Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Stem Cells International
Volume 2016, Article ID 6838253, 16 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/6838253
Review Article

Pluripotency Factors on Their Lineage Move

1Department of Internal Medicine I, Ulm University Hospital, 89069 Ulm, Germany
2Department of Anesthesiology, Ulm University Hospital, 89069 Ulm, Germany

Received 14 May 2015; Revised 30 July 2015; Accepted 3 August 2015

Academic Editor: Kodandaramireddy Nalapareddy

Copyright © 2016 Clair E. Weidgang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. J. Wray, T. Kalkan, and A. G. Smith, “The ground state of pluripotency,” Biochemical Society Transactions, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 1027–1032, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. H. Niwa, K. Ogawa, D. Shimosato, and K. Adachi, “A parallel circuit of LIF signalling pathways maintains pluripotency of mouse ES cells,” Nature, vol. 460, no. 7251, pp. 118–122, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. H. Niwa, J.-I. Miyazaki, and A. G. Smith, “Quantitative expression of Oct-3/4 defines differentiation, dedifferentiation or self-renewal of ES cells,” Nature Genetics, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 372–376, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. C. E. Weidgang, R. Russell, P. R. Tata et al., “TBX3 directs cell-fate decision toward mesendoderm,” Stem Cell Reports, vol. 1, pp. 248–265, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  5. M. Thomson, S. J. Liu, L.-N. Zou, Z. Smith, A. Meissner, and S. Ramanathan, “Pluripotency factors in embryonic stem cells regulate differentiation into germ layers,” Cell, vol. 145, no. 6, pp. 875–889, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. M. Bertolessi, L. Linta, T. Seufferlein, A. Kleger, and S. Liebau, “A fresh look on T-box factor action in early embryogenesis (T-box factors in early development),” Stem Cells and Development, vol. 24, no. 16, pp. 1833–1851, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  7. J. Hao, T.-G. Li, X. Qi, D.-F. Zhao, and G.-Q. Zhao, “WNT/β-catenin pathway up-regulates Stat3 and converges on LIF to prevent differentiation of mouse embryonic stem cells,” Developmental Biology, vol. 290, no. 1, pp. 81–91, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. S. I. Kim, F. Oceguera-Yanez, R. Hirohata et al., “KLF4 N-terminal variance modulates induced reprogramming to pluripotency,” Stem Cell Reports, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 727–743, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  9. G. Nagamatsu, S. Saito, K. Takubo, and T. Suda, “Integrative analysis of the acquisition of pluripotency in PGCs reveals the mutually exclusive roles of blimp-1 and AKT signaling,” Stem Cell Reports, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 111–124, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  10. A. Waghray, N. Saiz, A. Jayaprakash et al., “Tbx3 controls Dppa3 levels and exit frompluripotency toward mesoderm,” Stem Cell Reports, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 97–110, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  11. T. Wu, H. Pinto, Y. Kamikawa, and M. Donohoe, “The BET family member BRD4 interacts with OCT4 and regulates pluripotency gene expression,” Stem Cell Reports, vol. 4, pp. 390–403, 2015. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. Y. Chen, K. Blair, and A. Smith, “Robust self-renewal of rat embryonic stem cells requires fine-tuning of glycogen synthase kinase-3 inhibition,” Stem Cell Reports, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 209–217, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. H. G. Leitch, J. Nichols, P. Humphreys et al., “Rebuilding pluripotency from primordial germ cells,” Stem Cell Reports, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 66–78, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. J. Nichols and A. Smith, “Naive and primed pluripotent states,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 487–492, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. T. Boroviak, R. Loos, P. Bertone, A. Smith, and J. Nichols, “The ability of inner-cell-mass cells to self-renew as embryonic stem cells is acquired following epiblast specification,” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 516–528, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. Q.-L. Ying, J. Nichols, I. Chambers, and A. Smith, “BMP induction of Id proteins suppresses differentiation and sustains embryonic stem cell self-renewal in collaboration with STAT3,” Cell, vol. 115, no. 3, pp. 281–292, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. Q.-L. Ying, J. Wray, J. Nichols et al., “The ground state of embryonic stem cell self-renewal,” Nature, vol. 453, no. 7194, pp. 519–523, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. M. Müller, J. Schröer, N. Azoitei et al., “A time frame permissive for Protein Kinase D2 activity to direct angiogenesis in mouse embryonic stem cells,” Scientific Reports, vol. 5, Article ID 11742, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  19. M. Sugimoto, M. Kondo, Y. Koga et al., “A simple and robust method for establishing homogeneous mouse epiblast stem cell lines by wnt inhibition,” Stem Cell Reports, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 744–757, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  20. C. Dani, I. Chambers, S. Johnstone et al., “Paracrine induction of stem cell renewal by LIF-deficient cells: a new ES cell regulatory pathway,” Developmental Biology, vol. 203, no. 1, pp. 149–162, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. C. L. Stewart, P. Kaspar, L. J. Brunet et al., “Blastocyst implantation depends on maternal expression of leukaemia inhibitory factor,” Nature, vol. 359, no. 6390, pp. 76–79, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. R. L. Williams, D. J. Hilton, S. Pease et al., “Myeloid leukaemia inhibitory factor maintains the developmental potential of embryonic stem cells,” Nature, vol. 336, no. 6200, pp. 684–687, 1988. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. I. Chambers and A. Smith, “Self-renewal of teratocarcinoma and embryonic stem cells,” Oncogene, vol. 23, no. 43, pp. 7150–7160, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. H. Niwa, “How is pluripotency determined and maintained?” Development, vol. 134, no. 4, pp. 635–646, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. H. Niwa, T. Burdon, I. Chambers, and A. Smith, “Self-renewal of pluripotent embryonic stem cells is mediated via activation of STAT3,” Genes and Development, vol. 12, no. 13, pp. 2048–2060, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. D. V. Do, J. Ueda, D. M. Messerschmidt et al., “A genetic and developmental pathway from STAT3 to the OCT4-NANOG circuit is essential for maintenance of ICM lineages in vivo,” Genes and Development, vol. 27, no. 12, pp. 1378–1390, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. P. Cartwright, C. McLean, A. Sheppard, D. Rivett, K. Jones, and S. Dalton, “LIF/STAT3 controls ES cell self-renewal and pluripotency by a Myc-dependent mechanism,” Development, vol. 132, no. 5, pp. 885–896, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. G. Martello, P. Bertone, and A. Smith, “Identification of the missing pluripotency mediator downstream of leukaemia inhibitory factor,” The EMBO Journal, vol. 32, no. 19, pp. 2561–2574, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. P.-Y. Bourillot, I. Aksoy, V. Schreiber et al., “Novel STAT3 target genes exert distinct roles in the inhibition of mesoderm and endoderm differentiation in cooperation with Nanog,” Stem Cells, vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 1760–1771, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. T. Kunath, M. K. Saba-El-Leil, M. Almousailleakh, J. Wray, S. Meloche, and A. Smith, “FGF stimulation of the Erk1/2 signalling cascade triggers transition of pluripotent embryonic stem cells from self-renewal to lineage commitment,” Development, vol. 134, no. 16, pp. 2895–2902, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. J. Nichols, J. Silva, M. Roode, and A. Smith, “Suppression of Erk signalling promotes ground state pluripotency in the mouse embryo,” Development, vol. 136, no. 19, pp. 3215–3222, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. R. J. Chan, S. A. Johnson, Y. Li, M. C. Yoder, and G.-S. Feng, “A definitive role of Shp-2 tyrosine phosphatase in mediating embryonic stem cell differentiation and hematopoiesis,” Blood, vol. 102, no. 6, pp. 2074–2080, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. H. Marks, T. Kalkan, R. Menafra et al., “The transcriptional and epigenomic foundations of ground state pluripotency,” Cell, vol. 149, no. 3, pp. 590–604, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. J. Wray, T. Kalkan, S. Gomez-Lopez et al., “Inhibition of glycogen synthase kinase-3 alleviates Tcf3 repression of the pluripotency network and increases embryonic stem cell resistance to differentiation,” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 13, pp. 838–845, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  35. H. Kuroda, L. Fuentealba, A. Ikeda, B. Reversade, and E. M. De Robertis, “Default neural induction: neuralization of dissociated Xenopus cells is mediated by Ras/MAPK activation,” Genes and Development, vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 1022–1027, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. S. I. Wilson, A. Rydström, T. Trimborn et al., “The status of Wnt signalling regulates neural and epidermal fates in the chick embryo,” Nature, vol. 411, no. 6835, pp. 325–330, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. B. M. Johansson and M. V. Wiles, “Evidence for involvement of activin A and bone morphogenetic protein 4 in mammalian mesoderm and hematopoietic development,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 141–151, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. M. F. A. Finley, S. Devata, and J. E. Huettner, “BMP-4 inhibits neural differentiation of murine embryonic stem cells,” Journal of Neurobiology, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 271–287, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. Y. Hayashi, M. K. Furue, S. Tanaka et al., “BMP4 induction of trophoblast from mouse embryonic stem cells in defined culture conditions on laminin,” In Vitro Cellular and Developmental Biology—Animal, vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 416–430, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. S. J. Arnold and E. J. Robertson, “Making a commitment: cell lineage allocation and axis patterning in the early mouse embryo,” Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 91–103, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. K. Katsu, D. Tokumori, N. Tatsumi, A. Suzuki, and Y. Yokouchi, “BMP inhibition by DAN in Hensen's node is a critical step for the establishment of left-right asymmetry in the chick embryo,” Developmental Biology, vol. 363, no. 1, pp. 15–26, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. Y.-J. Luo and Y.-H. Su, “Opposing nodal and BMP signals regulate left-right asymmetry in the sea urchin larva,” PLoS Biology, vol. 10, no. 10, Article ID e1001402, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. S. Frank, M. Zhang, H. R. Schöler, and B. Greber, “Small molecule-assisted, line-independent maintenance of human pluripotent stem cells in defined conditions,” PLoS ONE, vol. 7, no. 7, Article ID e41958, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. K. E. Galvin, E. D. Travis, D. Yee, T. Magnuson, and J. L. Vivian, “Nodal signaling regulates the bone morphogenic protein pluripotency pathway in mouse embryonic stem cells,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 285, no. 26, pp. 19747–19756, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. B. Lichtner, P. Knaus, H. Lehrach, and J. Adjaye, “BMP10 as a potent inducer of trophoblast differentiation in human embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells,” Biomaterials, vol. 34, no. 38, pp. 9789–9802, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. M. C. Nostro, X. Cheng, G. M. Keller, and P. Gadue, “Wnt, activin, and BMP signaling regulate distinct stages in the developmental pathway from embryonic stem cells to blood,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 60–71, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. A. Leunda-Casi, R. de Hertogh, and S. Pampfer, “Control of trophectoderm differentiation by inner cell mass-derived fibroblast growth factor-4 in mouse blastocysts and corrective effect of FGF-4 on high glucose-induced trophoblast disruption,” Molecular Reproduction and Development, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 38–46, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. N. Sato, L. Meijer, L. Skaltsounis, P. Greengard, and A. H. Brivanlou, “Maintenance of pluripotency in human and mouse embryonic stem cells through activation of Wnt signaling by a pharmacological GSK-3-specific inhibitor,” Nature Medicine, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 55–63, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. R. A. Cavallo, R. T. Cox, M. M. Moline et al., “Drosophila Tcf and Groucho interact to repress wingless signalling activity,” Nature, vol. 395, no. 6702, pp. 604–608, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. J. L. Stamos and W. I. Weis, “The β-catenin destruction complex,” Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology, vol. 5, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. G. Martello, T. Sugimoto, E. Diamanti et al., “Esrrb is a pivotal target of the Gsk3/Tcf3 axis regulating embryonic stem cell self-renewal,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 491–504, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  52. L. Pereira, F. Yi, and B. J. Merrill, “Repression of Nanog gene transcription by Tcf3 limits embryonic stem cell self-renewal,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 26, no. 20, pp. 7479–7491, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. H. Xu, C. Baroukh, R. Dannenfelser et al., “ESCAPE: database for integrating high-content published data collected from human and mouse embryonic stem cells,” Database, vol. 2013, Article ID bat045, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. F. Yi, L. Pereira, J. A. Hoffman et al., “Opposing effects of Tcf3 and Tcf1 control Wnt stimulation of embryonic stem cell self-renewal,” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 762–770, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. K. F. Kelly, D. Y. Ng, G. Jayakumaran, G. A. Wood, H. Koide, and B. W. Doble, “Beta-catenin enhances Oct-4 activity and reinforces pluripotency through a TCF-independent mechanism,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 214–227, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. E. Seo, U. Basu-Roy, J. Zavadil, C. Basilico, and A. Mansukhani, “Distinct functions of Sox2 control self-renewal and differentiation in the osteoblast lineage,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 31, no. 22, pp. 4593–4608, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. X. Ye, F. Wu, C. Wu et al., “β-catenin, a Sox2 binding partner, regulates the DNA binding and transcriptional activity of Sox2 in breast cancer cells,” Cellular Signalling, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 492–501, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. L. Marucci, E. Pedone, U. Di Vicino, B. Sanuy-Escribano, M. Isalan, and M. P. Cosma, “β-Catenin Fluctuates in mouse ESCs and is essential for Nanog-mediated reprogramming of somatic cells to pluripotency,” Cell Reports, vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 1686–1696, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. S. J. Arnold, J. Stappert, A. Bauer, A. Kispert, B. G. Herrmann, and R. Kemler, “Brachyury is a target gene of the Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway,” Mechanisms of Development, vol. 91, no. 1-2, pp. 249–258, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. H. Haegel, L. Larue, M. Ohsugi, L. Fedorov, K. Herrenknecht, and R. Kemler, “Lack of β-catenin affects mouse development at gastrulation,” Development, vol. 121, no. 11, pp. 3529–3537, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  61. S. He, D. Pant, A. Schiffmacher, A. Meece, and C. L. Keefer, “Lymphoid enhancer factor 1-mediated Wnt signaling promotes the initiation of trophoblast lineage differentiation in mouse embryonic stem cells,” Stem Cells, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 842–849, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. J. Huelsken, R. Vogel, V. Brinkmann, B. Erdmann, C. Birchmeier, and W. Birchmeier, “Requirement for β-catenin in anterior-posterior axis formation in mice,” Journal of Cell Biology, vol. 148, no. 3, pp. 567–578, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  63. O. G. Kelly, K. I. Pinson, and W. C. Skarnes, “The Wnt co-receptors Lrp5 and Lrp6 are essential for gastrulation in mice,” Development, vol. 131, no. 12, pp. 2803–2815, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. M. Ema, D. Mori, H. Niwa et al., “Krüppel-like factor 5 is essential for blastocyst development and the normal self-renewal of mouse ESCs,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 3, no. 5, pp. 555–567, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. J. Han, P. Yuan, H. Yang et al., “Tbx3 improves the germ-line competency of induced pluripotent stem cells,” Nature, vol. 463, no. 7284, pp. 1096–1100, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. B. Schuettengruber and G. Cavalli, “Recruitment of polycomb group complexes and their role in the dynamic regulation of cell fate choice,” Development, vol. 136, no. 21, pp. 3531–3542, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  67. K. Takahashi and S. Yamanaka, “Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors,” Cell, vol. 126, no. 4, pp. 663–676, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. S.-J. Dunn, G. Martello, B. Yordanov, S. Emmott, and A. G. Smith, “Defining an essential transcription factor program for naïve pluripotency,” Science, vol. 344, no. 6188, pp. 1156–1160, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. M. Zernicka-Goetz, “Patterning of the embryo: the first spatial decisions in the life of a mouse,” Development, vol. 129, no. 4, pp. 815–829, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  70. A. J. Copp, “Interaction between inner cell mass and trophectoderm of the mouse blastocyst. II. The fate of the polar trophectoderm,” Journal of Embryology and Experimental Morphology, vol. 51, pp. 109–120, 1979. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  71. P. Murray and D. Edgar, “Regulation of the differentiation and behaviour of extra-embryonic endodermal cells by basement membranes,” Journal of Cell Science, vol. 114, no. 5, pp. 931–939, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  72. S. Tada, T. Era, C. Furusawa et al., “Characterization of mesendoderm: a diverging point of the definitive endoderm and mesoderm in embryonic stem cell differentiation culture,” Development, vol. 132, no. 19, pp. 4363–4374, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  73. J. Nichols, B. Zevnik, K. Anastassiadis et al., “Formation of pluripotent stem cells in the mammalian embryo depends on the POU transcription factor Oct4,” Cell, vol. 95, no. 3, pp. 379–391, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  74. D. J. Rodda, J.-L. Chew, L.-H. Lim et al., “Transcriptional regulation of nanog by OCT4 and SOX2,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 280, no. 26, pp. 24731–24737, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  75. M. Pesce and H. R. Schöler, “Oct-4: gatekeeper in the beginnings of mammalian development,” Stem Cells, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 271–278, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  76. A. Radzisheuskaya, G. Le Bin Chia, R. L. dos Santos et al., “A defined Oct4 level governs cell state transitions of pluripotency entry and differentiation into all embryonic lineages,” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 579–590, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  77. V. Karwacki-Neisius, J. Göke, R. Osorno et al., “Reduced Oct4 expression directs a robust pluripotent state with distinct signaling activity and increased enhancer occupancy by Oct4 and Nanog,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 531–545, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  78. I. Aksoy, R. Jauch, J. Chen et al., “Oct4 switches partnering from Sox2 to Sox17 to reinterpret the enhancer code and specify endoderm,” The EMBO Journal, vol. 32, no. 7, pp. 938–953, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  79. S. Stefanovic, N. Abboud, S. Désilets, D. Nury, C. Cowan, and M. Pucéat, “Interplay of Oct4 with Sox2 and Sox17: a molecular switch from stem cell pluripotency to specifying a cardiac fate,” Journal of Cell Biology, vol. 186, no. 5, pp. 665–673, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  80. M. Hogan, D. Parfitt, C. Zepeda-Mendoza, M. Shen, and D. Spector, “Transient pairing of homologous Oct4 alleles accompanies the onset of embryonic stem cell differentiation,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 275–288, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  81. M. R. Hübner, M. A. Eckersley-Maslin, and D. L. Spector, “Chromatin organization and transcriptional regulation,” Current Opinion in Genetics & Development, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 89–95, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  82. Z. Wei, Y. Yang, P. Zhang et al., “Klf4 interacts directly with Oct4 and Sox2 to promote reprogramming,” Stem Cells, vol. 27, no. 12, pp. 2969–2978, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  83. K. Deb, M. Sivaguru, H. Y. Yong, and R. M. Roberts, “Cdx2 gene expression and trophectoderm lineage specification in mouse embryos,” Science, vol. 311, no. 5763, pp. 992–996, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  84. H. Niwa, Y. Toyooka, D. Shimosato et al., “Interaction between Oct3/4 and Cdx2 determines trophectoderm differentiation,” Cell, vol. 123, no. 5, pp. 917–929, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  85. D. Strumpf, C.-A. Mao, Y. Yamanaka et al., “Cdx2 is required for correct cell fate specification and differentiation of trophectoderm in the mouse blastocyst,” Development, vol. 132, no. 9, pp. 2093–2102, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  86. Y. Li, W. Yu, A. J. Cooney, R. J. Schwartz, and Y. Liu, “Brief report: Oct4 and canonical Wnt signaling regulate the cardiac lineage factor Mesp1 through a Tcf/Lef-Oct4 composite element,” Stem Cells, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 1213–1217, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  87. T. Frum, M. Halbisen, C. Wang, H. Amiri, P. Robson, and A. Ralston, “Oct4 Cell-autonomously promotes primitive endoderm development in the mouse blastocyst,” Developmental Cell, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 610–622, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  88. S. Masui, Y. Nakatake, Y. Toyooka et al., “Pluripotency governed by Sox2 via regulation of Oct3/4 expression in mouse embryonic stem cells,” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 625–635, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  89. G. C. Le Bin, S. Muñoz-Descalzo, A. Kurowski et al., “Oct4 is required for lineage priming in the developing inner cell mass of the mouse blastocyst,” Development, vol. 141, no. 5, pp. 1001–1010, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  90. G. Tiscornia and J. C. Izpisúa Belmonte, “MicroRNAs in embryonic stem cell function and fate,” Genes and Development, vol. 24, no. 24, pp. 2732–2741, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  91. F. D. Price, H. Yin, A. Jones, W. Van Ijcken, F. Grosveld, and M. A. Rudnicki, “Canonical Wnt signaling induces a primitive endoderm metastable state in mouse embryonic stem cells,” Stem Cells, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 752–764, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  92. C.-A. Renard, C. Labalette, C. Armengol et al., “Tbx3 is a downstream target of the Wnt/β-catenin pathway and a critical mediator of β-catenin survival functions in liver cancer,” Cancer Research, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 901–910, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  93. J. Brennan, C. C. Lu, D. P. Norris, T. A. Rodriguez, R. S. P. Beddington, and E. J. Robertson, “Nodal signalling in the epiblast patterns the early mouse embryo,” Nature, vol. 411, no. 6840, pp. 965–969, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  94. X. Cheng, L. Ying, L. Lu et al., “Self-renewing endodermal progenitor lines generated from human pluripotent stem cells,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 371–384, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  95. A. E. R. Kartikasari, J. X. Zhou, M. S. Kanji et al., “The histone demethylase Jmjd3 sequentially associates with the transcription factors Tbx3 and Eomes to drive endoderm differentiation,” The EMBO Journal, vol. 32, no. 10, pp. 1393–1408, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  96. R. Pearson, J. Fleetwood, S. Eaton, M. Crossley, and S. Bao, “Krüppel-like transcription factors: a functional family,” International Journal of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, vol. 40, no. 10, pp. 1996–2001, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  97. K. Kurimoto, Y. Yabuta, Y. Ohinata et al., “An improved single-cell cDNA amplification method for efficient high-density oligonucleotide microarray analysis,” Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 34, no. 5, article e42, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  98. J. Jiang, Y.-S. Chan, Y.-H. Loh et al., “A core Klf circuitry regulates self-renewal of embryonic stem cells,” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 353–360, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  99. C. Chazaud, Y. Yamanaka, T. Pawson, and J. Rossant, “Early lineage segregation between epiblast and primitive endoderm in mouse blastocysts through the Grb2-MAPK pathway,” Developmental Cell, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 615–624, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  100. P. Zhang, R. Andrianakos, Y. Yang, C. Liu, and W. Lu, “Kruppel-like factor 4 (Klf4) prevents embryonic stem (ES) cell differentiation by regulating Nanog gene expression,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 285, no. 12, pp. 9180–9189, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  101. J. Hall, G. Guo, J. Wray et al., “Oct4 and LIF/Stat3 additively induce Krüppel factors to sustain embryonic stem cell self-renewal,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 597–609, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  102. A. M. Ghaleb, M. O. Nandan, S. Chanchevalap, W. B. Dalton, I. M. Hisamuddin, and V. W. Yang, “Krüppel-like factors 4 and 5: the yin and yang regulators of cellular proliferation,” Cell Research, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 92–96, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  103. D. T. Dang, W. Zhao, C. S. Mahatan, D. E. Geiman, and V. W. Yang, “Opposing effects of Kruppel-like factor 4 (gut-enriched Kruppel-like factor) and Kruppel-like factor 5 (intestinal-enriched Kruppel-like factor) on the promoter of the Kruppel-like factor 4 gene,” Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 30, pp. 2736–2741, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  104. Y. Li, J. McClintick, L. Zhong, H. J. Edenberg, M. C. Yoder, and R. J. Chan, “Murine embryonic stem cell differentiation is promoted by SOCS-3 and inhibited by the zinc finger transcription factor Klf4,” Blood, vol. 105, no. 2, pp. 635–637, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  105. S. Parisi, F. Passaro, L. Aloia et al., “Klf5 is involved in self-renewal of mouse embryonic stem cells,” Journal of Cell Science, vol. 121, no. 16, pp. 2629–2634, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  106. M. Nakagawa, M. Koyanagi, K. Tanabe et al., “Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells without Myc from mouse and human fibroblasts,” Nature Biotechnology, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 101–106, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  107. I. Aksoy, V. Giudice, E. Delahaye et al., “Klf4 and Klf5 differentially inhibit mesoderm and endoderm differentiation in embryonic stem cells,” Nature Communications, vol. 5, article 3719, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  108. J. A. Segre, C. Bauer, and E. Fuchs, “Klf4 is a transcription factor required for establishing the barrier function of the skin,” Nature Genetics, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 356–360, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  109. T. Yoshida, Q. Gan, A. S. Franke et al., “Smooth and cardiac muscle-selective knock-out of Krüppel-like factor 4 causes postnatal death and growth retardation,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 285, no. 27, pp. 21175–21184, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  110. S.-C. J. Lin, M. A. Wani, J. A. Whitsett, and J. M. Wells, “Klf5 regulates lineage formation in the pre-implantation mouse embryo,” Development, vol. 137, no. 23, pp. 3953–3963, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  111. A. Gagliardi, N. P. Mullin, Z. Ying Tan et al., “A direct physical interaction between Nanog and Sox2 regulates embryonic stem cell self-renewal,” The EMBO Journal, vol. 32, no. 16, pp. 2231–2247, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  112. T. Kuroda, M. Tada, H. Kubota et al., “Octamer and sox elements are required for transcriptional cis regulation of Nanog gene expression,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 2475–2485, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  113. K. Mitsui, Y. Tokuzawa, H. Itoh et al., “The homeoprotein nanog is required for maintenance of pluripotency in mouse epiblast and ES cells,” Cell, vol. 113, no. 5, pp. 631–642, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  114. I. Chambers, D. Colby, M. Robertson et al., “Functional expression cloning of Nanog, a pluripotency sustaining factor in embryonic stem cells,” Cell, vol. 113, no. 5, pp. 643–655, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  115. I. Chambers, J. Silva, D. Colby et al., “Nanog safeguards pluripotency and mediates germline development,” Nature, vol. 450, no. 7173, pp. 1230–1234, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  116. D. A. Faddah, H. Wang, A. W. Cheng, Y. Katz, Y. Buganim, and R. Jaenisch, “Single-cell analysis reveals that expression of nanog is biallelic and equally variable as that of other pluripotency factors in mouse ESCs,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 23–29, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  117. A. Filipczyk, K. Gkatzis, J. Fu et al., “Biallelic expression of nanog protein in mouse embryonic stem cells,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 12–13, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  118. A. Suzuki, Á. Raya, Y. Kawakami et al., “Maintenance of embryonic stem cell pluripotency by Nanog-mediated reversal of mesoderm specification,” Nature Clinical Practice Cardiovascular Medicine, vol. 3, supplement 1, pp. S114–S122, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  119. A. Suzuki, Á. Raya, Y. Kawakami et al., “Nanog binds to Smad1 and blocks bone morphogenetic protein-induced differentiation of embryonic stem cells,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 103, no. 27, pp. 10294–10299, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  120. X. Chen, H. Xu, P. Yuan et al., “Integration of external signaling pathways with the core transcriptional network in embryonic stem cells,” Cell, vol. 133, no. 6, pp. 1106–1117, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  121. D. M. Messerschmidt and R. Kemler, “Nanog is required for primitive endoderm formation through a non-cell autonomous mechanism,” Developmental Biology, vol. 344, no. 1, pp. 129–137, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  122. H. Ochiai, T. Sugawara, T. Sakuma, and T. Yamamoto, “Stochastic promoter activation affects Nanog expression variability in mouse embryonic stem cells,” Scientific Reports, vol. 4, article 7125, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  123. L. T. Sun, S. Yamaguchi, K. Hirano, T. Ichisaka, T. Kuroda, and T. Tada, “Nanog co-regulated by Nodal/Smad2 and Oct4 is required for pluripotency in developing mouse epiblast,” Developmental Biology, vol. 392, no. 2, pp. 182–192, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  124. D. L. C. van den Berg, W. Zhang, A. Yates et al., “Estrogen-related receptor beta interacts with Oct4 to positively regulate Nanog gene expression,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 28, no. 19, pp. 5986–5995, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  125. M. Sakaki-Yumoto, J. Liu, M. Ramalho-Santos, N. Yoshida, and R. Derynck, “Smad2 is essential for maintenance of the human and mouse primed pluripotent stem cell state,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 288, no. 25, pp. 18546–18560, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  126. L. Vallier, S. Mendjan, S. Brown et al., “Activin/Nodal signalling maintains pluripotency by controlling Nanog expression,” Development, vol. 136, no. 8, pp. 1339–1349, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  127. S. Bessonnard, L. D. Mot, D. Gonze et al., “Gata6, Nanog and Erk signaling control cell fate in the inner cell mass through a tristable regulatory network,” Development, vol. 141, no. 19, pp. 3637–3648, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  128. K. Q. Cai, C. D. Capo-Chichi, M. E. Rula, D.-H. Yang, and X.-X. M. Xu, “Dynamic GATA6 expression in primitive endoderm formation and maturation in early mouse embryogenesis,” Developmental Dynamics, vol. 237, no. 10, pp. 2820–2829, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  129. S. A. Morris, R. T. Y. Teo, H. Li, P. Robson, D. M. Glover, and M. Zernicka-Goetz, “Origin and formation of the first two distinct cell types of the inner cell mass in the mouse embryo,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 107, no. 14, pp. 6364–6369, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  130. S. Frankenberg, F. Gerbe, S. Bessonnard et al., “Primitive endoderm differentiates via a three-step mechanism involving Nanog and RTK signaling,” Developmental Cell, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 1005–1013, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  131. P. Xenopoulos, M. Kang, A. Puliafito, S. Di Talia, and A. Hadjantonakis, “Heterogeneities in nanog expression drive stable commitment to pluripotency in the mouse blastocyst,” Cell Reports, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 1508–1520, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  132. A. Bertero, P. Madrigal, A. Galli et al., “Activin/Nodal signaling and NANOG orchestrate human embryonic stem cell fate decisions by controlling the H3K4me3 chromatin mark,” Genes & Development, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 702–717, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  133. S. Brown, T. E. O. Adrian, S. Pauklin et al., “Activin/nodal signaling controls divergent transcriptional networks in human embryonic stem cells and in endoderm progenitors,” Stem Cells, vol. 29, no. 8, pp. 1176–1185, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  134. A. K. K. Teo, S. J. Arnold, M. W. B. Trotter et al., “Pluripotency factors regulate definitive endoderm specification through eomesodermin,” Genes and Development, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 238–250, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  135. J.-L. Chew, Y.-H. Loh, W. Zhang et al., “Reciprocal transcriptional regulation of Pou5f1 and Sox2 via the Oct4/Sox2 complex in embryonic stem cells,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 25, no. 14, pp. 6031–6046, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  136. H. Yuan, N. Corbi, C. Basilico, and L. Dailey, “Developmental-specific activity of the FGF-4 enhancer requires the synergistic action of Sox2 and Oct-3,” Genes and Development, vol. 9, no. 21, pp. 2635–2645, 1995. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  137. A. P. Russ, S. Wattler, W. H. Colledge et al., “Eomesodermin is required for mouse trophoblast development and mesoderm formation,” Nature, vol. 404, no. 6773, pp. 95–99, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  138. A. A. Avilion, S. K. Nicolis, L. H. Pevny, L. Perez, N. Vivian, and R. Lovell-Badge, “Multipotent cell lineages in early mouse development depend on SOX2 function,” Genes and Development, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 126–140, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  139. M. Keramari, J. Razavi, K. A. Ingman et al., “Sox2 is essential for formation of trophectoderm in the preimplantation embryo,” PLoS ONE, vol. 5, no. 11, Article ID e13952, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  140. A. L. M. Ferri, M. Cavallaro, D. Braida et al., “Sox2 deficiency causes neurodegeneration and impaired neurogenesis in the adult mouse brain,” Development, vol. 131, no. 15, pp. 3805–3819, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  141. C.-I. Tai and Q.-L. Ying, “Gbx2, a LIF/Stat3 target, promotes reprogramming to and retention of the pluripotent ground state,” Journal of Cell Science, vol. 126, no. 5, pp. 1093–1098, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  142. J. Rathjen, J.-A. Lake, M. D. Bettess, J. M. Washington, G. Chapman, and P. D. Rathjen, “Formation of a primitive ectoderm like cell population, EPL cells, from ES cells in response to biologically derived factors,” Journal of Cell Science, vol. 112, no. 5, pp. 601–612, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  143. K. M. Wassarman, M. Lewandoski, K. Campbell et al., “Specification of the anterior hindbrain and establishment of a normal mid/hindbrain organizer is dependent on Gbx2 gene function,” Development, vol. 124, no. 15, pp. 2923–2934, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  144. A. Bulfone, L. Puelles, M. H. Porteus, M. A. Frohman, G. R. Martin, and J. L. R. Rubenstein, “Spatially restricted expression of Dlx-1, Dlx-2 (Tes-1), Gbx-2, and Wnt-3 in the embryonic day 12.5 mouse forebrain defines potential transverse and longitudinal segmental boundaries,” Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 3155–3172, 1993. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  145. N. A. Byrd and E. N. Meyers, “Loss of Gbx2 results in neural crest cell patterning and pharyngeal arch artery defects in the mouse embryo,” Developmental Biology, vol. 284, no. 1, pp. 233–245, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  146. J. Y. H. Li and A. L. Joyner, “Otx2 and Gbx2 are required for refinement and not induction of mid-hindbrain gene expression,” Development, vol. 128, no. 24, pp. 4979–4991, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  147. Q. Wu, X. Chen, J. Zhang et al., “Sall4 interacts with Nanog and co-occupies Nanog genomic sites in embryonic stem cells,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 281, no. 34, pp. 24090–24094, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  148. U. Elling, C. Klasen, T. Eisenberger, K. Anlag, and M. Treier, “Murine inner cell mass-derived lineages depend on Sall4 function,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 103, no. 44, pp. 16319–16324, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  149. N. Tanimura, M. Saito, M. Ebisuya, E. Nishida, and F. Ishikawa, “Stemness-related factor Sall4 interacts with transcription factors Oct-3/4 and Sox2 and occupies Oct-Sox elements in mouse embryonic stem cells,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 288, no. 7, pp. 5027–5038, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  150. J. Yang, C. Gao, L. Chai, and Y. Ma, “A novel SALL4/OCT4 transcriptional feedback network for pluripotency of embryonic stem cells,” PLoS ONE, vol. 5, no. 5, Article ID e10766, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  151. J. Lu, H. Jeong, N. Kong et al., “Stem cell factor SALL4 represses the transcriptions of PTEN and SALL1 through an epigenetic repressor complex,” PLoS ONE, vol. 4, no. 5, Article ID e5577, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  152. M. Koutsourakis, A. Langeveld, R. Patient, R. Beddington, and F. Grosveld, “The transcription factor GATA6 is essential for early extraembryonic development,” Development, vol. 126, no. 4, pp. 723–732, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  153. C. Y. Lim, W.-L. Tam, J. Zhang et al., “Sall4 regulates distinct transcription circuitries in different blastocyst-derived stem cell lineages,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 3, no. 5, pp. 543–554, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  154. J. Zhang, W.-L. Tam, G. Q. Tong et al., “Sall4 modulates embryonic stem cell pluripotency and early embryonic development by the transcriptional regulation of Pou5f1,” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 1114–1123, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  155. S. Yuri, S. Fujimura, K. Nimura et al., “Sall4 is essential for stabilization, but not for pluripotency, of embryonic stem cells by repressing aberrant trophectoderm gene expression,” Stem Cells, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 796–805, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  156. M. Sakaki-Yumoto, C. Kobayashi, A. Sato et al., “The murine homolog of SALL4, a causative gene in Okihiro syndrome, is essential for embryonic stem cell proliferation, and cooperates with Sall1 in anorectal, heart, brain and kidney development,” Development, vol. 133, no. 15, pp. 3005–3013, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  157. M. Warren, W. Wang, S. Spiden et al., “A Sall4 mutant mouse model useful for studying the role of Sall4 in early embryonic development and organogenesis,” Genesis, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 51–58, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  158. B. Feng, J. Jiang, P. Kraus et al., “Reprogramming of fibroblasts into induced pluripotent stem cells with orphan nuclear receptor Esrrb,” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 197–203, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  159. N. Festuccia, R. Osorno, F. Halbritter et al., “Esrrb is a direct Nanog target gene that can substitute for Nanog function in pluripotent cells,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 477–490, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  160. X. Zhang, J. Zhang, T. Wang, M. A. Esteban, and D. Pei, “Esrrb activates Oct4 transcription and sustains self-renewal and pluripotency in embryonic stem cells,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 283, no. 51, pp. 35825–35833, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  161. J.-C. Yeo, J. Jiang, Z.-Y. Tan et al., “Klf2 is an essential factor that sustains ground state pluripotency,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 864–872, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  162. N. Ivanova, R. Dobrin, R. Lu et al., “Dissecting self-renewal in stem cells with RNA interference,” Nature, vol. 442, no. 7102, pp. 533–538, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  163. J. Luo, R. Sladek, J.-A. Bader, A. Matthyssen, J. Rossant, and V. Giguère, “Placental abnormalities in mouse embryos lacking the orphan nuclear receptor ERR-β,” Nature, vol. 388, no. 6644, pp. 778–782, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  164. Y. Ohinata and T. Tsukiyama, “Establishment of trophoblast stem cells under defined culture conditions in mice,” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 9, Article ID e107308, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  165. K. M. Loh and B. Lim, “A precarious balance: pluripotency factors as lineage specifiers,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 363–369, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  166. K. Uranishi, T. Akagi, C. Sun, H. Koide, and T. Yokota, “Dax1 associates with Esrrb and regulates its function in embryonic stem cells,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 33, no. 10, pp. 2056–2066, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  167. J. Rohwedel, K. Guan, and A. M. Wobus, “Induction of cellular differentiation by retinoic acid in vitro,” Cells Tissues Organs, vol. 165, no. 3-4, pp. 190–202, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  168. K. B. Scotland, S. Chen, R. Sylvester, and L. J. Gudas, “Analysis of Rex1 (zfp42) function in embryonic stem cell differentiation,” Developmental Dynamics, vol. 238, no. 8, pp. 1863–1877, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  169. W. Shi, H. Wang, G. Pan, Y. Geng, Y. Guo, and D. Pei, “Regulation of the pluripotency marker Rex-1 by Nanog and Sox2,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 281, no. 33, pp. 23319–23325, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  170. J. R. Thompson and L. J. Gudas, “Retinoic acid induces parietal endoderm but not primitive endoderm and visceral endoderm differentiation in F9 teratocarcinoma stem cells with a targeted deletion of the Rex-1 (Zfp-42) gene,” Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology, vol. 195, no. 1-2, pp. 119–133, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  171. E. Ben-Shushan, J. R. Thompson, L. J. Gudas, and Y. Bergman, “Rex-1, a gene encoding a transcription factor expressed in the early embryo, is regulated via Oct-3/4 and Oct-6 binding to an octamer site and a novel protein, Rox-1, binding to an adjacent site,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 1866–1878, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  172. S. Masui, S. Ohtsuka, R. Yagi, K. Takahashi, M. S. H. Ko, and H. Niwa, “Rex1/Zfp42 is dispensable for pluripotency in mouse ES cells,” BMC Developmental Biology, vol. 8, article 45, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  173. M. B. Rogers, B. A. Hosler, and L. J. Gudas, “Specific expression of a retinoic acid-regulated, zinc-finger gene, Rex-1, in preimplantation embryos, trophoblast and spermatocytes,” Development, vol. 113, no. 3, pp. 815–824, 1991. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  174. Y. Toyooka, D. Shimosato, K. Murakami, K. Takahashi, and H. Niwa, “Identification and characterization of subpopulations in undifferentiated ES cell culture,” Development, vol. 135, no. 5, pp. 909–918, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  175. J.-Z. Zhang, W. Gao, H.-B. Yang, B. Zhang, Z.-Y. Zhu, and Y.-F. Xue, “Screening for genes essential for mouse embryonic stem cell self-renewal using a subtractive RNA interference library,” Stem Cells, vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 2661–2668, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  176. M. Climent, S. Alonso-Martin, R. Pérez-Palacios et al., “Functional analysis of rex1 during preimplantation development,” Stem Cells and Development, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 459–472, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  177. D. Guallar, R. Pérez-Palacios, M. Climent et al., “Expression of endogenous retroviruses is negatively regulated by the pluripotency marker Rex1/Zfp42,” Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 40, no. 18, pp. 8993–9007, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  178. G. Hu and P. A. Wade, “NuRD and pluripotency: a complex balancing act,” Cell Stem Cell, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 497–503, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  179. K. Kaji, I. M. Caballero, R. MacLeod, J. Nichols, V. A. Wilson, and B. Hendrich, “The NuRD component Mbd3 is required for pluripotency of embryonic stem cells,” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 285–292, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  180. J. Ramírez and J. Hagman, “The Mi-2/NuRD complex: a critical epigenetic regulator of hematopoietic development, differentiation and cancer,” Epigenetics, vol. 4, no. 8, pp. 532–536, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  181. Y. Rais, A. Zviran, S. Geula et al., “Deterministic direct reprogramming of somatic cells to pluripotency,” Nature, vol. 502, no. 7469, pp. 65–70, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  182. D. Zhu, J. Fang, Y. Li, and J. Zhang, “Mbd3, a component of NuRD/Mi-2 complex, helps maintain pluripotency of mouse embryonic stem cells by repressing trophectoderm differentiation,” PLoS ONE, vol. 4, no. 11, Article ID e7684, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  183. J. J. Kim, O. Khalid, S. Vo, H.-H. Sun, D. T. W. Wong, and Y. Kim, “A novel regulatory factor recruits the nucleosome remodeling complex to wingless integrated (Wnt) signaling gene promoters in mouse embryonic stem cells,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 287, no. 49, pp. 41103–41117, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  184. B. Hendrich, J. Guy, B. Ramsahoye, V. A. Wilson, and A. Bird, “Closely related proteins MBD2 and MBD3 play distinctive but interacting roles in mouse development,” Genes & Development, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 710–723, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus