Abstract

Deletion of Sox2 from mouse embryonic stem cells (ESCs) causes trophectodermal differentiation. While this can be prevented by enforced expression of the related SOXB1 proteins, SOX1 or SOX3, the roles of SOXB1 proteins in epiblast stem cell (EpiSC) pluripotency are unknown. Here we show that Sox2 can be deleted from EpiSCs with impunity. This is due to a shift in the balance of SoxB1 expression in EpiSCs, which have decreased Sox2 and increased Sox3 compared to ESCs. Consistent with functional redundancy, Sox3 can also be deleted from EpiSCs without eliminating self-renewal. However, deletion of both Sox2 and Sox3 prevents self-renewal. The overall SOXB1 levels in ESCs affect differentiation choices: neural differentiation of Sox2 heterozygous ESCs is compromised, while increased SOXB1 levels divert the ESC to EpiSC transition towards neural differentiation. Therefore, optimal SOXB1 levels are critical for each pluripotent state and for cell fate decisions during exit from naïve pluripotency.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Andrea Corsinotti

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Frederick CK Wong

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Tülin Tatar

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Iwona Szczerbinska

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Florian Halbritter

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2452-4784
  6. Douglas Colby

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Sabine Gogolok

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Raphaël Pantier

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Kirsten Liggat

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Elham S Mirfazeli

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Elisa Hall-Ponsele

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Nicholas P Mullin

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Valerie Wilson

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    v.wilson@ed.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4182-5159
  14. Ian Chambers

    MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    ichambers@ed.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2605-1597

Funding

Medical Research Council

  • Andrea Corsinotti
  • Frederick CK Wong
  • Florian Halbritter
  • Douglas Colby
  • Nicholas P Mullin
  • Valerie Wilson
  • Ian Chambers

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council

  • Elisa Hall-Ponsele
  • Ian Chambers

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Martin Pera, University of Melbourne, Australia

Ethics

Animal experimentation: Animal experiments were performed under the UK Home Office project license PPL60/4435, approved by the Animal Welfare and Ethical Review Panel of the MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine and within the conditions of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.

Version history

  1. Received: May 9, 2017
  2. Accepted: December 18, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: December 19, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: January 8, 2018 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2017, Corsinotti 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

  • 1,885
    views
  • 303
    downloads
  • 17
    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. Andrea Corsinotti
  2. Frederick CK Wong
  3. Tülin Tatar
  4. Iwona Szczerbinska
  5. Florian Halbritter
  6. Douglas Colby
  7. Sabine Gogolok
  8. Raphaël Pantier
  9. Kirsten Liggat
  10. Elham S Mirfazeli
  11. Elisa Hall-Ponsele
  12. Nicholas P Mullin
  13. Valerie Wilson
  14. Ian Chambers
(2017)
Distinct SoxB1 networks are required for naive and primed pluripotency
eLife 6:e27746.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.27746

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.27746

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    2. Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine
    Junjun Yao, Shaoxing Dai ... Tianqing Li
    Research Article

    While accumulated publications support the existence of neurogenesis in the adult human hippocampus, the homeostasis and developmental potentials of neural stem cells (NSCs) under different contexts remain unclear. Based on our generated single-nucleus atlas of the human hippocampus across neonatal, adult, aging, and injury, we dissected the molecular heterogeneity and transcriptional dynamics of human hippocampal NSCs under different contexts. We further identified new specific neurogenic lineage markers that overcome the lack of specificity found in some well-known markers. Based on developmental trajectory and molecular signatures, we found that a subset of NSCs exhibit quiescent properties after birth, and most NSCs become deep quiescence during aging. Furthermore, certain deep quiescent NSCs are reactivated following stroke injury. Together, our findings provide valuable insights into the development, aging, and reactivation of the human hippocampal NSCs, and help to explain why adult hippocampal neurogenesis is infrequently observed in humans.

    1. Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine
    Magali Seguret, Patricia Davidson ... Jean-Sébastien Hulot
    Research Article

    We developed a 96-well plate assay which allows fast, reproducible, and high-throughput generation of 3D cardiac rings around a deformable optically transparent hydrogel (polyethylene glycol [PEG]) pillar of known stiffness. Human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes, mixed with normal human adult dermal fibroblasts in an optimized 3:1 ratio, self-organized to form ring-shaped cardiac constructs. Immunostaining showed that the fibroblasts form a basal layer in contact with the glass, stabilizing the muscular fiber above. Tissues started contracting around the pillar at D1 and their fractional shortening increased until D7, reaching a plateau at 25±1%, that was maintained up to 14 days. The average stress, calculated from the compaction of the central pillar during contractions, was 1.4±0.4 mN/mm2. The cardiac constructs recapitulated expected inotropic responses to calcium and various drugs (isoproterenol, verapamil) as well as the arrhythmogenic effects of dofetilide. This versatile high-throughput assay allows multiple in situ mechanical and structural readouts.