, Periasamy A, Booker CF et al. Monitoring dynamic protein interactions with photoquenching FRET. Nat Meth 2006;3:519¨C524.
9 R- A  O2 g  N) _+ L! m
Li E. Chromatin modification and epigenetic reprogramming in mammalian development. Nat Rev Genet 2002;3:662¨C673.
, X; Q5 S& X7 S% E6 F# A
Kurimoto K, Yabuta Y, Ohinata Y et al. An improved single-cell cDNA amplification method for efficient high-density oligonucleotide microarray analysis. Nucl Acids Res 2006;34:e42.
) |. N. \9 l  h3 J8 Y
Chazaud C, Yamanaka Y, Pawson T et al. Early lineage segregation between epiblast and primitive endoderm in mouse blastocysts through the Grb2-MAPK pathway. Dev Cell 2006;10:615¨C624.
$ p! b/ P( L5 O/ M
Wakayama T, Perry ACF, Zuccotti M et al. Full-term development of mice from enucleated oocytes injected with cumulus cell nuclei. Nature 1998;394:369¨C374.

Reik W, Dean W, Walter J. Epigenetic reprogramming in mammalian development. Science 2001;293:1089¨C1093.

Bannister AJ, Schneider R, Myers FA et al. Spatial distribution of di- and tri-methyl lysine 36 of histone H3 at active genes. J Biol Chem 2005;280:17732¨C17736.

Richards EJ, Elgin SCR. Epigenetic codes for heterochromatin formation and silencing: Rounding up the usual suspects. Cell 2002;108:489¨C500.
3 U) s5 J+ n% Q' T6 j
Karachentsev D, Sarma K, Reinberg D et al. PR-Set7-dependent methylation of histone H4 Lys 20 functions in repression of gene expression and is essential for mitosis. Genes Dev 2005;19:431¨C435.

Duerre JA, Lee CT. In vivo methylation and turnover of rat brain histones. J Neurochem 1974;23:541¨C547.

收藏0 分享0 顶0 踩0