Stem cell mechanobiology

Stem cells are undifferentiated cells that are capable of proliferation, self‐maintenance and differentiation towards specific cell phenotypes. These processes are controlled by a variety of cues including physicochemical factors associated with the specific mechanical environment in which the cells reside. The control of stem cell biology through mechanical factors remains poorly understood and is the focus of the developing field of mechanobiology. This review provides an insight into the current knowledge of the role of mechanical forces in the induction of differentiation of stem cells. While the details associated with individual studies are complex and typically associated with the stem cell type studied and model system adopted, certain key themes emerge. First, the differentiation process affects the mechanical properties of the cells and of specific subcellular components. Secondly, that stem cells are able to detect and respond to alterations in the stiffness of their surrounding microenvironment via induction of lineage‐specific differentiation. Finally, the application of external mechanical forces to stem cells, transduced through a variety of mechanisms, can initiate and drive differentiation processes. The coalescence of these three key concepts permit the introduction of a new theory for the maintenance of stem cells and alternatively their differentiation via the concept of a stem cell ‘mechano‐niche’, defined as a specific combination of cell mechanical properties, extracellular matrix stiffness and external mechanical cues conducive to the maintenance of the stem cell population. J. Cell. Biochem. 112: 1–9, 2011. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Balancing self-renewal and differentiation by asymmetric division: insights from brain tumor suppressors in Drosophila neural stem cells

Balancing self-renewal and differentiation of stem cells is an important issue in stem cell and cancer biology. Recently, the Drosophila neuroblast (NB), neural stem cell has emerged as an excellent model for stem cell self-renewal and tumorigenesis. It is of great interest to understand how defects in the asymmetric division of neural stem cells lead to tumor formation. Here, we review recent advances in asymmetric division and the self-renewal control of Drosophila NBs. We summarize molecular mechanisms of asymmetric cell division and discuss how the defects in asymmetric division lead to tumor formation. Gain-of-function or loss-of-function of various proteins in the asymmetric machinery can drive NB overgrowth and tumor formation. These proteins control either the asymmetric protein localization or mitotic spindle orientation of NBs. We also discuss other mechanisms of brain tumor suppression that are beyond the control of asymmetric division.     

Pirh2

Ubiquitylation is currently recognized as a major posttranslational modification that regulates diverse cellular processes. Pirh2 is a ubiquitin E3 ligase that regulates the turnover and functionality of several proteins involved in cell proliferation and differentiation, cell cycle checkpoints, and cell death. Here we review the role of Pirh2 as a regulator of the DNA damage response through the ubiquitylation of p53, Chk2, p73, and PolH. By ubiquitylating these proteins, Pirh2 regulates cell cycle checkpoints and cell death in response to DNA double-strand breaks or the formation of bulky DNA lesions. We also discuss how Pirh2 affects cell proliferation and differentiation in unstressed conditions through ubiquitylation and degradation of c-Myc, p63, and p27^kip1. Finally, we link these different functions of Pirh2 to its role as a tumor suppressor in mice and as a prognosis marker in various human cancer subtypes.     

Biophysical factors in the regulation of asymmetric division of stem cells

Stem cells are a promising cell source for regenerative medicine due to their characteristics of self‐renewal and differentiation. The intricate balance between these two cell fates is maintained by precisely controlled symmetric and asymmetric cell divisions. Asymmetric division has a fundamental importance in maintaining tissue homeostasis and in the development of multi‐cellular organisms. For example, during development, asymmetric cell divisions are responsible for the formation of the body axis. Mechanistically, mitotic spindle dynamics determine the assembly and separation of chromosomes and regulate the orientation of cell division. Interestingly, symmetric and asymmetric cell division is not mutually exclusive and a range of factors are involved in such cell‐fate decisions, the measurement of which can provide efficient and reliable information on the regenerative potential of a cell. The balance between self‐renewal and differentiation in stem cells is controlled by various biophysical and biochemical cues. Although the role of biochemical factors in asymmetric stem cell division has been widely studied, the effect of biophysical cues in stem‐cell self‐renewal is not comprehensively understood. Herein, we review the biological relevance of stem‐cell asymmetric division to regenerative medicine and discuss the influences of various intrinsic and extrinsic biophysical cues in stem‐cell self‐renewal. This review particularly aims to inform the clinical translation of efforts to control the self‐renewal ability of stem cells through the tuning of various biophysical cues.     

Stemness,fusion and renewal of hematopoietic and embryonic stem cells

Development of replacement cell therapies awaits the identification of factors that regulate nuclear reprogramming and the mechanisms that control stem cell renewal and differentiation. Once such factors and signals will begin to be elucidated, new technologies will have to be envisaged where uniform differentiation of adult or embryonic stem cells along one differentiation pathway can be induced. Controlled differentiation of stem cells will require the engineering of niches and extracellular signal combinations that would amplify a particular signaling network and allow uniform and selective differentiation. Three recent advances in stem cell research open the possibility to approach engineering studies for cell replacement therapies. Fusion events between stem cells and adult cells or between adult and embryonic stem cells have been shown to result in altered fates and nuclear reprogramming of cell hybrids. Hematopoietic stem cells were shown to require Wnt signaling in order to renew. The purification of Wnt proteins would allow their use as exogenous purified cytokines in attempts to amplify stem cells before bone marrow transplantation. The homeodomain protein Nanog has been shown to be crucial for the embryonic stem cell renewal and pluripotency. However, the cardinal question of how stemness is preserved in the early embryo and adult stem cells remains opened.     

Restrictins: stromal cell associated factors that control cell organization in hemopoietic tissues

Hemopoiesis is a sequence of events initiated by the self-renewal of pluripotent stem cells followed by a series of differentiation steps and completed in the formation of distinct tissue patterns. Differentiation and self-renewal are antagonistic processes. A mechanism that attenuates the differentiation flow is obligatory to prevent the exhaustion of the stem cell pool. We suggest that stromal cells from the bone marrow control stem cell renewal through a mechanism that does not require colony-stimulating factors. The organization of cells within the tissue and their specific localization is suggested to be directed by stromal cell activities other than differentiation inducers. These stromal cell activities restrict differentiation or accumulation of mature cells. They are therefore designated as 'Restrictins'.     

Large Noncoding RNAs Are Promising Regulators in Embryonic Stem Cells

Embryonic stem cells(ESCs) hold great promises for treating and studying numerous devastating diseases. The molecular basis of their potential is not completely understood. Large noncoding RNAs(lnc RNAs) are an important class of gene regulators that play essential roles in a variety of physiologic and pathologic processes. Dozens of lnc RNAs are now identified to control ESC self-renewal and differentiation. Research on lnc RNAs may provide novel insights into manipulating the cell fate or reprogramming somatic cells into induced pluripotent stem cells(i PSCs). In this review, we summarize the recent research efforts in identifying functional lnc RNAs and understanding how they act in ESCs, and discuss various future directions of this field.     

Driving Apoptosis-relevant Proteins Toward Neural Differentiation

Emerging evidence suggests that apoptosis regulators and executioners may control cell fate, without involving cell death per se. Indeed, several conserved elements of apoptosis are integral components of terminal differentiation, which must be restrictively activated to assure differentiation efficiency, and carefully regulated to avoid cell loss. A better understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying key checkpoints responsible for neural differentiation, as an alternative to cell death will surely make stem cells more suitable for neuro-replacement therapies. In this review, we summarize recent studies on the mechanisms underlying the non-apoptotic function of p53, caspases, and Bcl-2 family members during neural differentiation. In addition, we discuss how apoptosis-regulatory proteins control the decision between differentiation, self-renewal, and cell death in neural stem cells, and how activity is restrained to prevent cell loss.     

Genetic control of quiescence in hematopoietic stem cells

Cellular quiescence is a reversible cell cycle arrest that is poised to re-enter the cell cycle in response to a combination of cell-intrinsic factors and environmental cues. In hematopoietic stem cells, a coordinated balance between quiescence and differentiating proliferation ensures longevity and prevents both genetic damage and stem cell exhaustion. However, little is known about how all these processes are integrated at the molecular level. We will briefly review the environmental and intrinsic control of stem cell quiescence and discuss a new model that involves a protein-to-protein interaction between G0S2 and the phospho-nucleoprotein nucleolin in the cytosol.     

Self-maintained escort cells form a germline stem cell differentiation niche

Stem cell self-renewal is controlled by concerted actions of niche signals and intrinsic factors in a variety of systems. In the Drosophila ovary, germline stem cells (GSCs) in the niche continuously self-renew and generate differentiated germ cells that interact physically with escort cells (ECs). It has been proposed that escort stem cells (ESCs), which directly contact GSCs, generate differentiated ECs to maintain the EC population. However, it remains unclear whether the differentiation status of germ cells affects EC behavior and how the interaction between ECs and germ cells is regulated. In this study, we have found that ECs can undergo slow cell turnover regardless of their positions, and the lost cells are replenished by their neighboring ECs via self-duplication rather than via stem cells. ECs extend elaborate cellular processes that exhibit extensive interactions with differentiated germ cells. Interestingly, long cellular processes of ECs are absent when GSC progeny fail to differentiate, suggesting that differentiated germ cells are required for the formation or maintenance of EC cellular processes. Disruption of Rho functions leads to the disruption of long EC cellular processes and the accumulation of ill-differentiated single germ cells by increasing BMP signaling activity outside the GSC niche, and also causes gradual EC loss. Therefore, our findings indicate that ECs interact extensively with differentiated germ cells through their elaborate cellular processes and control proper germ cell differentiation. Here, we propose that ECs form a niche that controls GSC lineage differentiation and is maintained by a non-stem cell mechanism.     

Adventures in time and space: Nonlinearity and complexity of cytokine effects on stem cell fate decisions

Cytokines are central factors in the control of stem cell fate decisions and, as such, they are invaluable to those interested in the manipulation of stem and progenitor cells for clinical or research purposes. In their in vivo niches or in optimized cultures, stem cells are exposed to multiple cytokines, matrix proteins and other cell types that provide individual and combinatorial signals that influence their self‐renewal, proliferation and differentiation. Although the individual effects of cytokines are well‐characterized in terms of increases or decreases in stem cell expansion or in the production of specific cell lineages, their interactions are often overlooked. Factorial design experiments in association with multiple linear regression is a powerful multivariate approach to derive response‐surface models and to obtain a quantitative understanding of cytokine dose and interactions effects. On the other hand, cytokine interactions detected in stem cell processes can be difficult to interpret due to the fact that the cell populations examined are often heterogeneous, that cytokines can exhibit pleiotropy and redundancy and that they can also be endogenously produced. This perspective piece presents a list of possible biological mechanisms that can give rise to positive and negative two‐way factor interactions in the context of in vivo and in vitro stem cell‐based processes. These interpretations are based on insights provided by recent studies examining intra‐ and extra‐cellular signaling pathways in adult and embryonic stem cells. Cytokine interactions have been classified according to four main types of molecular and cellular mechanisms: (i) interactions due to co‐signaling; (ii) interactions due to sequential actions; (iii) interactions due to high‐dose saturation and inhibition; and (iv) interactions due to intercellular signaling networks. For each mechanism, possible patterns of regression coefficients corresponding to the cytokine main effects, quadratic effects and two‐way interactions effects are provided. Finally, directions for future mechanistic studies are presented. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2010;106: 173–182. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Directed Stem Cell Differentiation: The Role of Physical Forces

Abstract

A number of factors contribute to the control of stem cell fate. In particular, the evidence for how physical forces control the stem cell differentiation program is now accruing. In this review, the authors discuss the types of physical forces: mechanical forces, cell shape, extracellular matrix geometry/properties, and cell-cell contacts and morphogenic factors, which evidence suggests play a role in influencing stem cell fate.     

Wnt control of stem cells and differentiation in the intestinal epithelium

The intestinal epithelium represents a very attractive experimental model for the study of integrated key cellular processes such as proliferation and differentiation. The tissue is subjected to a rapid and perpetual self-renewal along the crypt-villus axis. Renewal requires division of multipotent stem cells, still to be morphologically identified and isolated, followed by transit amplification, and differentiation of daughter cells into specialized absorptive and secretory cells. Our understanding of the crucial role played by the Wnt/beta-catenin signaling pathway in controlling the fine balance between cell proliferation and differentiation in the gut has been significantly enhanced in recent years. Mutations in some of its components irreversibly lead to carcinogenesis in humans and in mice. Here, we discuss recent advances related to the Wnt/beta-catenin signaling pathway in regulating intestinal stem cells, homeostasis, and cancer. We emphasize how Wnt signaling is able to maintain a stem cell/progenitor phenotype in normal intestinal crypts, and to impose a very similar phenotype onto colorectal adenomas.     

Mitochondria and the dynamic control of stem cell homeostasis

The maintenance of cellular identity requires continuous adaptation to environmental changes. This process is particularly critical for stem cells, which need to preserve their differentiation potential over time. Among the mechanisms responsible for regulating cellular homeostatic responses, mitochondria are emerging as key players. Given their dynamic and multifaceted role in energy metabolism, redox, and calcium balance, as well as cell death, mitochondria appear at the interface between environmental cues and the control of epigenetic identity. In this review, we describe how mitochondria have been implicated in the processes of acquisition and loss of stemness, with a specific focus on pluripotency. Dissecting the biological functions of mitochondria in stem cell homeostasis and differentiation will provide essential knowledge to understand the dynamics of cell fate modulation, and to establish improved stem cell‐based medical applications.     

DNA methylation in embryonic stem cells

Embryonic stem cells (ESCs) are pluripotent, self‐renewing cells. These cells can be used in applications such as cell therapy, drug development, disease modeling, and the study of cellular differentiation. Investigating the interplay of epigenetics, genetics, and gene expression in control of pluripotence and differentiation could give important insights on how these cells function. One of the best known epigenetic factors is DNA methylation, which is a major mechanism for regulation of gene expression. This phenomenon is mostly seen in imprinted genes and X‐chromosome inactivation where DNA methylation of promoter regions leads to repression of gene expression. Differential DNA methylation of pluripotence‐associated genes such as Nanog and Oct4/Pou5f1 has been observed between pluripotent and differentiated cells. It is clear that tight regulation of DNA methylation is necessary for normal development. As more associations between aberrant DNA methylation and disease are reported, the demand for high‐throughput approaches for DNA methylation analysis has increased. In this article, we highlight these methods and discuss recent DNA methylation studies on ESCs. J. Cell. Biochem. 109: 1–6, 2010. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.