It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
How paracrine signals are interpreted to yield multiple cell fate decisions in a dynamic context during human development in vivo and in vitro remains poorly understood. Here we report an automated tracking method to follow signaling histories linked to cell fate in large numbers of human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs). Using an unbiased statistical approach, we discover that measured BMP signaling history correlates strongly with fate in individual cells. We find that BMP response in hPSCs varies more strongly in the duration of signaling than the level. However, both the level and duration of signaling activity control cell fate choices only by changing the time integral. Therefore, signaling duration and level are interchangeable in this context. In a stem cell model for patterning of the human embryo, we show that signaling histories predict the fate pattern and that the integral model correctly predicts changes in cell fate domains when signaling is perturbed. Our data suggest that mechanistically, BMP signaling is integrated by SOX2.
The interpretation of the key developmental signal BMP remains poorly understood. Here, the authors show that the total time-integrated signaling controls differentiation in a stem cell embryo model and provide a possible mechanism.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details



1 University of Michigan, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Ann Arbor, USA (GRID:grid.214458.e) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7347)
2 University of Michigan Medical School, Department of Computational Medicine and Bioinformatics, Ann Arbor, USA (GRID:grid.214458.e) (ISNI:0000000086837370)
3 University of Michigan Medical School, Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Ann Arbor, USA (GRID:grid.214458.e) (ISNI:0000000086837370)
4 University of Michigan, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Ann Arbor, USA (GRID:grid.214458.e) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7347); University of Michigan Medical School, Department of Computational Medicine and Bioinformatics, Ann Arbor, USA (GRID:grid.214458.e) (ISNI:0000000086837370); University of Michigan Medical School, Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Ann Arbor, USA (GRID:grid.214458.e) (ISNI:0000000086837370); University of Michigan Medical School, Center for Cell Plasticity and Organ Design, Ann Arbor, USA (GRID:grid.214458.e) (ISNI:0000000086837370); University of Michigan, Department of Physics, Ann Arbor, USA (GRID:grid.214458.e) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7347)