| Literature DB >> 24937170 |
Nerea Gaztelumendi1, Carme Nogués1.
Abstract
Embryonic Stem Cells (ESCs) are expected to show a stable euploid karyotype, but in the last decade (sub)chromosomal aberrations have been systematically described in these cell lines when maintained in vitro. Culture conditions and long-term culture have been traditionally proposed as possible factors involved in the acquisition of chromosomal abnormalities. Thus, we analyzed the chromosome constitution, the undifferentiated state and the functional pluripotency of three different mouse ESCs grown under the same culture conditions. Two cell lines were unstable from early passages, whereas the third one retained its chromosome integrity after long-term culture despite using enzymatic methods for cell disaggregation. Trisomy 8 and 11 were clonally selected in both unstable cell lines, which also showed a higher growth rate than our normal cell line and suffered morphological changes in colony shape with increasing passage number. Regardless of the length of culture or the chromosome instability, all cell lines preserved their differentiation potential. These results confirm that double trisomy 8 and 11 confers a growth advantage to the abnormal cells, but not at the expense of cell differentiation. The presence of chromosome instability, widely related to tumor development and cancer disease, highlights the risk of using pluripotent cells in regenerative medicine.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24937170 PMCID: PMC4060510 DOI: 10.1038/srep05324
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Modal karyotype of CMT, E14 and J1 mESCs.
Chromosome counting of three mESCs at early (<22 p), middle (23–33 p) and late passages (>34 p). (A) More than 50% of the CMT cells had a normal chromosome number of 40 acrocentric chromosomes at all different time points. (B) E14 mESCs were an aneuploid and unstable cell line. The modal karyotype increased from 42 (p29) to 52 chromosomes in just four passages (from p29 to p33) leveling off in this number at late passages. Populations with a modal karyotype ranging from 44 to 50 chromosomes are not represented in the figure. This gap is shown as//in the graph. (C) J1 mESCs were also an aneuploid cell line (55% of the cells had 41 chromosomes at p11) and retained this modal karyotype until late passages, when the modal number increased up to 43 chromosomes.
Chromosome counts of CMT, E14 and J1 mESCs at different time points
| cell line | stage | chromosome counting | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| passage number | modal number | n | modal cells n (%) | euploid cells n (%) | ||
| CMT | E | p16 | 40 | 50 | 36 (72) | 36 (72) |
| M | p24 | 40 | 48 | 25 (52) | 25 (52) | |
| L | p40 | 40 | 48 | 28 (58.3) | 28 (58.3) | |
| J1 | E | p11 | 41 | 89 | 49 (55) | 18 (20.2) |
| p17 | 41 | 45 | 22 (48.9) | 7 (15.6) | ||
| p20 | 41 | 49 | 25 (51) | 8 (16.3) | ||
| M | p25 | 41 | 49 | 23 (46.9) | 9 (18.4) | |
| p30 | 41 | 51 | 20 (39.2) | 15 (29.4) | ||
| L | p35 | 40 | 53 | 14 (26.4) | 14 (26.4) | |
| p40 | 43 | 55 | 17 (30.9) | 10 (18.2) | ||
| E14 | M | p29 | 42 | 93 | 55 (59.1) | 6 (6.5) |
| p33 | 52 | 43 | 9 (20.9) | 5 (11.6) | ||
| L | p36 | 52 | 57 | 30 (52.6) | 0 (0) | |
| p39 | 52 | 96 | 29 (30.2) | 1 (1) | ||
Abbreviations: E, early passages (less than p22); M, middle passages (between p23–p33); L, late passages (more than 34 p); n = number of cells.
Figure 2Morphological changes in colony shape and chromosome abnormalities in mESCs.
(A) Colonies from the CMT cell line showed a normal shape throughout the study, whereas J1 colonies presented irregular edges at late passages. In E14 mESCs, the colony shape was irregular during the first passages and became almost invisible in later passages (red arrow). Magnification: 10×. (B) Metaphase spreads showing (in red) a Robertsonian translocation in J1 mESC (a) and different chromosomes with structural reorganizations in the E14 cell line (b).
Karyotypes from J1 mESCs at early (p11) and middle (p25) passages by mFISH
| no– cells (n = 12) | Karyotype p11 | no– cells (n = 15) | Karyotype p25 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 38,XY,−5,+8,−9,+Rb(11.11),−16 | 1 | 39,OY,Del(4),+Rb(11.11) |
| 1 | 39,XY,−3,+Rb(11.11) | 1 | 39,OY,−3,+Rb(6.6),+8,+10,+Rb(11.11),+12,−14,−15 |
| 1 | 39,XY,+8,Rb(8;12),+Rb(11.11),−16 | 1 | 40,XO,+8,+Rb(11.11) |
| 1 | 40,XY,+8,Rb(11.11) | 1 | 40,OYY,Rb(Y.Y),+6,+8,+Rb(11.11),+12,−13,Del(14)−17 |
| 1 | 40,XO,+8,+Rb(11.11) | 3 | 41,XY,+8,+Rb(11.11) |
| 2 | 41,XY,+8,+Rb(11.11) | 1 | 41,XY,Del(3)+6,+Rb(11.11) |
| 1 | 41,XO,+8,+Rb(11.11),+18 | 1 | 41,XY,+4,+8,Rb(11.11),Rb(15.15),+19 |
| 1 | 41,XY,+8,+9,+Rb(11.11),−17 | 1 | 41,XY,Del(4),+8,+Rb(11.11),+15,−16,−16,+18 |
| 1 | 41,XY,+Y,−3+8,+Rb(11.11) | 1 | 42,XY,+8,+Rb(11.11),+15 |
| 1 | 41,XY,−3,+8,+Rb(11.11),+13,+16−18 | 1 | 42,XY,+8,+Rb(11.11),+18 |
| 1 | 42,XY,+Y,−6,+8,+Rb(11.11),−14,+15 | 1 | 42,XYY,Rb(Y.Y),+1,−6,+Rb(11.11),+15,+18 |
| 1 | 42,XY,−5,+8,+10,+Rb(11.11),+15 | ||
| 1 | 43,XY,−6,+8,Rb(11.11),+14,+14,+15,+17 |
Nomenclature based in the MGI = Mouse Genome Informatics http://www.informatics.jax.org/mgihome/nomen/anomalies.shtml
1Fig. 3A.
2Fig. 3B.
Figure 3mFISH and chromosome painting analysis.
(A), (B) mFISH showing numerical and structural chromosomal abnormalities in J1 mESCs at p11 and p25, respectively. Yellow circle; trisomy 11 formed by one chromosome 11 and a homologous Robertsonian (Rb) translocation of chromosome 11. Red circle; trisomy 8. Green circle; other trisomies. Blue circle; monosomies. Purple circle; two copies of chromosome Y as single chromosome (A) or forming a Rb translocation (B). Red arrow; partial deletion. White arrow; loss of X chromosome. (C–F) Chromosome painting at late passages. Chromosome 8 in red, chromosome 11 in green, and DAPI counterstain in blue. (C) Normal euploid metaphase from CMT line with two copies of chromosomes 8 and 11. (D) Double trisomy 8 and 11 in J1 mESCs. Arrow: Rb translocation of chromosome 11. (E) Double trisomy 8 and 11 from E14 cell line with a short duplication of chromosome 8 (arrow). (F) Metaphase spread from the E14 cell line with a complex karyotype: a Rb translocation of chromosome 11 forming a ring chromosome, a derivative chromosome 8 (unbalanced translocation 8;11) and extra fragments of chromosome 11.
Figure 4Expression pattern of stemness markers in undifferentiated cells at late passages by immunofluorescence and RT-PCR.
All three mES cell lines expressed the nuclear transcription factor OCT-4 (left column) and the stemness markers Oct-4, Sox-2 and Rex-1 at late passages (right column). 1: Gapdh. 2: Rex-1. 3: Sox-2. 4: Oct-4. MW: ØX174. Negative controls (C-: non template control. DNAg: DNA contamination control).
Figure 5Spontaneous differentiation of mESCs.
EBs from all cell lines (A) and inmunofluorescence assays of differentiation markers in J1 and CMT cell lines at early and late passages (B). (a), (b) EBs in bacteriological dishes from J1 and E14 cell lines, respectively. (c) Cell migration and differentiation from attached EBs obtained from the CMT cell line (two images overlapped at 4× magnification). (B) CMT and J1 cell lines (chromosomally stable and unstable, respectively) maintained a functional pluripotency throughout the study. Both mESCs expressed markers of the three germ layers after at least 10 days of spontaneous differentiation. AFP: Alpha Fetoprotein, endodermal marker. SMA: alpha Smooth Muscle Actin, mesodermal marker. Nest: Nestin, ectodermal marker. A and B magnification:10×. Other magnifications are shown on the pictures. Images obtained from independent experiments.