Hassan Rassouli1, Mona Khalaj1, Seyedeh-Nafiseh Hassani2, S Hiva Nemati2, G Hasem Hosseini Salekdeh1,3,4, Hossein Baharvand5,6. 1. Department of Molecular Systems Biology, Cell Science Research Center, Royan Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Technology, ACECR, Tehran, Iran. 2. Department of Stem Cells and Developmental Biology, Cell Science Research Center, Royan Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Technology, ACECR, Tehran, Iran. 3. Department of Systems Biology, Agricultural Biotechnology Research Institute of Iran, Agricultural Research, Education, and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran. Electronic Address:salekdeh@royanInstitute.org. 4. Department of Molecular Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 5. Department of Stem Cells and Developmental Biology, Cell Science Research Center, Royan Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Technology, ACECR, Tehran, Iran. Electronic Address: baharvand@royaninstitute.org. 6. Department of Developmental Biology, University of Science and Culture, Tehran, Iran.
Embryonic stem cells (ESCs) divide indefinitely and
give rise to all different cell types during differentiation.
These unique properties make them invaluable cell
sources for a wide range of applications in regenerative
medicine, cell therapy, disease modeling, drug screening,
gene delivery, and other research. However, despite
their potential, human ESCs (hESCs) have not been
successfully introduced into the clinic setting. Numerous
obstacles must be overcome prior to their efficient
use in cell replacement therapies. In addition to ethical
issues that concern the embryonic source of hESCs (1),
the most important technical challenges that stem cell
researchers face are concerns about the safety of the cells
(2), their purity (3), host immune system rejection (4),
efficiency and reproducibility of differentiation , and cell
transduction or post-transplantation issues (5).Optimization of the current differentiation protocols
is a major challenge in stem cell research. The ability
to efficiently generate pure populations of mature cell
types from stem cells over a reasonable period of time
is a major challenge. There are several protocols that
enable differentiation of hESCs into diverse cell types
like cardiomyocytes (6, 7), dopaminergic neurons (8),
definitive endoderm (9), human hepatic competent
endoderm (10), neural cells (11), and insulin-producing
cells (12). Different approaches vary in terms of
chemical and mechanical factors, and include the
composition of growth factors and soluble inducers,
forces applied in the cultured cells, and the culture
system used for differentiation. Modifications in the
chemical factors in stem cell media have been intensely
analyzed in order to enhance differentiation. However,
researchers have recently noted the significant role of
physical and mechanical variables on differentiation
efficiency (13). Cell-cell and cell-matrix interactions
have significant roles in cell fate decisions (14). The
combination of chemical and mechanical factors that
regulate the stem cell fate in vivo can influence the
direction and efficiency of lineage specifications in
vitro. Therefore, depending on the mature cell type
of interest, it is critical to provide stem cells with the
appropriate culture system.The following 3 main methods are commonly
used for stem cell culture: i. Suspension culture and
formation of embryoid bodies (EB), ii. Monolayer
culture of stem cells on extracellular matrix proteins,
and iii. Culture of ESCs on a feeder layer (15). Some
protocols for directed differentiation of ESCs use
an adherent culture system (16, 17), whereas others
suggest a suspension culture (18-20). Advantages and
disadvantages associated with both methods make it
difficult to choose one method over the other. Stem
cells are cultured in monolayers in the adherent system,
and the cells divide and grow in a two-dimensional
(2D) manner. The soluble inducing factors should be
added to the medium for initiation of differentiation,
which would allow the cells to have homogenous
access to soluble factors in the medium. However, the
2D culture systems do not provide in vivo interactions
like cell-cell and cell-matrix connections. The
differentiation procedure in the suspension method is
basically different compared to the adherent system.
In the suspension culture, ESCs usually form three-
dimensional (3D) cellular aggregates that lead to
the formation of EBs, which begin to spontaneously
differentiate before the addition of any soluble inducers
(21). EBs resemble the initial stages of embryonic
development, in which they form primary embryonic
germ layers (ectoderm, mesoderm, and endoderm)
(22). The spatial interactions between cells in EBs
help direct cell fate determination through signaling
pathways that are mainly absent in adherent cultures
(23-25). However, as these EBs increase in size, it is
difficult for soluble factors to diffuse into the inner
cell layers of the aggregate.Some of the directed differentiation protocols
include an initial step of EB mediated spontaneous
differentiation followed by addition of soluble
inducing factors to the cell aggregates. The differences
in dimensions of the suspension and adherent culture
systems result in significant differences between cell-
cell and cell-matrix interactions, which highlights the
importance of a proper choice of a 2D versus 3D stem
cell culture system. Several reports have theoretically
compared the adherent and suspension culture systems
and their effects on the overall differentiation efficiency
of stem cells, but there is no report of an experimental
comparison (26, 27). In theory, pros and cons exist for
both culture systems, and the choice of the appropriate
culture system necessitates experimental tests for
detailed examination and comprehensive analysis.Different signal transduction pathways play roles
in the in vivo differentiation of stem cells into each
type of mature cells. The microenvironmental
factors that govern a cell’s fate in the body include
structural, biochemical, mechanical, physiological,
and hydrostatic stimuli (28). The environmental
triggers required to induce differentiation toward one
lineage may differ completely from other lineages;
thus, it is reasonable that the choice of culture system
for directed differentiation must be cell type-specific.
Some cell types might differentiate more efficiently
under 2D conditions, whereas other cell types prefer
3D culture systems. Stem cell researchers are seeking
straightforward and accurate experimental methods to
provide critical information to maximize the efficiency
of differentiation for specific cell types.EB formation and spontaneous differentiation of ESCs
result in heterogeneous populations of differentiated
cells that include cells of the primary germ layers as
well as some of the mature cell types that they produce.
Spontaneous differentiation could be the first step for
production of pure populations of desired cell types.
The convenience of spontaneously differentiated
ESCs makes them a useful research tool to provide
researchers with valuable information about stem cell
behavior, even during directed differentiation. It has
been shown that comparative expression of lineage-
specific markers during spontaneous differentiation
of ESC lines is a good representative of their relative
potentials for directed differentiation toward different
lineages (29, 30). In these studies, researchers have
analyzed the expression levels of lineage-specific
markers at various time points after spontaneous
differentiation of several distinct ESC lines. Based
on the comparative marker expression levels of
each lineage, the researchers could hypothesize
which ESC line had a higher intrinsic propensity to
differentiate toward a specific lineage or cell type.
Directed differentiation was then used to validate their
hypothesis. The results have proven that spontaneous
differentiation is an informative method. Simplicity
and reliable data over a relatively short period of
time, as well as the cost effectiveness of spontaneous
differentiation, make it an interesting approach to
study stem cell behavior during differentiation. Since
the neural cells differentiation potencies have great
potential for cell therapy and treatment of neurological
disorders (31).In this study, we used spontaneous differentiation
to optimize differentiation in 4 Royan hESC lines.
These hESC lines were cultured under both adherent
and suspension culture conditions and we compared
expression levels of 46 lineage specific markers to
determine the propensity of each of the Royan hESC
lines. Subsequently, direct differentiation for neural cells
and hepatocytes was done to confirm the spontaneous
differentiation results.We evaluated our hypothesis by focusing on the
expression level of neural stem cells lineage specific
markers (in two undifferentiated and differentiated
states with adherent or suspension culture system)
like NESTIN, SOX1, NEUROD1, NCAM, PAX6,
PDGFRa and GFAP (as general neural stem cell
markers), and b-Tubulin (neural differentiation
marker) (32) in spontaneously differentiated samples
and specific neural subtypes markers like TH (marker
for dopaminergic neural subtypes) in samples from
direct differentiation (33).In the other side we evaluated hepatocyte
differentiation potency by focusing on spontaneous and
direct endodermal layer differentiation and checking
the general hepatic lineage specific expression
markers like BRACHYURY, GOOSECOID, and
SOX17 in two different culturing strategies (adherent
and suspension).
Materials and Methods
Human embryonic stem cell culture
In this experimental study, approved by the Ethical
Committee of Royan Institute, we have used 4 hESC
lines-Royan H1 (RH1), RH2, RH5, and RH6 (34). RH6
is a male hESC line, whereas the other 3 hESC lines
have been derived from female embryos. These hESC
lines all have a normal karyotype (35). Passage 15-20
hESCs were transferred to dishes coated with mouse
embryonic fibroblasts (MEF) and we derived 3 different
biological replicates from each cell line. The hESCs were
cultured in standard Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s media
(DMEM, Gibco, USA) complemented 20% knockout
serum replacement (KOSR), 2 mM L-glutamine, 0.1 mM
ß-mercaptoethanol (BME, Sigma, USA), 100 µg/ml pen/
strep, and 100 ng/ml basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF,
Royan Biotech, Iran) (36).
Spontaneous differentiation
In order to form EBs, we cultured the hESCs in
suspension stem cell medium that contained agarose and
fetal bovine serum (FBS, Gibco, USA), without KOSR.
The samples were harvested at days 10 and 30 after the
initiation of EB formation. For spontaneous differentiation
in the adherent settings, we used the same media with
slight changes. The cells were cultured on 0.1% gelatin
coated plates instead of agarose coated plates.
RNA extraction and cDNA synthesis
Total RNA was extracted using TRIzol (Sigma, USA)
according to the manufacturer’s protocol. The RNA
concentration was measured using a Biowave WPA (S
2100) spectrophotometer. We examined the purity of each
RNA sample based on 260/280 absorbance ratios. We
noted that all samples had a ratio of 1.9-2. The quality
of total RNA from all samples was determined by
electrophoresis. Ribosomal 50S and 28S bands were
sharp and showed approximately 2:1 band intensity,
which confirmed that the samples had acceptable RNA
integrity and quality.We used a DNase treatment kit (Fermentas,
USA) based on the manufacturer’s instructions for
elimination of DNA contamination. Random hexamer
primers were used for first strand cDNA synthesis
using the Fermentas kit.
Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction
Totally, we used 48 primers in this study. The
sequences of 34 primers were obtained from (29) and
13 primers were designed using Gene Runner and
PerlPrimer software (Table S1) (See Supplementary
Online Information at www.celljournal.org). Primers
were synthesized by Metabion Company. The
quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction
(qRT-PCR) reactions were performed using a Corbett
machine, 72-well rotor using SYBR Green from ABI
(Applied Biosystems, USA). All qRT-PCR reactions
were run in duplicate, and we used the average threshold
cycle (Ct) of 2 duplicates for further analysis. We used
the housekeeping genes, GAPDH and ß-Actin, as they
have the most homogenous expression level among the
Royan hESC lines based on the NormFinder software
analysis (data not shown). The geometric mean Ct of
GAPDH and ß-Actin
were calculated for each sample,
and the Ct results from all 46 genes were normalized
based on the mean housekeeping values.
Directed neural differentiation of human embryonic
stem cells
RH5 hESCs were differentiated to neuronal cells
using 2 different protocols for confirmation of the
spontaneous differentiation results. These protocols
consisted of 3 main steps: i. Induction of hESC
colonies toward neural ectoderm, ii. Differentiation
toward neural tube formation, and iii. Neuron
maturation stage (Fig .1A). Steps i and ii differed
between the 2 protocols. In the first protocol, the cells
were cultured in a suspension culture and they were
grown in an adherent condition in the second protocol.
The third step was identical for both protocols. Neural
ectoderms were obtained by culturing hESCs in
induction medium for 6 days, followed by 6 days in
the same medium without Noggin. For induction of
neural tube formation, the concentration of bFGF was
increased to 25% and the cells were maintained in
this medium for 6 days. For maturation, neural tubes
(in adherent culture) and neuronal precursor cells (in
suspension condition) were transferred to laminin/
poly-L-ornithine culture dishes and grown for 12-14
days in maturation medium. Samples were collected
from all the 3 stages for both differentiation protocols.
Fig.1
Differentiation protocols and clustering tree. A. The 3 steps of the neural
induction and differentiation protocol, B. The 3 steps of the hepatic
differentiation protocol, and C. Cluster of all samples based on
expression levels of the 46 marker genes (vertical axis). hESCs; Human embryonic stem
cells, N2; N2 supplement, RA; Retinoic acid, bFGF; Basic fibroblast growth factor, IM;
Induction medium, AA; Amino acids, EB; Embryoid bodies, DMSO; Dimethyl sulfoxide, BMP;
Bone morphogenetic protein, HGF; Hepatocyte growth factor, HCM; Hepatocyte culture
medium, OSM; Oncostatin M, and Dex; Dexamethasone.
Directed hepatic differentiation of human embryonic
stem cells
We used 2 hESC lines (RH2, RH6) at passages 25-35
to differentiate into a hepatic lineage according to the
protocol of Basma et al. (37) with some modifications
(Fig .1B). Briefly, EBs were generated by plating
collagenase/dispase-passaged cells at a density of
1-5×104 cells/cm2 on bacterial petri dishes for 48 hours
in DMEM/F12 supplemented with 20% KOSR, 1 mM
nonessential amino acids, and 2 mM L-glutamine.
Then, EBs were plated on Matrigel-coated plates in
DMEM/F12 supplemented with Activin A (100 ng/
ml) for 6 days to induce definitive endoderm lineage.
The day-6 cells were used as definitive endoderm
for analysis. The concentration of KOSR was 0% for
the first 48 hours, 0.2% for the second 24 hours, and
2.0% for the final 24 hours. Cells were then grown
for 3 days in DMEM/F12 that contained 2.0% KOSR,
1 mM nonessential amino acids, 2 mM L-glutamine,
1% dimethyl sulfoxide, 10 ng/ml fibroblast growth
factor 4 (FGF4, Royan Biotech, Iran), and 20 ng/
ml bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP2, Sigma,
USA). The cells were allowed to grow in the same
base media for an additional 4 days with 100 ng/mL
hepatocyte growth factor (HGF, Sigma, USA) instead
of FGF4 and BMP2. Next, they were cultured for
7-8 additional days in hepatocyte culture medium
(HCM, Lonza, Swiss) that contained 2% KOSR, 1
mM nonessential amino acids, 2 mM L-glutamine, and
50 ng/ml HGF for the first 2 days as pre-hepatocyte
cells at this step, followed by 5-6 days in maturation
media that contained the same base media with 20 ng/
ml oncostatin M (OSM, Royan Biotech, Iran), 10 ng/
ml HGF, and 0.1 µM dexamethasone.
Statistical analysis
qRT-PCR results were converted to relative
concentrations based on the standard curve method.
Analysis of variances was performed on the readings
from 60 samples and 48 different transcripts. We used the
Statistical Analysis System (SAS) for 2-factor ANOVA
by considering the hESC lines and the culture methods
as 2 variable factors. P<0.01 were considered to be
significant. SAS also provides a Duncan grouping chart
for each gene in which samples are sorted based on that
gene’s expression level. We used Eisen Lab and TreeView
softwares for hierarchical clustering of the samples and
genes.
Results
Gene expression profiles of the different hESC lines
begin to diverge during differentiation
Clustering of the complete data set, as shown in Figure
1C, indicates that different hESC lines have similar
expression profiles at the undifferentiated stage. Once
the cells start to spontaneously differentiate, their gene
expression profiles differ significantly due to their distinct
intrinsic lineage propensities. As expected, most of
the genes that were markers of the same cell type were
clustered in close proximity in the clustering tree, which
indicated reliability of the results. Pluripotency markers
Oct4, Nanog, and TDGF were all clustered together, as
were the endoderm markers HNF3b, CXCR4, and SOX17.
CHD1 temporal expression pattern differed in
comparison with pluripotency markers
CHD1, a chromatin remodeler known to be involved
in formation and maintenance of the open chromatin
state, showed interesting results. We assessed the
expression levels of CHD1 in 4 hESC samples, and
at days 10 and 30 after spontaneous differentiation.
Figure 2A shows that the expression level of CHD1
increased upon differentiation and peaked at day 10,
which was unexpected if it had a similar role in mouse
ESCs and hESCs. A study on mouse ESCs showed
that this protein highly expressed in stem cells and
was responsible for the existence of a completely
open chromatin in undifferentiated stem cells, and was
required for the stemness property of mESCs.
Expression levels of lineage-specific markers showed
variations among different cell lines
A comparison of lineage-specificity among the
4 hESC lines in the current study was the first step
for additional approval of the reliability of marker
expression levels in spontaneous differentiation.
The majority of the 46 examined markers showed
significant differences in gene expression patterns
among the 4 lines, which suggested divergent lineage
specification. Based on spontaneous differentiation
results, we selected 2 hESC lines for directed
differentiation tests. The RH2 line showed the
highest propensity to express endodermal (Fig .2B)
and hepatocyte markers (Fig .3A). RH6 showed the
lowest propensity to express endodermal (Fig .2B)
and hepatocyte markers (Fig .3A). RH5 had the
highest relative propensity to express the mesodermal
(Fig .3B) and neural markers (Fig .4). We selected the
RH2 and RH6 lines for further study on the comparison
of directed differentiation toward hepatocytes under
identical conditions. qRT-PCR results of directed
differentiation towards endodermal and hepatocytes
showed that RH2 had significantly higher efficiency
to differentiate to endoderm and hepatocytes (Fig .5).
There was a substantial distance between RH2 and
RH6 based on the hierarchical clustering tree for
hepatic markers (Fig .S1) (See Supplementary Online
Information at www.celljournal.org). These results
confirmed previous researches on determination of
lineage specificity among different stem cell lines
(29, 30).
Fig.2
Expression comparison of spontaneous differentiation in different conditions. A. The expression level of CHD1 peaked at day 10 of spontaneous
differentiation in both the suspension and adherent culture systems and B. Comparison of the expression levels of liver-specific markers between the
Royan H2 (RH2) and RH6 lines during spontaneous differentiation in suspension [embryoid body (EB)] and adherent (AD) conditions.
Fig.3
Expression comparison of endodermal and mesodermal markers between Royan embryonic stem cell (ESC) lines. A. Comparison of the expression
levels of endodermal markers between the Royan H2 (RH2) and RH6 cell lines during spontaneous differentiation in suspension [embryoid body (EB)]
and adherent (AD) conditions and B. Comparison of the expression levels of mesodermal markers between RH6 and RH5 cell lines during spontaneous
differentiation in EB and AD conditions.
Fig.4
Relative expression levels of 3 neural markers in the 4 human embryonic stem cell (hESC) lines during spontaneous differentiation in suspension
[embryoid body (EB)] or adherent (AD) culture systems.
Fig.5
Relative expression levels comparison between RH2 and RH6 cell lines. A. four endodermal markers and B. four hepatocyte markers in directed
differentiation of the Royan H2 (RH2) and RH6 cell lines in 3 stages: endoderm (ENDO), pre-hepatocyte (PREHEP), and mature hepatocyte.
Differentiation protocols and clustering tree. A. The 3 steps of the neural
induction and differentiation protocol, B. The 3 steps of the hepatic
differentiation protocol, and C. Cluster of all samples based on
expression levels of the 46 marker genes (vertical axis). hESCs; Human embryonic stem
cells, N2; N2 supplement, RA; Retinoic acid, bFGF; Basic fibroblast growth factor, IM;
Induction medium, AA; Amino acids, EB; Embryoid bodies, DMSO; Dimethyl sulfoxide, BMP;
Bone morphogenetic protein, HGF; Hepatocyte growth factor, HCM; Hepatocyte culture
medium, OSM; Oncostatin M, and Dex; Dexamethasone.Expression comparison of spontaneous differentiation in different conditions. A. The expression level of CHD1 peaked at day 10 of spontaneous
differentiation in both the suspension and adherent culture systems and B. Comparison of the expression levels of liver-specific markers between the
Royan H2 (RH2) and RH6 lines during spontaneous differentiation in suspension [embryoid body (EB)] and adherent (AD) conditions.Expression comparison of endodermal and mesodermal markers between Royan embryonic stem cell (ESC) lines. A. Comparison of the expression
levels of endodermal markers between the Royan H2 (RH2) and RH6 cell lines during spontaneous differentiation in suspension [embryoid body (EB)]
and adherent (AD) conditions and B. Comparison of the expression levels of mesodermal markers between RH6 and RH5 cell lines during spontaneous
differentiation in EB and AD conditions.Relative expression levels of 3 neural markers in the 4 human embryonic stem cell (hESC) lines during spontaneous differentiation in suspension
[embryoid body (EB)] or adherent (AD) culture systems.
Different cell lines showed differentiation potential in
suspension and adherent cultures
Primary results confirmed the effectiveness of
spontaneous differentiation in a comparison of the different
hESC lines. In the second step, we compared EB versus
the adherent culture methods using the same approach.
Gene expression levels in suspension and adherent culture
were compared for all lines. Interestingly, different
lineage markers showed differential patterns in each
condition. The ectodermal, neural, endodermal, hepatic,
and endothelial markers had higher expression levels in
suspension condition (Fig .6A), while the expression of
skin-specific markers was higher in the adherent system
(Fig .6B).
Fig.6
Expression comparison of neural and keratinocyte markers in adherent or suspension culture conditions. A. Relative expression levels of 6 neural
markers in Royan H5 (RH5) during spontaneous differentiation under adherent or suspension culture conditions and B. Relative expression levels of
keratinocyte markers, P63 and KRT14, under suspension [embryoid body (EB)] and adherent (AD) culture conditions in 4 human embryonic stem cells
(hESC) lines (note the scale on the Y-axis).
Relative expression levels comparison between RH2 and RH6 cell lines. A. four endodermal markers and B. four hepatocyte markers in directed
differentiation of the Royan H2 (RH2) and RH6 cell lines in 3 stages: endoderm (ENDO), pre-hepatocyte (PREHEP), and mature hepatocyte.Expression comparison of neural and keratinocyte markers in adherent or suspension culture conditions. A. Relative expression levels of 6 neural
markers in Royan H5 (RH5) during spontaneous differentiation under adherent or suspension culture conditions and B. Relative expression levels of
keratinocyte markers, P63 and KRT14, under suspension [embryoid body (EB)] and adherent (AD) culture conditions in 4 human embryonic stem cells
(hESC) lines (note the scale on the Y-axis).We confirmed the spontaneous differentiation results
by direct differentiation of the RH5 cell line into neural
cells according to the 2 induction protocols. The first
protocol comprised the suspension culture stage, whereas
the second protocol used the adherent culture during
differentiation. Results of directed differentiation of stem
cells to neurons confirmed spontaneous differentiation
results, which showed that the suspension protocol was
significantly more effective than the adherent culture.Our results confirmed that the expression level of
neural specific expressing markers like GFAP, PAX6,
PDGFRa (as general neural stem cell markers) and
b-Tublin (as general pre-mature neuronal marker) are
higher in suspension (EB form) than adherent system in
both direct and spontaneous differentiation systems, even
in neuro-ectodermal specification or neural maturation
stages. Although in both differentiation systems we have
acceptable increase in neural lineage specific markers
(Fig .S2) (See Supplementary Online Information at www.
celljournal.org).
Directed endodermal and hepatic differentiation of
human embryonic stem cells
Spontaneous differentiation results showed that RH2
and RH6 had significant differences in expression
of endoderm and hepatocyte markers. According to
these results, RH2 differentiated into endodermal and
hepatocyte cells with higher efficacy compared to RH6.
Direct endodermal and hepatic differentiation confirmed
that spontaneous differentiation could be a powerful
tool to predict the propensity of hESC lines. Direct
differentiation results verified findings that the RH2
cell line had significantly higher expression levels of
endodermal and hepatic markers (Fig .5). According to
these data, spontaneous differentiation analysis could be
a reliable, rapid, and economical method for optimization
of differentiation protocols.
Discussion
hESCs have remarkable potential as cell sources for
cell-based therapies. However, lack of knowledge in many
aspects of hESC biology is a main barrier for introduction
of stem cells in the clinic. In this study, we have focused
on optimization of hESCs differentiation toward desired
lineages, as one of the most important challenges in
stem cell applications. Prior to using stem cells in the
clinic, 2 major obstacles must be solved-differentiation
efficiency and purity of differentiated cells. However,
both must have the capability to produce purified cells
at the maximum rate. Optimization of current direct
differentiation protocols can overcome these problems.
Here, we have investigated the effects of 2 parameters,
cell line and dimension (2D vs. 3D). Both parameters had
a significant influence on the final results. Although the
effect of dimension has been extensively discussed, there
are few reports that have compared different lineages
in 2D versus 3D culture systems. More recently, the
3D culture systems have been developed to recapitulate
human complicated organs (like nervous system)
development and differentiation in in vitro system starting
from human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs) by organoid
technology (cerebral organoid models). Although many
studies have been conducted to reveal the mechanisms
of 3D differentiation in higher organs studies but there
are still many questions to be addressed (38). In the most
suspension differentiation system, increases in expression
levels of region specific neural genes are shown. That
these changes in the expression level of specific genes
are mostly described by mysterious cell-cell interaction
and releasing neurotrophic factors from specific regions
of EBs (spheroids), and 3D self-organization of ESCs in
suspension culture system (39).
Needed cell types dictate using suspension or adherent
culture systems
We observed that the ectodermal, neural, endodermal,
hepatic, and endothelial markers had higher expression
levels in cells grown in the suspension condition,
while skin-specific markers were expressed more in
the adherent system. A possible explanation could be
the similarity of the ex vivo environment to the natural
extracellular environment for each cell or tissue type (40).
Keratinocytes usually grow in a 2D layered condition in
the body; hence these cells would prefer the adherent
culture system. On the other hand, neural cells and
hepatocytes grow in the 3D state in organs. Thus, they
had more efficient differentiation in suspension culture.
Cell-cell interactions and some signaling pathways might
also be involved in the hESC response to the culture
condition. Further studies would be needed to reveal
the mechanisms that underlie lineage fate determination
of hESCs during early differentiation stages of different
culture methods. According to the current study results,
some of the differentiation protocols could be improved
by addition of a suspension step in the early stages of
these protocols.
Spontaneous differentiation has the potential to predict
the behavior of hESC lines in direct differentiation
Gene expression profile analysis of hESCs during
differentiation is a simple and reliable approach to predict
their lineage propensities. This cost effective method
could provide very useful data over a short period of
time instead of cultivation of different hESC lines,
differentiating them to all possible lineages, and comparing
them. In the current study, we have used this invaluable
tool to compare the expression levels of lineage-specific
markers during spontaneous differentiation of hESC lines
in suspension versus adherent culture systems. Although
reports have shown this tool’s usefulness, we decided
to confirm spontaneous differentiation results by direct
differentiation of the RH5 cell line to neural cells. The
direct differentiation data verified previous results and
proved that this tool could be useful for optimization of
hESC differentiation. According to the current results,
the addition of a suspension culture step in differentiation
of most lineages would be necessary. This new strategy
may lead to the optimization of some common protocols
used for neural differentiation of stem cells, and provide
a standard platform for analysis of other types of
differentiation protocols.
Conclusion
Future studies, such as high-throughput analysis of the
expression profiles on ESC lines during differentiation
in adherent versus suspension culture conditions,
are required for additional information in this area.
Elucidation of the mechanisms that cause the early events
of lineage specification under the 2 culture conditions
is necessary. Commonly used differentiation protocols
can be compared with respect to different environmental
variables such as chemical and mechanical properties of
the culture system to enhance the efficiency of stem cell
differentiation toward a desired cell type, and further pave
the way for stem cells to be used in a clinical setting.
Authors: Stephen M Dang; Michael Kyba; Rita Perlingeiro; George Q Daley; Peter W Zandstra Journal: Biotechnol Bioeng Date: 2002-05-20 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Hossein Baharvand; Saeid Kazemi Ashtiani; Adeleh Taee; Mohammad Massumi; Mojtaba R Valojerdi; Poopak E Yazdi; Shabnam Z Moradi; Ali Farrokhi Journal: Dev Growth Differ Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 2.053
Authors: Hesham Basma; Alejandro Soto-Gutiérrez; Govardhana Rao Yannam; Liping Liu; Ryotaro Ito; Toshiyuki Yamamoto; Ewa Ellis; Steven D Carson; Shintaro Sato; Yong Chen; David Muirhead; Nalu Navarro-Alvarez; Ronald J Wong; Jayanta Roy-Chowdhury; Jeffrey L Platt; David F Mercer; John D Miller; Stephen C Strom; Naoya Kobayashi; Ira J Fox Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2008-10-29 Impact factor: 22.682