Evidence for close molecular proximity between reverting and undifferentiated cells

Abstract Background According to Waddington’s epigenetic landscape concept, the differentiation process can be illustrated by a cell akin to a ball rolling down from the top of a hill (proliferation state) and crossing furrows before stopping in basins or “attractor states” to reach its stable diffe...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Souad Zreika, Camille Fourneaux, Elodie Vallin, Laurent Modolo, Rémi Seraphin, Alice Moussy, Elias Ventre, Matteo Bouvier, Anthony Ozier-Lafontaine, Arnaud Bonnaffoux, Franck Picard, Olivier Gandrillon, Sandrine Gonin-Giraud
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2022-07-01
Series:BMC Biology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915-022-01363-7
_version_ 1828760195601268736
author Souad Zreika
Camille Fourneaux
Elodie Vallin
Laurent Modolo
Rémi Seraphin
Alice Moussy
Elias Ventre
Matteo Bouvier
Anthony Ozier-Lafontaine
Arnaud Bonnaffoux
Franck Picard
Olivier Gandrillon
Sandrine Gonin-Giraud
author_facet Souad Zreika
Camille Fourneaux
Elodie Vallin
Laurent Modolo
Rémi Seraphin
Alice Moussy
Elias Ventre
Matteo Bouvier
Anthony Ozier-Lafontaine
Arnaud Bonnaffoux
Franck Picard
Olivier Gandrillon
Sandrine Gonin-Giraud
author_sort Souad Zreika
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background According to Waddington’s epigenetic landscape concept, the differentiation process can be illustrated by a cell akin to a ball rolling down from the top of a hill (proliferation state) and crossing furrows before stopping in basins or “attractor states” to reach its stable differentiated state. However, it is now clear that some committed cells can retain a certain degree of plasticity and reacquire phenotypical characteristics of a more pluripotent cell state. In line with this dynamic model, we have previously shown that differentiating cells (chicken erythrocytic progenitors (T2EC)) retain for 24 h the ability to self-renew when transferred back in self-renewal conditions. Despite those intriguing and promising results, the underlying molecular state of those “reverting” cells remains unexplored. The aim of the present study was therefore to molecularly characterize the T2EC reversion process by combining advanced statistical tools to make the most of single-cell transcriptomic data. For this purpose, T2EC, initially maintained in a self-renewal medium (0H), were induced to differentiate for 24H (24H differentiating cells); then, a part of these cells was transferred back to the self-renewal medium (48H reverting cells) and the other part was maintained in the differentiation medium for another 24H (48H differentiating cells). For each time point, cell transcriptomes were generated using scRT-qPCR and scRNAseq. Results Our results showed a strong overlap between 0H and 48H reverting cells when applying dimensional reduction. Moreover, the statistical comparison of cell distributions and differential expression analysis indicated no significant differences between these two cell groups. Interestingly, gene pattern distributions highlighted that, while 48H reverting cells have gene expression pattern more similar to 0H cells, they are not completely identical, which suggest that for some genes a longer delay may be required for the cells to fully recover. Finally, sparse PLS (sparse partial least square) analysis showed that only the expression of 3 genes discriminates 48H reverting and 0H cells. Conclusions Altogether, we show that reverting cells return to an earlier molecular state almost identical to undifferentiated cells and demonstrate a previously undocumented physiological and molecular plasticity during the differentiation process, which most likely results from the dynamic behavior of the underlying molecular network.
first_indexed 2024-12-11T01:10:12Z
format Article
id doaj.art-c2d10c001e0f4d87920f7ade838d64ab
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1741-7007
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-11T01:10:12Z
publishDate 2022-07-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Biology
spelling doaj.art-c2d10c001e0f4d87920f7ade838d64ab2022-12-22T01:26:05ZengBMCBMC Biology1741-70072022-07-0120111610.1186/s12915-022-01363-7Evidence for close molecular proximity between reverting and undifferentiated cellsSouad Zreika0Camille Fourneaux1Elodie Vallin2Laurent Modolo3Rémi Seraphin4Alice Moussy5Elias Ventre6Matteo Bouvier7Anthony Ozier-Lafontaine8Arnaud Bonnaffoux9Franck Picard10Olivier Gandrillon11Sandrine Gonin-Giraud12Laboratory of Biology and Modelling of the Cell, Université de Lyon, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, CNRS, UMR5239, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1Laboratory of Biology and Modelling of the Cell, Université de Lyon, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, CNRS, UMR5239, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1Laboratory of Biology and Modelling of the Cell, Université de Lyon, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, CNRS, UMR5239, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1Laboratory of Biology and Modelling of the Cell, Université de Lyon, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, CNRS, UMR5239, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1Laboratory of Biology and Modelling of the Cell, Université de Lyon, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, CNRS, UMR5239, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, PSL Research University, UMRS951, INSERM, Univ-EvryLaboratory of Biology and Modelling of the Cell, Université de Lyon, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, CNRS, UMR5239, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1Laboratory of Biology and Modelling of the Cell, Université de Lyon, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, CNRS, UMR5239, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1Nantes Université, Centrale Nantes, Laboratoire de mathématiques Jean Leray, LMJLLaboratory of Biology and Modelling of the Cell, Université de Lyon, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, CNRS, UMR5239, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1Laboratory of Biology and Modelling of the Cell, Université de Lyon, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, CNRS, UMR5239, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1Laboratory of Biology and Modelling of the Cell, Université de Lyon, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, CNRS, UMR5239, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1Laboratory of Biology and Modelling of the Cell, Université de Lyon, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, CNRS, UMR5239, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1Abstract Background According to Waddington’s epigenetic landscape concept, the differentiation process can be illustrated by a cell akin to a ball rolling down from the top of a hill (proliferation state) and crossing furrows before stopping in basins or “attractor states” to reach its stable differentiated state. However, it is now clear that some committed cells can retain a certain degree of plasticity and reacquire phenotypical characteristics of a more pluripotent cell state. In line with this dynamic model, we have previously shown that differentiating cells (chicken erythrocytic progenitors (T2EC)) retain for 24 h the ability to self-renew when transferred back in self-renewal conditions. Despite those intriguing and promising results, the underlying molecular state of those “reverting” cells remains unexplored. The aim of the present study was therefore to molecularly characterize the T2EC reversion process by combining advanced statistical tools to make the most of single-cell transcriptomic data. For this purpose, T2EC, initially maintained in a self-renewal medium (0H), were induced to differentiate for 24H (24H differentiating cells); then, a part of these cells was transferred back to the self-renewal medium (48H reverting cells) and the other part was maintained in the differentiation medium for another 24H (48H differentiating cells). For each time point, cell transcriptomes were generated using scRT-qPCR and scRNAseq. Results Our results showed a strong overlap between 0H and 48H reverting cells when applying dimensional reduction. Moreover, the statistical comparison of cell distributions and differential expression analysis indicated no significant differences between these two cell groups. Interestingly, gene pattern distributions highlighted that, while 48H reverting cells have gene expression pattern more similar to 0H cells, they are not completely identical, which suggest that for some genes a longer delay may be required for the cells to fully recover. Finally, sparse PLS (sparse partial least square) analysis showed that only the expression of 3 genes discriminates 48H reverting and 0H cells. Conclusions Altogether, we show that reverting cells return to an earlier molecular state almost identical to undifferentiated cells and demonstrate a previously undocumented physiological and molecular plasticity during the differentiation process, which most likely results from the dynamic behavior of the underlying molecular network.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915-022-01363-7Cell-fate reversionCell differentiationErythroid progenitorsSingle-cell RNA-seqSingle-cell RT-qPCR
spellingShingle Souad Zreika
Camille Fourneaux
Elodie Vallin
Laurent Modolo
Rémi Seraphin
Alice Moussy
Elias Ventre
Matteo Bouvier
Anthony Ozier-Lafontaine
Arnaud Bonnaffoux
Franck Picard
Olivier Gandrillon
Sandrine Gonin-Giraud
Evidence for close molecular proximity between reverting and undifferentiated cells
BMC Biology
Cell-fate reversion
Cell differentiation
Erythroid progenitors
Single-cell RNA-seq
Single-cell RT-qPCR
title Evidence for close molecular proximity between reverting and undifferentiated cells
title_full Evidence for close molecular proximity between reverting and undifferentiated cells
title_fullStr Evidence for close molecular proximity between reverting and undifferentiated cells
title_full_unstemmed Evidence for close molecular proximity between reverting and undifferentiated cells
title_short Evidence for close molecular proximity between reverting and undifferentiated cells
title_sort evidence for close molecular proximity between reverting and undifferentiated cells
topic Cell-fate reversion
Cell differentiation
Erythroid progenitors
Single-cell RNA-seq
Single-cell RT-qPCR
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915-022-01363-7
work_keys_str_mv AT souadzreika evidenceforclosemolecularproximitybetweenrevertingandundifferentiatedcells
AT camillefourneaux evidenceforclosemolecularproximitybetweenrevertingandundifferentiatedcells
AT elodievallin evidenceforclosemolecularproximitybetweenrevertingandundifferentiatedcells
AT laurentmodolo evidenceforclosemolecularproximitybetweenrevertingandundifferentiatedcells
AT remiseraphin evidenceforclosemolecularproximitybetweenrevertingandundifferentiatedcells
AT alicemoussy evidenceforclosemolecularproximitybetweenrevertingandundifferentiatedcells
AT eliasventre evidenceforclosemolecularproximitybetweenrevertingandundifferentiatedcells
AT matteobouvier evidenceforclosemolecularproximitybetweenrevertingandundifferentiatedcells
AT anthonyozierlafontaine evidenceforclosemolecularproximitybetweenrevertingandundifferentiatedcells
AT arnaudbonnaffoux evidenceforclosemolecularproximitybetweenrevertingandundifferentiatedcells
AT franckpicard evidenceforclosemolecularproximitybetweenrevertingandundifferentiatedcells
AT oliviergandrillon evidenceforclosemolecularproximitybetweenrevertingandundifferentiatedcells
AT sandrinegoningiraud evidenceforclosemolecularproximitybetweenrevertingandundifferentiatedcells