| Literature DB >> 35964138 |
Lingmin Liang1,2,3,4,5, Yao Tian6,2,3,4,5, Lin Feng6,2,3,4,5, Chaoqun Wang6,1,2,3,5, Guihai Feng6,2,3, Glyn Nigel Stacey4,7, Ng Shyh-Chang6,2,3,5, Jun Wu6,2,3,4, Baoyang Hu6,1,2,3,4,5, Wei Li6,2,3,5, Jie Hao6,2,3,4, Liu Wang8,9,10,11,12, Yukai Wang13,14,15,16.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Midbrain dopaminergic (DA) progenitors derived from human pluripotent stem cells are considered to be a promising treatment for Parkinson's disease (PD). However, the differentiation process produces undesired cell types, which influence the in vivo evaluation of DA cells. In this paper, we analyze the cell fate choice during differentiation and provide valuable information on cell preparation.Entities:
Keywords: Cell therapy; Dopaminergic (DA) neurons; Parkinson’s disease (PD); Pluripotent stem cells (PSCs); Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq)
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35964138 PMCID: PMC9375405 DOI: 10.1186/s13287-022-03104-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Stem Cell Res Ther ISSN: 1757-6512 Impact factor: 8.079
Fig. 1Single-cell RNA sequencing of DA differentiation in vitro. a Schematic depicting DA differentiation from hESCs at different differentiation stages. b We defined 11 clusters in DA differentiation. c Heat map showing expression levels of the differentially expressed genes of each cluster
Fig. 2Differentiation trajectory from hESCs to DA. a UMAP projections of cells sampled from day 5 to 25. b Cell numbers at each time point. c Pseudo-time trajectories calculated from UMAP d Expression of selected marker genes along pseudo-time. e Expression of marker genes projected onto UMAP
Fig. 3Defining two molecularly distinct populations in the key branch point on day 17. a The branch point between day 11 and 17 during DA differentiation. b C5 and C6 clusters showing expression of DA progenitors-related genes shown as violin plots. Violin plots showing the expression of marker genes of C5 and C6 clusters. c Volcano plot of significantly differentially expressed genes (|log2FC|> 1; padj < 0.05) between C5 and C6 cluster. d Immunofluorescence detection of TH positive after the hESCs cell lines of overexpressing LGI1 differentiation into DA. n.s., not significant. Data are shown as mean ± SEM. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001. Scale bars, 50 μm. e Quantification of the percentage of TH+ cells on day 25 of differentiation. Dox was added on day 7 and day 11, respectively. Data are shown as mean ± SEM, n = 3. **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001
Fig. 4Subpopulations and their molecular signature of day 25 cells. a UMAP map of the five subpopulations of day 25 cells. Cell-type assignments are indicated. b Violin plots showing expression of key lineage-associated genes between the five subpopulations. c Heatmap showing expression levels of DEGs for each subcluster. d Volcano plot of significantly DEGs (|log2FC|> 1; padj < 0.05) identified by choroid plexus cells versus DA progenitor cells. e GO analysis of differentially expressed genes governing DA and CPECs
Fig. 5Enrichment of DA progenitors with CD99. a CD99 expression in day 25 cells. b, c Immunofluorescence for CD99 of day 25 cells (b) and of grafts derived from rat striatum at 3 months after transplantation (c). Scale bars, 50 μm. d FACS analysis of CD99+ cells in day 25 cells. e, f Cell morphology and immunofluorescence for CD99+ cells (e) and CD99− cells (f). Scale bars, 50 μm. g The percentages of TUJ1+ and TH.+ cells in sorted cells. Data are shown as mean ± SEM, n = 3 independent experiments. ***P < 0.001