Since human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) were first isolated and successfully cultured in vitro, the pluripotent potential of hESCs has been underestimated. The pluripotency of mouse embryonic stem cells (mESCs) can be categorized as naïve and primed, depending on their corresponding in vivo developing phases. mESC morphology differs at distinct pluripotent states, which differ in signaling dependence, gene expression, epigenetic features, and developmental potential. hESCs resemble mouse stem cells at primed pluripotency, and consequently are believed to correspond to a later developmental stage in vivo than mESCs. Nevertheless, recent studies indicate that a naïve state of pluripotency may exist in hESCs, and the pluripotency of hESCs also can be enhanced by genetic modification or optimized culture systems. These findings provide novel insight into the properties and differentiation potential of hESCs. Here, we review the recent advances in characterization of ESC states and investigate the mechanisms regulating hESC pluripotency.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaoS., TangF., LiX., HayashiK., GillichA., LaoK., and SuraniM.A. (2009). Epigenetic reversion of post-implantation epiblast to pluripotent embryonic stem cells. Nature, 461, 1292–1295.
2.
BetschingerJ., NicholsJ., DietmannS., CorrinP.D., PaddisonP.J., and SmithA. (2013). Exit from pluripotency is gated by intracellular redistribution of the bHLH transcription factor Tfe3. Cell, 153, 335–347.
3.
BronsI.G., SmithersL.E., TrotterM.W., Rugg-GunnP., SunB., Chuva, de Sousa LopesS.M., HowlettS.K., ClarksonA., Ahrlund-RichterL., PedersenR.A., and VallierL. (2007). Derivation of pluripotent epiblast stem cells from mammalian embryos. Nature, 448, 191–195.
4.
BrookF.A., and GardnerR.L. (1997). The origin and efficient derivation of embryonic stem cells in the mouse. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 94. 5709–5712.
5.
BueckerC., and GeijsenN. (2010). Different flavors of pluripotency, molecular mechanisms, and practical implications. Cell Stem Cell, 7, 559–564.
6.
BueckerC., ChenH.H., PoloJ.M., DaheronL., BuL., BarakatT.S., OkwiekaP., PorterA., GribnauJ., HochedlingerK., and GeijsenN. (2010). A murine ESC-like state facilitates transgenesis and homologous recombination in human pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell, 6, 535–546.
7.
ChambersI., ColbyD., RobertsonM., NicholsJ., LeeS., TweedieS., and SmithA. (2003). Functional expression cloning of Nanog, a pluripotency sustaining factor in embryonic stem cells. Cell, 113, 643–655.
ChenY.F., DongZ., JiangL., LaiD., and GuoL. (2013). Mouse primed embryonic stem cells could be maintained and reprogrammed on human amnion epithelial cells. Stem Cells Dev., 22, 320–329.
10.
ChiaN.Y., ChanY.S., FengB., LuX., OrlovY.L., MoreauD., KumarP., YangL., JiangJ., LauM.S., HussM., SohB.S., KrausP., LiP., LufkinT., LimB., ClarkeN.D., BardF., and NgH.H. (2010). A genome-wide RNAi screen reveals determinants of human embryonic stem cell identity. Nature, 468, 316–320.
11.
ChouY.F., ChenH.H., EijpeM., YabuuchiA., ChenowethJ.G., TesarP., LuJ., McKayR.D., and GeijsenN. (2008). The growth factor environment defines distinct pluripotent ground states in novel blastocyst-derived stem cells. Cell, 135, 449–461.
12.
EvansM.J., and KaufmanM.H. (1981). Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature, 292, 154–156.
HannaJ., MarkoulakiS., MitalipovaM., ChengA.W., CassadyJ.P., StaerkJ., CareyB.W., LengnerC.J., ForemanR., LoveJ., GaoQ., KimJ., and JaenischR. (2009). Metastable pluripotent states in NOD-mouse-derived ESCs. Cell Stem Cell, 4, 513–524.
19.
HannaJ., ChengA.W., SahaK., KimJ., LengnerC.J., SoldnerF., CassadyJ.P., MuffatJ., CareyB.W, and JaenischR. (2010a). Human embryonic stem cells with biological and epigenetic characteristics similar to those of mouse ESCs. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107, 9222–9227.
20.
HannaJ.H., SahaK., and JaenischR. (2010b). Pluripotency and cellular reprogramming: Facts, hypotheses, unresolved issues. Cell, 143, 508–525.
21.
HassaniS.N., TotonchiM., GourabiH., SchölerH.R., and BaharvandH. (2014). Signaling roadmap modulating naive and primed pluripotency. Stem Cells Dev., 23, 193–208.
22.
HayashiK., and SuraniM.A. (2009). Self-renewing epiblast stem cells exhibit continual delineation of germ cells with epigenetic reprogramming in vitro. Development, 136, 3549–3556.
23.
HoganB.L.M. (1976). Changes in the behaviour of teratocarcinoma cells cultivated in vitro. Nature, 263, 136–137.
24.
JiangJ., ChanY.S., LohY.H., CaiJ., TongG.Q., LimC.A., RobsonP., ZhongS., and NgH.H. (2008). A core Klf circuitry regulates self-renewal of embryonic stem cells. Nat. Cell Biol., 10, 353–360.
25.
KerrC.L., and ChengL. (2010). Multiple, interconvertible states of human pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell, 6, 497–499.
26.
LaboskyP.A., BarlowD.P., and HoganB.L. (1994). Mouse embryonic germ (EG) cell lines: Transmission through the germline and differences in the methylation imprint of insulin-like growth factor 2 receptor (Igf2r) gene compared with embryonic stem (ES) cell lines. Development, 120, 3197–3204.
27.
LaiD., ChenY., WangF., JiangL., WeiC. (2012). LKB1 controls the pluripotent state of human embryonic stem cells. Cell. Reprogram., 14, 164–170.
28.
LengnerC.J., GimelbrantA.A., ErwinJ.A., ChengA.W., GuentherM.G., WelsteadG.G., AlagappanR., FramptonG.M., XuP., MuffatJ., SantagataS., PowersD., BarrettC.B., YoungR.A., LeeJ.T., JaenischR., and MitalipovaM. (2010). Derivation of pre-X inactivation human embryonic stem cells under physiological oxygen concentrations. Cell, 141, 872–883.
29.
LiY., McClintickJ., ZhongL., EdenbergH.J., YoderM.C., and ChanR.J. (2005). Murine embryonic stem cell differentiation is promoted by SOCS-3 and inhibited by the zinc finger transcription factor Klf4. Blood, 105, 635–637.
30.
MartinG.R. (1981). Isolation of a pluripotent cell line from early mouse embryos cultured in medium conditioned by teratocarcinoma stem cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 78, 7634–7638.
31.
McConnellB.B., GhalebA.M., NandanM.O., and YangV.W. (2007). The diverse functions of Krüppel-like factors 4 and 5 in epithelial biology and pathobiology. Bioessays, 29, 549–557.
32.
MitsuiK., TokuzawaY., ItohH., SegawaK., MurakamiM., TakahashiK., MaruyamaM., MaedaM., and YamanakaS. (2003). The homeoprotein Nanog is required for maintenance of pluripotency in mouse epiblast and ES cells. Cell, 113, 631–642.
33.
NicholsJ., and SmithA. (2009). Naive and primed pluripotent states. Cell Stem Cell, 4, 487–492.
34.
RossantJ. (2008). Stem cells and early lineage development. Cell, 132, 527–531.
35.
SchölerH.R., RuppertS., SuzukiN., ChowdhuryK., and GrussP. (1990). New type of POU domain in germ line-specific protein Oct-4. Nature, 344, 435–439.
36.
SilvaJ., BarrandonO., NicholsJ., KawaguchiJ., TheunissenT.W., and SmithA. (2008a). Promotion of reprogramming to ground state pluripotency by signal inhibition. PLoS Biol., 6, e253.
37.
SilvaJ., NicholsJ., TheunissenT.W., GuoG., van OostenA.L., BarrandonO., WrayJ., YamanakaS., ChambersI., and SmithA. (2009). Nanog is the gateway to the pluripotent ground state. Cell, 138, 722–737.
38.
SilvaS.S., RowntreeR.K., MekhoubadS., and LeeJ.T. (2008b). X-chromosome inactivation and epigenetic fluidity in human embryonic stem cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 105, 4820–4825.
39.
SridharanR., TchieuJ., MasonM.J., YachechkoR., KuoyE., HorvathS., ZhouQ., and PlathK. (2009). Role of the murine reprogramming factors in the induction of pluripotency. Cell, 136, 364–377.
40.
TakahashiK., and YamanakaS. (2006). Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell, 126, 663–676.
41.
TakahashiK., TanabeK., OhnukiM., NaritaM., IchisakaT., TomodaK., and YamanakaS. (2007). Induction of pluripotent stem cells from adult human fibroblasts by defined factors. Cell, 131, 861–872.
42.
TesarP.J., ChenowethJ.G., BrookF.A., DaviesT.J., EvansE.P., MackD.L., GardnerR.L., and McKayR.D. (2007). New cell lines from mouse epiblast share defining features with human embryonic stem cells. Nature, 448, 196–199.
43.
TheunissenT.W., PowellB.E, WangH., MitalipovaM., FaddahD.A., ReddyJ., FanZ.P., MaetzelD., GanzK., ShiL., LungjangwaT., ImsoonthornruksaS., StelzerY., RangarajanS., D'AlessioA., ZhangJ., GaoQ., DawlatyM.M., YoungR.A., GrayN.S., JaenischR. (2014). Systematic identification of culture conditions for induction and maintenance of naive human pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell, 15, 471–487.
44.
ThomsonJ.A., Itskovitz-EldorJ., ShapiroS.S., WaknitzM.A., SwiergielJ.J., MarshallV.S., and JonesJ.M. (1998). Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts. Science, 282, 1145–1147.
45.
XuR.H., Sampsell-BarronT.L., GuF., RootS., PeckR.M., PanG., YuJ., Antosiewicz-BourgetJ., TianS., StewartR., and ThomsonJ.A. (2008). NANOG is a direct target of TGFbeta/activin-mediated SMAD signaling in human ESCs. Cell Stem Cell, 3, 196–206.
46.
XuY., ZhuX., HahmH.S., WeiW., HaoE., HayekA., and DingS. (2010). Revealing a core signaling regulatory mechanism for pluripotent stem cell survival and self-renewal by small molecules. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107, 8129–8134.
47.
YangJ., van OostenA.L., TheunissenT.W., GuoG., SilvaJ.C., and SmithA. (2010). Stat3 activation is limiting for reprogramming to ground state pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell, 7, 319–328.
