Figure 4
Figure 4. Regulation of hPSC hemogenic precursor specification by Notch signaling. (A-B) Effect of Jag1-mediated Notch activation on hemogenic precursor specification of hESCs. Increased frequency (A, 63.1 ± 15.6% vs 29.6 ± 4.5%) and total number (B, 11 ± 3.2 × 104 cells vs 4.4 ± 0.4 × 104 cells) of hemogenic precursors were observed in hEBs treated with Jag1 relative to controls on day 10. In contrast, on day 15, the frequency (A, 29.7 ± 10.8% vs 55.1 ± 10.6%) and total number (B, 5.3 ± 2.5 × 104 cells vs 9.1 ± 1.2 × 104 cells) of hemogenic precursors in Jag1-treated hEBs had significantly decreased. *P < .05 (n = 3). (C-D) Effect of GSI on the emergence of hemogenic precursors during hEB development. hEBs treated with a GSI showed decreased frequency (C, 1.58 ± 1.36% vs 7.08 ± 1.08%) and total number (D, 5.2 ± 4.1 × 103 cells vs 29.6 ± 8.0 × 103 cells) of hemogenic precursor relative to controls on day 10. *P < .05 (n = 3). (E) GSI inhibited hemogenic precursor augmentation from hEBs formed with hFib-iPSCs (24.3 ± 1.1 × 103 cells vs 39.6 ± 1.2 × 103 cells). *P < .05 (n = 3). (F-I) Effect of Notch signaling on the emergence of hemogenic precursors from hESCs was confirmed by colocalization of PECAM1 with Notch1 (F-G) and HES1 (H-I) by immunofluorescence. Day 10 hEBs stimulated by Jag1 (G,I) were compared with control hEBs (F,H). In EBs stimulated with Jag1, the majority of Notch1+ cells (G) and HES1+ cells (I) coexpressed hemogenic precursor marker PECAM1 (white arrowhead), whereas lower numbers of PECAM1+ cells (red arrowheads) are predominant in control hEBs. Scale bars represent 100 μm. (J) HES1 knockdown during hematopoietic hEB development impaired hemogenic precursor specification. HES1 siRNA–treated hEBs exhibited reduced numbers of hemogenic precursors compared with the scrambled siRNA control (27.6 ± 7.4 × 103 cells vs 52.1 ± 7.1 × 103 cells). *P < .05 (n = 3).

Regulation of hPSC hemogenic precursor specification by Notch signaling. (A-B) Effect of Jag1-mediated Notch activation on hemogenic precursor specification of hESCs. Increased frequency (A, 63.1 ± 15.6% vs 29.6 ± 4.5%) and total number (B, 11 ± 3.2 × 104 cells vs 4.4 ± 0.4 × 104 cells) of hemogenic precursors were observed in hEBs treated with Jag1 relative to controls on day 10. In contrast, on day 15, the frequency (A, 29.7 ± 10.8% vs 55.1 ± 10.6%) and total number (B, 5.3 ± 2.5 × 104 cells vs 9.1 ± 1.2 × 104 cells) of hemogenic precursors in Jag1-treated hEBs had significantly decreased. *P < .05 (n = 3). (C-D) Effect of GSI on the emergence of hemogenic precursors during hEB development. hEBs treated with a GSI showed decreased frequency (C, 1.58 ± 1.36% vs 7.08 ± 1.08%) and total number (D, 5.2 ± 4.1 × 103 cells vs 29.6 ± 8.0 × 103 cells) of hemogenic precursor relative to controls on day 10. *P < .05 (n = 3). (E) GSI inhibited hemogenic precursor augmentation from hEBs formed with hFib-iPSCs (24.3 ± 1.1 × 103 cells vs 39.6 ± 1.2 × 103 cells). *P < .05 (n = 3). (F-I) Effect of Notch signaling on the emergence of hemogenic precursors from hESCs was confirmed by colocalization of PECAM1 with Notch1 (F-G) and HES1 (H-I) by immunofluorescence. Day 10 hEBs stimulated by Jag1 (G,I) were compared with control hEBs (F,H). In EBs stimulated with Jag1, the majority of Notch1+ cells (G) and HES1+ cells (I) coexpressed hemogenic precursor marker PECAM1 (white arrowhead), whereas lower numbers of PECAM1+ cells (red arrowheads) are predominant in control hEBs. Scale bars represent 100 μm. (J) HES1 knockdown during hematopoietic hEB development impaired hemogenic precursor specification. HES1 siRNA–treated hEBs exhibited reduced numbers of hemogenic precursors compared with the scrambled siRNA control (27.6 ± 7.4 × 103 cells vs 52.1 ± 7.1 × 103 cells). *P < .05 (n = 3).

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal