A panel of induced pluripotent stem cells from chimpanzees: a resource for comparative functional genomics

  1. Irene Gallego Romero  Is a corresponding author
  2. Bryan J Pavlovic
  3. Irene Hernando-Herraez
  4. Xiang Zhou
  5. Michelle C Ward
  6. Nicholas E Banovich
  7. Courtney L Kagan
  8. Jonathan E Burnett
  9. Constance H Huang
  10. Amy Mitrano
  11. Claudia I Chavarria
  12. Inbar Friedrich Ben-Nun
  13. Yingchun Li
  14. Karen Sabatini
  15. Trevor R Leonardo
  16. Mana Parast
  17. Tomas Marques-Bonet
  18. Louise C Laurent
  19. Jeanne F Loring
  20. Yoav Gilad
  1. University of Chicago, United States
  2. Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Spain
  3. University of Michigan, United States
  4. Lonza Walkersville, Inc., United States
  5. University of California San Diego, United States
  6. The Scripps Research Institute, United States
  7. Sanford Consortium for Regenerative Medicine, United States

Abstract

Comparative genomics studies in primates are restricted due to our limited access to samples. In order to gain better insight into the genetic processes that underlie variation in complex phenotypes in primates, we must have access to faithful model systems for a wide range of cell types. To facilitate this, we generated a panel of 7 fully characterized chimpanzee induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) lines derived from healthy donors. To demonstrate the utility of comparative iPSC panels, we collected RNA-sequencing and DNA methylation data from the chimpanzee iPSCs and the corresponding fibroblast lines, as well as from 7 human iPSCs and their source lines, which encompass multiple populations and cell types. We observe much less within-species variation in iPSCs than in somatic cells, indicating the reprogramming process erases many inter-individual differences. The low within-species regulatory variation in iPSCs allowed us to identify many novel inter-species regulatory differences of small magnitude.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Irene Gallego Romero

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    For correspondence
    ireneg@uchicago.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Bryan J Pavlovic

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Irene Hernando-Herraez

    Institute of Evolutionary Biology, Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Barcelona, Spain
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Xiang Zhou

    Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Michelle C Ward

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Nicholas E Banovich

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Courtney L Kagan

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Jonathan E Burnett

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Constance H Huang

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Amy Mitrano

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Claudia I Chavarria

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Inbar Friedrich Ben-Nun

    n/a, Lonza Walkersville, Inc., Walkersville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Yingchun Li

    Department of Pathology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Karen Sabatini

    Center for Regenerative Medicine, Department of Chemical Physiology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Trevor R Leonardo

    Center for Regenerative Medicine, Department of Chemical Physiology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Mana Parast

    Department of Pathology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Tomas Marques-Bonet

    Institute of Evolutionary Biology, Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Barcelona, Spain
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Louise C Laurent

    n/a, Sanford Consortium for Regenerative Medicine, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Jeanne F Loring

    Center for Regenerative Medicine, Department of Chemical Physiology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  20. Yoav Gilad

    Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Copyright

© 2015, Gallego Romero et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 4,970
    views
  • 820
    downloads
  • 113
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Irene Gallego Romero
  2. Bryan J Pavlovic
  3. Irene Hernando-Herraez
  4. Xiang Zhou
  5. Michelle C Ward
  6. Nicholas E Banovich
  7. Courtney L Kagan
  8. Jonathan E Burnett
  9. Constance H Huang
  10. Amy Mitrano
  11. Claudia I Chavarria
  12. Inbar Friedrich Ben-Nun
  13. Yingchun Li
  14. Karen Sabatini
  15. Trevor R Leonardo
  16. Mana Parast
  17. Tomas Marques-Bonet
  18. Louise C Laurent
  19. Jeanne F Loring
  20. Yoav Gilad
(2015)
A panel of induced pluripotent stem cells from chimpanzees: a resource for comparative functional genomics
eLife 4:e07103.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07103

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07103

Further reading

    1. Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine
    Syeda Nayab Fatima Abidi, Sara Chan ... Christian W Siebel
    Research Article

    The sebaceous gland (SG) is a vital appendage of the epidermis, and its normal homeostasis and function is crucial for effective maintenance of the skin barrier. Notch signaling is a well-known regulator of epidermal differentiation, and has also been shown to be involved in postnatal maintenance of SGs. However, the precise role of Notch signaling in regulating SG differentiation in the adult homeostatic skin remains unclear. While there is evidence to suggest that Notch1 is the primary Notch receptor involved in regulating the differentiation process, the ligand remains unknown. Using monoclonal therapeutic antibodies designed to specifically inhibit of each of the Notch ligands or receptors, we have identified the Jag2/Notch1 signaling axis as the primary regulator of sebocyte differentiation in mouse homeostatic skin. Mature sebocytes are lost upon specific inhibition of the Jag2 ligand or Notch1 receptor, resulting in the accumulation of proliferative stem/progenitor cells in the SG. Strikingly, this phenotype is reversible, as these stem/progenitor cells re-enter differentiation when the inhibition of Notch activity is lifted. Thus, Notch activity promotes correct sebocyte differentiation, and is required to restrict progenitor proliferation.

    1. Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine
    Corentin Bernou, Marc-André Mouthon ... François Dominique Boussin
    Research Article

    The lateral wall of the mouse subventricular zone harbors neural stem cells (NSC, B cells) which generate proliferating transient-amplifying progenitors (TAP, C cells) that ultimately give rise to neuroblasts (NB, A cells). Molecular profiling at the single-cell level struggles to distinguish these different cell types. Here, we combined transcriptome analyses of FACS-sorted cells and single-cell RNAseq to demonstrate the existence of an abundant, clonogenic and multipotent population of immature neuroblasts (iNB cells) at the transition between TAP and migrating NB (mNB). iNB are reversibly engaged in neuronal differentiation. Indeed, they keep molecular features of both undifferentiated progenitors, plasticity and unexpected regenerative properties. Strikingly, they undergo important progressive molecular switches, including changes in the expression of splicing regulators leading to their differentiation in mNB subdividing them into two subtypes, iNB1 and iNB2. Due to their plastic properties, iNB could represent a new target for regenerative therapy of brain damage.