Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Forcing cells to change lineages

Abstract

The ability to produce stem cells by induced pluripotency (iPS reprogramming) has rekindled an interest in earlier studies showing that transcription factors can directly convert specialized cells from one lineage to another. Lineage reprogramming has become a powerful tool to study cell fate choice during differentiation, akin to inducing mutations for the discovery of gene functions. The lessons learnt provide a rubric for how cells may be manipulated for therapeutic purposes.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Examples of transcription factor overexpression or ablation experiments that result in cell fate changes.
Figure 2: Conversion of endothelial cells into haematopoietic cells.
Figure 3: Transcription factor cross-antagonism: the PU.1:GATA1 paradigm.
Figure 4: Timing of transcription factor expression and lineage outcome.
Figure 5: Transcription factor cross-antagonisms in a cascading landscape of unstable and stable cell states.

References

  1. 1

    Blau, H. M. How fixed is the differentiated state? Lessons from heterokaryons. Trends Genet. 5, 268–272 (1989)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Davis, R. L., Weintraub, H. & Lassar, A. B. Expression of a single transfected cDNA converts fibroblasts to myoblasts. Cell 51, 987–1000 (1987)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Kulessa, H., Frampton, J. & Graf, T. GATA-1 reprograms avian myelomonocytic cell lines into eosinophils, thromboblasts, and erythroblasts. Genes Dev. 9, 1250–1262 (1995)This paper, together with refs 19 and 20, established the principle of transcription factor cross-antagonisms.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Gurdon, J. B. & Byrne, J. A. The first half-century of nuclear transplantation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 8048–8052 (2003)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Wilmut, I., Schnieke, A. E., McWhir, J., Kind, A. J. & Campbell, K. H. Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Nature 385, 810–813 (1997)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Gurdon, J. B. & Melton, D. A. Nuclear reprogramming in cells. Science 322, 1811–1815 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Hochedlinger, K. & Jaenisch, R. Monoclonal mice generated by nuclear transfer from mature B and T donor cells. Nature 415, 1035–1038 (2002)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Takahashi, K. & Yamanaka, S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell 126, 663–676 (2006)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Slack, J. M. Metaplasia and transdifferentiation: from pure biology to the clinic. Nature Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 8, 369–378 (2007)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Yang, J. & Weinberg, R. A. Epithelial-mesenchymal transition: at the crossroads of development and tumor metastasis. Dev. Cell 14, 818–829 (2008)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Kragl, M. et al. Cells keep a memory of their tissue origin during axolotl limb regeneration. Nature 460, 60–65 (2009)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Chen, M. J., Yokomizo, T., Zeigler, B. M., Dzierzak, E. & Speck, N. A. Runx1 is required for the endothelial to haematopoietic cell transition but not thereafter. Nature 457, 887–891 (2009)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Lancrin, C. et al. The haemangioblast generates haematopoietic cells through a haemogenic endothelium stage. Nature 457, 892–895 (2009)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Dzierzak, E. & Speck, N. A. Of lineage and legacy: the development of mammalian hematopoietic stem cells. Nature Immunol. 9, 129–136 (2008)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Eilken, H. M., Nishikawa, S. & Schroeder, T. Continuous single-cell imaging of blood generation from haemogenic endothelium. Nature 457, 896–900 (2009)An example of ‘transdifferentiation’ in the context of normal lineage progression; also highlights how real-time visualization may show cell fate conversions that are otherwise hard to document.

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Adamo, L. et al. Biomechanical forces promote embryonic haematopoiesis. Nature 459, 1131–1135 (2009)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    North, T. E. et al. Hematopoietic stem cell development is dependent on blood flow. Cell 137, 736–748 (2009)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Zhou, Q. & Melton, D. A. Extreme makeover: converting one cell into another. Cell Stem Cell 3, 382–388 (2008)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Visvader, J. E., Elefanty, A. G., Strasser, A. & Adams, J. M. GATA-1 but not SCL induces megakaryocytic differentiation in an early myeloid line. EMBO J. 11, 4557–4564 (1992)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Nerlov, C. & Graf, T. PU.1 induces myeloid lineage commitment in multipotent hematopoietic progenitors. Genes Dev. 12, 2403–2412 (1998)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Heyworth, C., Pearson, S., May, G. & Enver, T. Transcription factor-mediated lineage switching reveals plasticity in primary committed progenitor cells. EMBO J. 21, 3770–3781 (2002)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Zhang, P. et al. Enhancement of hematopoietic stem cell repopulating capacity and self-renewal in the absence of the transcription factor C/EBPα. Immunity 21, 853–863 (2004)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Xie, H., Ye, M., Feng, R. & Graf, T. Stepwise reprogramming of B cells into macrophages. Cell 117, 663–676 (2004)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Laiosa, C. V., Stadtfeld, M., Xie, H., de Andres-Aguayo, L. & Graf, T. Reprogramming of committed T cell progenitors to macrophages and dendritic cells by C/EBPα and PU.1 transcription factors. Immunity 25, 731–744 (2006)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Arinobu, Y. et al. Reciprocal activation of GATA-1 and PU.1 marks initial specification of hematopoietic stem cells into myeloerythroid and myelolymphoid lineages. Cell Stem Cell 1, 416–427 (2007)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Iwasaki, H. & Akashi, K. Myeloid lineage commitment from the hematopoietic stem cell. Immunity 26, 726–740 (2007)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Okuno, Y. et al. Potential autoregulation of transcription factor PU.1 by an upstream regulatory element. Mol. Cell. Biol. 25, 2832–2845 (2005)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Yu, C. et al. Targeted deletion of a high-affinity GATA-binding site in the GATA-1 promoter leads to selective loss of the eosinophil lineage in vivo . J. Exp. Med. 195, 1387–1395 (2002)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Ptashne, M. A Genetic Switch. Phage Lambda Revisited 3rd edn (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2004)

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    Cantor, A. B. & Orkin, S. H. Hematopoietic development: a balancing act. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 11, 513–519 (2001)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. 31

    Graf, T. Differentiation plasticity of hematopoietic cells. Blood 99, 3089–3101 (2002)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. 32

    Orkin, S. H. & Zon, L. I. Hematopoiesis: an evolving paradigm for stem cell biology. Cell 132, 631–644 (2008)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. 33

    Zhang, P. et al. Negative cross-talk between hematopoietic regulators: GATA proteins repress PU.1. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96, 8705–8710 (1999)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. 34

    Stopka, T., Amanatullah, D. F., Papetti, M. & Skoultchi, A. I. PU.1 inhibits the erythroid program by binding to GATA-1 on DNA and creating a repressive chromatin structure. EMBO J. 24, 3712–3723 (2005)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. 35

    Rhodes, J. et al. Interplay of Pu.1 and Gata1 determines myelo-erythroid progenitor cell fate in zebrafish. Dev. Cell 8, 97–108 (2005) In vivo evidence for the importance of GATA1:PU.1 interplay in lineage specification.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. 36

    Galloway, J. L., Wingert, R. A., Thisse, C., Thisse, B. & Zon, L. I. Loss of Gata1 but not Gata2 converts erythropoiesis to myelopoiesis in zebrafish embryos. Dev. Cell 8, 109–116 (2005)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. 37

    Warga, R. M., Kane, D. A. & Ho, R. K. Fate mapping embryonic blood in zebrafish: multi- and unipotential lineages are segregated at gastrulation. Dev. Cell 16, 744–755 (2009)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. 38

    Nutt, S. L., Heavey, B., Rolink, A. G. & Busslinger, M. Commitment to the B-lymphoid lineage depends on the transcription factor Pax5. Nature 401, 556–562 (1999)

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. 39

    Cobaleda, C., Jochum, W. & Busslinger, M. Conversion of mature B cells into T cells by dedifferentiation to uncommitted progenitors. Nature 449, 473–477 (2007)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. 40

    Rothenberg, E. V. Cell lineage regulators in B and T cell development. Nature Immunol. 8, 441–444 (2007)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. 41

    Davidson, E. H. & Levine, M. S. Properties of developmental gene regulatory networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 20063–20066 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. 42

    Zhou, L. et al. TGF-β-induced Foxp3 inhibits TH17 cell differentiation by antagonizing RORγt function. Nature 453, 236–240 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. 43

    Rieger, M. A., Hoppe, P. S., Smejkal, B. M., Eitelhuber, A. C. & Schroeder, T. Hematopoietic cytokines can instruct lineage choice. Science 325, 217–218 (2009)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. 44

    Sarrazin, S. et al. MafB restricts M-CSF-dependent myeloid commitment divisions of hematopoietic stem cells. Cell 138, 300–313 (2009)An example of how extrinsic signals may act through intrinsic regulators to specify lineage fates; ref. 57 addresses a similar issue from a mathematical modelling perspective.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. 45

    Smith, J., Wardle, F., Loose, M., Stanley, E. & Patient, R. Germ layer induction in ESC–following the vertebrate roadmap. Curr. Protocols Stem Cell Biol. 1, 1D.1.1–1D.1.22 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  46. 46

    Iwasaki, H. et al. The order of expression of transcription factors directs hierarchical specification of hematopoietic lineages. Genes Dev. 20, 3010–3021 (2006)Showed that the order of transcription factor expression can induce different cell fates.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. 47

    Sieweke, M. H. & Graf, T. A transcription factor party during blood cell differentiation. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 8, 545–551 (1998)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. 48

    Waddington, C. H. The Strategy of the Genes (Allen & Unwin, 1957)

    Google Scholar 

  49. 49

    Kauffman, S. Metabolic stability and epigenesis in randomly constructed genetic nets. J. Theor. Biol. 22, 437–467 (1969)

    MathSciNet  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. 50

    Kauffman, S. Origins of Order: Self-organization and Selection in Evolution (Oxford Univ. Press, 1993)

    Google Scholar 

  51. 51

    Enver, T., Pera, M., Peterson, C. & Andrews, P. W. Stem cell states, fates, and the rules of attraction. Cell Stem Cell 4, 387–397 (2009)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. 52

    Hu, M. et al. Multilineage gene expression precedes commitment in the hemopoietic system. Genes Dev. 11, 774–785 (1997)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. 53

    Miyamoto, T. et al. Myeloid or lymphoid promiscuity as a critical step in hematopoietic lineage commitment. Dev. Cell 3, 137–147 (2002)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. 54

    Månsson, R. et al. Molecular evidence for hierarchical transcriptional lineage priming in fetal and adult stem cells and multipotent progenitors. Immunity 26, 407–419 (2007)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. 55

    Enver, T., Heyworth, C. M. & Dexter, T. M. Do stem cells play dice? Blood 92, 348–351,–352 (1998)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. 56

    Graf, T. & Stadtfeld, M. Heterogeneity of embryonic and adult stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 3, 480–483 (2008)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. 57

    Chambers, I. et al. Nanog safeguards pluripotency and mediates germline development. Nature 450, 1230–1234 (2007)

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. 58

    Chickarmane, V., Enver, T. & Peterson, C. Computational modeling of the hematopoietic erythroid-myeloid switch reveals insights into cooperativity, priming, and irreversibility. PLoS Comput. Biol. 5, e1000268 (2009)

    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. 59

    Huang, S., Guo, Y. P., May, G. & Enver, T. Bifurcation dynamics in lineage-commitment in bipotent progenitor cells. Dev. Biol. 305, 695–713 (2007)Refs 57, 58 and 59 highlight how mathematical modelling of cross-antagonistic circuits illuminates their dynamic behaviour and capacity to effect stable lineage choice decisions.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. 60

    Roeder, I. & Glauche, I. Towards an understanding of lineage specification in hematopoietic stem cells: a mathematical model for the interaction of transcription factors GATA-1 and PU.1. J. Theor. Biol. 241, 852–865 (2006)

    MathSciNet  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. 61

    Swiers, G., Patient, R. & Loose, M. Genetic regulatory networks programming hematopoietic stem cells and erythroid lineage specification. Dev. Biol. 294, 525–540 (2006)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. 62

    Laslo, P. et al. Multilineage transcriptional priming and determination of alternate hematopoietic cell fates. Cell 126, 755–766 (2006)An example of sequential cross-antagonistic switches in the specification of cell lineage.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. 63

    Frontelo, P. et al. Novel role for EKLF in megakaryocyte lineage commitment. Blood 110, 3871–3880 (2007)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. 64

    Hwang, E. S., Szabo, S. J., Schwartzberg, P. L. & Glimcher, L. H. T helper cell fate specified by kinase-mediated interaction of T-bet with GATA-3. Science 307, 430–433 (2005)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. 65

    Yechoor, V. et al. Neurogenin3 is sufficient for transdetermination of hepatic progenitor cells into neo-islets in vivo but not transdifferentiation of hepatocytes. Dev. Cell 16, 358–373 (2009)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. 66

    Zhou, Q., Brown, J., Kanarek, A., Rajagopal, J. & Melton, D. A. In vivo reprogramming of adult pancreatic exocrine cells to β-cells. Nature 455, 627–632 (2008)Showed that expression in the pancreas of a combination of three key regulators re-specifies one somatic cell type into another functional cell type, in vivo.

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. 67

    Starck, J. et al. Functional cross-antagonism between transcription factors FLI-1 and EKLF. Mol. Cell. Biol. 23, 1390–1402 (2003)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. 68

    Querfurth, E. et al. Antagonism between C/EBPβ and FOG in eosinophil lineage commitment of multipotent hematopoietic progenitors. Genes Dev. 14, 2515–2525 (2000)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. 69

    Kajimura, S. et al. Regulation of the brown and white fat gene programs through a PRDM16/CtBP transcriptional complex. Genes Dev. 22, 1397–1409 (2008)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. 70

    Heins, N. et al. Glial cells generate neurons: the role of the transcription factor Pax6. Nature Neurosci. 5, 308–315 (2002)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. 71

    Jessberger, S., Toni, N., Clemenson, G. D., Ray, J. & Gage, F. H. Directed differentiation of hippocampal stem/progenitor cells in the adult brain. Nature Neurosci. 11, 888–893 (2008)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. 72

    Gubbels, S. P., Woessner, D. W., Mitchell, J. C., Ricci, A. J. & Brigande, J. V. Functional auditory hair cells produced in the mammalian cochlea by in utero gene transfer. Nature 455, 537–541 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. 73

    Horb, M. E., Shen, C. N., Tosh, D. & Slack, J. M. Experimental conversion of liver to pancreas. Curr. Biol. 13, 105–115 (2003)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. 74

    Niwa, H. et al. Interaction between Oct3/4 and Cdx2 determines trophectoderm differentiation. Cell 123, 917–929 (2005)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. 75

    Ralston, A. & Rossant, J. Genetic regulation of stem cell origins in the mouse embryo. Clin. Genet. 68, 106–112 (2005)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. 76

    Aoi, T. et al. Generation of pluripotent stem cells from adult mouse liver and stomach cells. Science 321, 699–702 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. 77

    Stadtfeld, M., Brennand, K. & Hochedlinger, K. Reprogramming of pancreatic β cells into induced pluripotent stem cells. Curr. Biol. 18, 890–894 (2008)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. 78

    Hochedlinger, K. & Plath, K. Epigenetic reprogramming and induced pluripotency. Development 136, 509–523 (2009)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. 79

    Yamanaka, S. Elite and stochastic models for induced pluripotent stem cell generation. Nature 460, 49–52 (2009)

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. 80

    Kim, J. B. et al. Oct4-induced pluripotency in adult neural stem cells. Cell 136, 411–419 (2009)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. 81

    Loh, Y. H., Zhang, W., Chen, X., George, J. & Ng, H. H. Jmjd1a and Jmjd2c histone H3 Lys 9 demethylases regulate self-renewal in embryonic stem cells. Genes Dev. 21, 2545–2557 (2007)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. 82

    Bernstein, B. E. et al. A bivalent chromatin structure marks key developmental genes in embryonic stem cells. Cell 125, 315–326 (2006)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. 83

    Ying, Q. L. et al. The ground state of embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Nature 453, 519–523 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. 84

    Alon, U. An Introduction to Systems Biology. Design Principles of Biological Circuits (Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  85. 85

    Chickarmane, V., Troein, C., Nuber, U. A., Sauro, H. M. & Peterson, C. Transcriptional dynamics of the embryonic stem cell switch. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2, e123 (2006)

    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. 86

    Chickarmane, V. & Peterson, C. A computational model for understanding stem cell, trophectoderm and endoderm lineage determination. PLoS One 3, e3478 (2008)

    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. 87

    Chang, H. H., Hemberg, M., Barahona, M., Ingber, D. E. & Huang, S. Transcriptome-wide noise controls lineage choice in mammalian progenitor cells. Nature 453, 544–547 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. 88

    Boukamp, P., Chen, J., Gonzales, F., Jones, P. A. & Fusenig, N. E. Progressive stages of “transdifferentiation” from epidermal to mesenchymal phenotype induced by MyoD1 transfection, 5-aza-2′-deoxycytidine treatment, and selection for reduced cell attachment in the human keratinocyte line HaCaT. J. Cell Biol. 116, 1257–1271 (1992)

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. 89

    Feng, R. et al. PU.1 and C/EBPα/β convert fibroblasts into macrophage-like cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 6057–6062 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. 90

    Palermo, A. et al. Nuclear reprogramming in heterokaryons is rapid, extensive, and bidirectional. FASEB J. 23, 1431–1440 (2009)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  91. 91

    Singh, H., Medina, K. L. & Pongubala, J. M. Contingent gene regulatory networks and B cell fate specification. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 4949–4953 (2005)

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. 92

    Kitajima, K., Zheng, J., Yen, H., Sugiyama, D. & Nakano, T. Multipotential differentiation ability of GATA-1-null erythroid-committed cells. Genes Dev. 20, 654–659 (2006)

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  93. 93

    Judson, R. L., Babiarz, J. E., Venere, M. & Blelloch, R. Embryonic stem cell-specific microRNAs promote induced pluripotency. Nature Biotechnol. 27, 459–461 (2009)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. 94

    Takeuchi, J. K. & Bruneau, B. G. Directed transdifferentiation of mouse mesoderm to heart tissue by defined factors. Nature 459, 708–711 (2009)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  95. 95

    Viswanathan, S. R., Daley, G. Q. & Gregory, R. I. Selective blockade of microRNA processing by Lin28. Science 320, 97–100 (2008)

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  96. 96

    Feng, B., Ng, J. H., Heng, J. C. & Ng, H. H. Molecules that promote or enhance reprogramming of somatic cells to induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 4, 301–312 (2009)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. 97

    Collombat, P. et al. Opposing actions of Arx4 and Pax4 in endocrine pancreas development. Genes Dev. 15, 2591–2603 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  98. 98

    Lagha, M. et al. Pax3/7:Foxc2 reciprocal repression in the somite modulates multipotent cell fates. Dev. Cell (in the press)

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank J. Sharpe, C. Peterson, J. Brickman and D. Thieffry for feedback and suggestions. T.G. is an ICREA professor and T.E. is supported by an LRF specialist programme.

Author Contributions T.G. and T.E. together conceived the ideas encapsulated in the article and also drafted it jointly. Most of the figures were conceived by T.G. and modified by T.E.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Graf.

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Graf, T., Enver, T. Forcing cells to change lineages . Nature 462, 587–594 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08533

Download citation

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing