Naïve and primed pluripotent stem cells (PSCs) reflect discrete pluripotent states that approximate the inner cell mass or the progressively lineage-restricted perigastrulation epiblast, respectively. Cells that occupy primed pluripotency have distinct epigenetic landscapes, transcriptional circuitry, and trophic requirements compared with their naïve counterparts. The existence of multiple pluripotent states has not been explored in dogs, which show promise as outbred biomedical models with more than 300 inherited diseases that also afflict humans. However, our understanding of canine embryogenesis and embryo-derived stem cells is limited. Herein, we converted leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF)-dependent and fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF2)-dependent canine embryonic stem cells (cESCs) resembling primed PSCs toward a naïve pluripotent state using LIF and inhibitors of glycogen synthase kinase 3β and mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase 1/2 [called 2i and LIF (2iL)]. cESCs propagated in 2iL exhibited significant induction of genes associated with the naïve pluripotent state (eg, REX1, TBX3) and downregulation of primed pluripotency markers (eg, OTX2, FGF5) (P < 0.05). Differential phosphorylation of signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) and cell fate decisions on exposure to bone morphogenetic protein 4 (BMP4) suggested that a novel pluripotent identity has been established with 2iL. Accordingly, cESCs cultured with 2iL formed colonies at a greater efficiency than LIF-FGF2 cESCs following single-cell dissociation. Total genomic DNA methylation and histone H3 lysine 27 trimethylation signals were reduced in 2iL-treated cESCs. Our data suggest that 2iL culture conditions promote the conversion of cESCs toward an epigenetically distinct pluripotent state resembling naïve PSCs.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ThomsonJA, Itskovitz-EldorJ, ShapiroSS, WaknitzMA, SwiergielJJ, MarshallVS and JonesJM. (1998). Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts. Science, 282:1145–1147.
2.
EvansMJ and KaufmanMH. (1981). Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature, 292:154–156.
3.
JaenischR and YoungR. (2008). Stem cells, the molecular circuitry of pluripotency and nuclear reprogramming. Cell, 132:567–582.
4.
BoyerLA, LeeTI, ColeMF, JohnstoneSE, LevineSS, ZuckerJP, GuentherMG, KumarRM, MurrayHL, et al. (2005). Core transcriptional regulatory circuitry in human embryonic stem cells. Cell, 122:947–956.
5.
LohY-H, WuQ, ChewJ-L, VegaVB, ZhangW, ChenX, BourqueG, GeorgeJ, LeongB, et al. (2006). The Oct4 and Nanog transcription network regulates pluripotency in mouse embryonic stem cells. Nat Genet, 38:431–440.
6.
MartinGR. (1981). Isolation of a pluripotent cell line from early mouse embryos cultured in medium conditioned by teratocarcinoma stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 78:7634–7638.
7.
BronsIG, SmithersLE, TrotterMWB, Rugg-GunnP, SunB, Chuva de Sousa LopesSM, HowlettSK, ClarksonA, AhrlundL, et al. (2007). Derivation of pluripotent epiblast stem cells from mammalian embryos. Nature, 448:191–195.
8.
TesarPJ, ChenowethJG, BrookFA, DaviesTJ, EvansEP, MackDL, GardnerRL and McKayRD. (2007) New cell lines from mouse epiblast share defining features with human embryonic stem cells. Nature, 448:196–199.
9.
HuangY, OsornoR, TsakiridisA and WilsonV. (2012). In vivo differentiation potential of epiblast stem cells revealed by chimeric embryo formation. Cell Rep, 2:1571–1578.
10.
NicholsJ and SmithA. (2009). Naive and primed pluripotent states. Cell Stem Cell, 4:487–492.
11.
JooJY, ChoiHW, KimMJ, ZaehresH, TapiaN, StehlingM, JungKS, DoJT and ScholerHR. (2014). Establishment of a primed pluripotent epiblast stem cell in FGF4-based conditions. Sci Rep, 4:7477.
12.
MacArthurBD and LemischkaIR. (2013). Statistical mechanics of pluripotency. Cell, 154:484–489.
13.
KojimaY, Kaufman-FrancisK, StuddertJB, SteinerKA, PowerMD, LoebelDAF, JonesV, HorA, de AlencastroG, et al. (2014). The transcriptional and functional properties of mouse epiblast stem cells resemble the anterior primitive streak. Cell Stem Cell, 14:107–120.
14.
HuangK, MaruyamaT and FanG. (2014). The naive state of human pluripotent stem cells: a synthesis of stem cell and preimplantation embryo transcriptome analyses. Cell Stem Cell, 15:410–415.
15.
HackettJA, DietmannS, MurakamiK, DownTA, LeitchHG and SuraniMA. (2013). Synergistic mechanisms of DNA demethylation during transition to ground-state pluripotency. Stem Cell Rep, 1:518–531.
16.
LeitchHG, McEwenKR, TurpA, EnchevaV, CarrollT, GraboleN, MansfieldW, NashunB, KnezovichJG, et al. (2013). Naive pluripotency is associated with global DNA hypomethylation. Nat Struct Mol Biol, 20:311–316.
17.
HartungO, HuoH, DaleyGQ and SchlaegerTM. (2010). Clump passaging and expansion of human embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells on mouse embryonic fibroblast feeder cells. Curr Protoc Stem Cell Biol Chapter 1:Unit 1C.10.
18.
BueckerC, ChenH-H, PoloJM, DaheronL, BuL, BarakatTS, OkwiekaP, PorterA, GribnauJ, HochedlingerK and GeijsenN. (2010). A murine ESC-like state facilitates transgenesis and homologous recombination in human pluripotent stem cells. Stem Cell, 6:535–546.
19.
WareCB. (2014). Naive embryonic stem cells: the future of stem cell research?. Regen Med, 9:401–403.
20.
WangH and DoeringLC. (2012). Induced pluripotent stem cells to model and treat neurogenetic disorders. Neural Plast, 2012:1–15.
21.
VallierL. (2005). Activin/Nodal and FGF pathways cooperate to maintain pluripotency of human embryonic stem cells. J Cell Sci, 118:4495–4509.
22.
ChambersI and SmithA. (2004). Self-renewal of teratocarcinoma and embryonic stem cells. Oncogene, 23:7150–7160.
23.
YoshidaY, TakahashiK, OkitaK, IchisakaT and YamanakaS. (2009). Hypoxia enhances the generation of induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell, 5:237–241.
24.
TakashimaY, GuoG, LoosR, NicholsJ, FiczG, KruegerF, OxleyD, SantosF, ClarkeJ, et al. (2014). Resetting transcription factor control circuitry toward ground-state pluripotency in human. Cell, 158:1254–1269.
25.
OsornoR, TsakiridisA, WongF, CambrayN, EconomouC, WilkieR, BlinG, ScottingPJ, ChambersI and WilsonV. (2012). The developmental dismantling of pluripotency is reversed by ectopic Oct4 expression. Development, 139:2288–2298.
26.
KumarRM, CahanP, ShalekAK, SatijaR, Jay DaleyKeyserA, LiH, ZhangJ, PardeeK, GennertD, et al. (2014). Deconstructing transcriptional heterogeneity in pluripotent stem cells. Nature, 516:56–61.
27.
HayashiK, LopesSM, TangF and SuraniMA. (2008). Dynamic equilibrium and heterogeneity of mouse pluripotent stem cells with distinct functional and epigenetic states. Cell Stem Cell, 3:391–401.
28.
HannaJ, MarkoulakiS, MitalipovaM, ChengAW, CassadyJP, StaerkJ, CareyBW, LengnerCJ, ForemanR, et al. (2009). Metastable pluripotent states in NOD-mouse-derived ESCs. Cell Stem Cell, 4:513–524.
29.
GuoG, YangJ, NicholsJ, HallJS, EyresI, MansfieldW and SmithA. (2009). Klf4 reverts developmentally programmed restriction of ground state pluripotency. Development, 136:1063–1069.
30.
BaoS, TangF, LiX, HayashiK, GillichA, LaoK and SuraniMA. (2009). Epigenetic reversion of post-implantation epiblast to pluripotent embryonic stem cells. Nature, 461:1292–1295.
31.
ZhouH, LiW, ZhuS, JooJY, DoJT, XiongW, KimJB, ZhangK, ScholerHR and DingS. (2010). Conversion of mouse epiblast stem cells to an earlier pluripotency state by small molecules. J Biol Chem, 285:29676–29680.
32.
YingQ-L, WrayJ, NicholsJ, Batlle-MoreraL, DobleB, WoodgettJ, CohenP and SmithA. (2008). The ground state of embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Nature, 453:519–523.
33.
Van SoomA, RijsselaereT and FilliersM. Cats and dogs: two neglected species in this era of embryo production in vitro?. Reprod Domest Anim, 49:87–91.
34.
NagashimaJB, SylvesterSR, NelsonJL, CheongSH, MukaiC, LamboC, FlandersJA, Meyers-WallenVN, SongsasenN and TravisAJ. (2015). Live births from domestic dog (Canis familiaris) embryos produced by in vitro fertilization. PLoS One, 10:e0143930–13.
35.
HatoyaS, ToriiR, KondoY, OkunoT, KobayashiK, WijewardanaV, KawateN, TamadaH, SawadaT, et al. (2006). Isolation and characterization of embryonic stem-like cells from canine blastocysts. Mol Reprod Dev, 73:298–305.
36.
SchneiderMR, AdlerH, BraunJ, KienzleB, WolfE and KolbH-J. (2007). Canine embryo-derived stem cells-toward clinically relevant animal models for evaluating efficacy and safety of cell therapies. Stem Cells, 25:1850–1851.
37.
HayesB, FagerlieSR, RamakrishnanA, BaranS, HarkeyM, GrafL, BarM, BendoraiteA, TewariM and Torok-StorbB. (2008). Derivation, characterization, and in vitro differentiation of canine embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells, 26:465–473.
38.
VaagsAK, Rosic-KablarS, GartleyCJ, ZhengYZ, ChesneyA, VillagómezDA, KruthSA and HoughMR. (2009). Derivation and characterization of canine embryonic stem cell lines with in vitro and in vivo differentiation potential. Stem Cells, 27:329–340.
39.
WilcoxJT, SempleE, GartleyC, BrissonBA, PerraultSD, VillagómezDA, TayadeC, BeckerS, LanzaR and BettsDH. (2009). Characterization of canine embryonic stem cell lines derived from different niche microenvironments. Stem Cells Dev, 18:1167–1178.
40.
KohS and PiedrahitaJA. (2014). From “ES-like” cells to induced pluripotent stem cells: a historical perspective in domestic animals. Theriogenology, 81:103–111.
41.
BettsDH and TobiasIC. (2015). Canine pluripotent stem cells: are they ready for clinical applications?. Front Vet Sci, 2:298–294.
42.
DaheronL, OpitzSL, ZaehresH, LenschWM, AndrewsPW, Itskovitz-EldorJ and DaleyGQ. (2004). LIF/STAT3 signaling fails to maintain self‐renewal of human embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells, 22:770–778.
43.
TobiasIC, BrooksCR, TeichroebJH and BettsDH. (2013). Derivation and culture of canine embryonic stem cells. Methods Mol Biol, 1074:69–83.
44.
GreberB, WuG, BernemannC, JooJY, HanDW, KoK, TapiaN, SabourD, SterneckertJ, TesarP and ScholerHR. (2010). Conserved and divergent roles of FGF signaling in mouse epiblast stem cells and human embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell, 6:215–226.
45.
WilcoxJT, LaiJKY, SempleE, BrissonBA, GartleyC, ArmstrongJN and BettsDH. (2011). Synaptically-competent neurons derived from canine embryonic stem cells by lineage selection with EGF and Noggin. PLoS One, 6:e19768.
46.
StarkeyMP, ScaseTJ, MellershCS and MurphyS. (2005). Dogs really are man's best friend—canine genomics has applications in veterinary and human medicine!. Brief Funct Genomic Proteomic, 4:112–128.
47.
VolkSW and TheoretC. (2013). Translating stem cell therapies: the role of companion animals in regenerative medicine. Wound Repair Regen, 21:382–394.
48.
HannaJ, ChengAW, SahaK, KimJ, LengnerCJ, SoldnerF, CassadyJP, MuffatJ, CareyBW and JaenischR. (2010). Human embryonic stem cells with biological and epigenetic characteristics similar to those of mouse ESCs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 107:9222–9227.
49.
HanL, SuB, LiW-H and ZhaoZ. (2008). CpG island density and its correlations with genomic features in mammalian genomes. Genome Biol, 9:R79.
50.
OhtsukaS and NiwaH. (2015). The differential activation of intracellular signaling pathways confers the permissiveness of embryonic stem cell derivation from different mouse strains. Development, 142:431–437.
51.
KurokawaD, TakasakiN, KiyonariH, NakayamaR, Kimura-YoshidaC, MatsuoI and AizawaS. (2004). Regulation of Otx2 expression and its functions in mouse epiblast and anterior neuroectoderm. Development, 131:3307–3317.
52.
BueckerC, SrinivasanR, WuZ, CaloE, AcamporaD, FaialT, SimeoneA, TanM, SwigutT and WysockaJ. (2014). Reorganization of enhancer patterns in transition from naive to primed pluripotency. Stem Cell, 14:838–853.
53.
YangS-H, KalkanT, MorissroeC, MarksH, StunnenbergH, SmithA and SharrocksAD. (2014). Otx2 and Oct4 drive early enhancer activation during embryonic stem cell transition from naive pluripotency. Cell Rep, 7:1968–1981.
54.
AcamporaD, Di GiovannantonioLG and SimeoneA. (2012). Otx2 is an intrinsic determinant of the embryonic stem cell state and is required for transition to a stable epiblast stem cell condition. Development, 140:43–55.
55.
BeattieGM, LopezAD, BucayN, HintonA, FirpoMT, KingCC and HayekA. (2005). Activin A maintains pluripotency of human embryonic stem cells in the absence of feeder layers. Stem Cells, 23:489–495.
56.
YingQ-L, NicholsJ, ChambersI and SmithA. (2003). BMP induction of Id proteins suppresses differentiation and sustains embryonic stem cell self-renewal in collaboration with STAT3. Cell, 115:281–292.
57.
BernardoAS, FaialT, GardnerL, NiakanKK, OrtmannD, SennerCE, CalleryEM, TrotterMW, HembergerM, et al. (2011). BRACHYURY and CDX2 mediate BMP-induced differentiation of human and mouse pluripotent stem cells into embryonic and extraembryonic lineages. Cell Stem Cell, 9:144–155.
58.
AmitaM, AdachiK, AlexenkoAP, SinhaS, SchustDJ, SchulzLC, RobertsRM and EzashiT. (2013). Complete and unidirectional conversion of human embryonic stem cells to trophoblast by BMP4. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 110:E1212–E1221.
59.
NiakanKK, SchrodeN, ChoLTY and HadjantonakisA-K. (2013). Derivation of extraembryonic endoderm stem (XEN) cells from mouse embryos and embryonic stem cells. Nat Protoc, 8:1028–1041.
60.
KobayakawaS, MiikeK, NakaoM and AbeK. (2007). Dynamic changes in the epigenomic state and nuclear organization of differentiating mouse embryonic stem cells. Genes Cells, 12:447–460.
61.
XieW, SongC, YoungNL, SperlingAS, XuF, SridharanR, ConwayAE, GarciaBA, PlathK, ClarkAT and GrunsteinM. (2009). Histone h3 lysine 56 acetylation is linked to the core transcriptional network in human embryonic stem cells. Mol Cell, 33:417–427.
62.
SchneiderMR, WolfE, BraunJ, KolbHJ and AdlerH. (2008). Canine embryo-derived stem cells and models for human diseases. Hum Mol Genet, 17:R42–R47.
63.
LuoJ, SuhrST, ChangEA, WangK, RossPJ, NelsonLL, VentaPJ, KnottJG and CibelliJB. (2011). Generation of leukemia inhibitory factor and basic fibroblast growth factor-dependent induced pluripotent stem cells from canine adult somatic cells. Stem Cells Dev, 20:1669–1678.
64.
WhitworthDJ, OvchinnikovDA and WolvetangEJ. (2012). Generation and characterization of LIF-dependent canine induced pluripotent stem cells from adult dermal fibroblasts. Stem Cells Dev, 21:2288–2297.
65.
GafniO, WeinbergerL, MansourAA, ManorYS, ChomskyE, Ben-YosefD, KalmaY, ViukovS, MazaI, et al. (2013). Derivation of novel human ground state naive pluripotent stem cells. Nature, 504:282–286.
66.
ChanY-S, GökeJ, NgJ-H, LuX, GonzalesKAU, TanC-P, TngW-Q, HongZ-Z, LimY-S and NgH-H. (2013). Induction of a human pluripotent state with distinct regulatory circuitry that resembles preimplantation epiblast. Cell Stem Cell, 13:663–675.
67.
TheunissenTW, PowellBE, WangH, MitalipovaM, FaddahDA, ReddyJ, FanZP, MaetzelD, GanzK, et al. (2014). Systematic identification of culture conditions for induction and maintenance of naive human pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell, 15:471–487.
68.
ValamehrB, RobinsonM, AbujarourR, ReznerB, VranceanuF, LeT, MedcalfA, LeeTT, FitchM, RobbinsD and FlynnP. (2014). Platform for induction and maintenance of transgene-free hiPSCs resembling ground state pluripotent stem cells. Stem Cell Rep, 2:366–381.
69.
WareCB, NelsonAM, MechamB, HessonJ, ZhouW, JonlinEC, Jimenez-CalianiAJ, DengX, CavanaughC, et al. (2014). Derivation of naive human embryonic stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 111:4484–4489.
70.
ChenH, AksoyI, GonnotF, OsteilP, AubryM, HamelaC, RognardC, HochardA, VoisinS, et al. (2015). Reinforcement of STAT3 activity reprogrammes human embryonic stem cells to naive-like pluripotency. Nature Commun, 6:7095.
71.
IpNY, NyeSH, BoultonTG, DavisS, TagaT, LiY, BirrenSJ, YasukawaK, KishimotoT and AndersonDJ. (1992). CNTF and LIF act on neuronal cells via shared signaling pathways that involve the IL-6 signal transducing receptor component gp130. Cell, 69:1121–1132.
72.
BockAS, LeighND and BrydaEC. (2014). Effect of Gsk3 inhibitor CHIR99021 on aneuploidy levels in rat embryonic stem cells. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim, 50:572–579.
73.
MartelloG, BertoneP and SmithA. (2013). Identification of the missing pluripotency mediator downstream of leukaemia inhibitory factor. EMBO J, 32:2561–2574.
74.
MartelloG, SugimotoT, DiamantiE, JoshiA, HannahR, OhtsukaS, GöttgensB, NiwaH and SmithA. (2012). Esrrb is a pivotal target of the Gsk3/Tcf3 axis regulating embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Cell Stem Cell, 11:491–504.
75.
ZhangJ, FeiT, LiZ, ZhuG, WangL and ChenY-G. (2013). BMP induces cochlin expression to facilitate self-renewal and suppress neural differentiation of mouse embryonic stem cells. J Biol Chem, 288:8053–8060.
76.
XuX, BrowningVL and OdoricoJS. (2011). Activin, BMP and FGF pathways cooperate to promote endoderm and pancreatic lineage cell differentiation from human embryonic stem cells. Mech Dev, 128:412–427.
77.
SudheerS, BhushanR, FaulerB, LehrachH and AdjayeJ. (2012). FGF inhibition directs BMP4-mediated differentiation of human embryonic stem cells to syncytiotrophoblast. Stem Cells Dev, 21:2987–3000.
78.
DrukkerM, TangC, ArdehaliR, RinkevichY, SeitaJ, LeeAS, MosleyAR, WeissmanIL and SoenY. (2012). Isolation of primitive endoderm, mesoderm, vascular endothelial and trophoblast progenitors from human pluripotent stem cells. Nat Biotechnol, 30:531–542.
79.
WinnierG, BlessingM, LaboskyPA and HoganBL. (1995). Bone morphogenetic protein-4 is required for mesoderm formation and patterning in the mouse. Genes Dev, 9:2105–2116.
80.
van den AkkerE, ForlaniS, ChawengsaksophakK, de GraaffW, BeckF, MeyerBI and DeschampsJ. (2002). Cdx1 and Cdx2 have overlapping functions in anteroposterior patterning and posterior axis elongation. Development, 129:2181–2193.
81.
ChawengsaksophakK, de GraaffW, RossantJ, DeschampsJ and BeckF. (2004). Cdx2 is essential for axial elongation in mouse development. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 101:7641–7645.
82.
EzashiT, TeluguBP, AlexenkoAP, SachdevS, SinhaS and RobertsRM. (2009). Derivation of induced pluripotent stem cells from pig somatic cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 106:10993–10998.
83.
GuQ, HaoJ, HaiT, WangJ, JiaY, KongQ, WangJ, FengC, XueB, et al. (2014). Efficient generation of mouse ESCs-like pig induced pluripotent stem cells. Protein Cell, 5:338–342.
84.
WuJ, OkamuraD, LiM, SuzukiK, LuoC, MaL, HeY, LiZ, BennerC, et al. (2015). An alternative pluripotent state confers interspecies chimaeric competency. Nature, 521:316–321.
85.
LiL, WangBH, WangS, Moalim-NourL, MohibK, LohnesD and WangL. (2012). Individual cell movement, asymmetric colony expansion, Rho-associated kinase, and E-cadherin impact the clonogenicity of human embryonic stem cells. Biophys J, 98:2442–2451.
86.
AraiY, OhganeJ, FujishiroS-H, NakanoK, MatsunariH, WatanabeM, UmeyamaK, AzumaD, UchidaN, et al. (2013). DNA methylation profiles provide a viable index for porcine pluripotent stem cells. Genesis, 51:763–776.
87.
LohY-H, ZhangW, ChenX, GeorgeJ and NgH-H. (2007). Jmjd1a and Jmjd2c histone H3 Lys 9 demethylases regulate self-renewal in embryonic stem cells. Genes Dev, 21:2545–2557.
88.
GiffordCA, ZillerMJ, GuH, TrapnellC, DonagheyJ, TsankovA, ShalekAK, KelleyDR, ShishkinAA, et al. (2013). Transcriptional and epigenetic dynamics during specification of human embryonic stem cells. Cell, 153:1149–1163.
89.
HawkinsRD, HonGC, LeeLK, NgoQ, ListerR, PelizzolaM, EdsallLE, KuanS, LuuY, et al. (2010). Distinct epigenomic landscapes of pluripotent and lineage-committed human cells. Cell Stem Cell, 6:479–491.
90.
WhitworthDJ, FrithJE, FrithTJ, OvchinnikovDA, Cooper-WhiteJJ and WolvetangEJ. (2014). Derivation of mesenchymal stromal cells from canine induced pluripotent stem cells by inhibition of the TGFβ/activin signaling pathway. Stem Cells Dev, 23:3021–3033.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
