Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Newest Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Methods & Resources
    • Archive
    • Subjects
  • Collections
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • License, Copyright, Fee
    • FAQ
    • Why Submit
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editors & Staff
    • Board Members
    • Licensing and Reuse
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Privacy Policy
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
    • LSA LLC
  • Alerts
  • Other Publications
    • EMBO Press
    • The EMBO Journal
    • EMBO reports
    • EMBO Molecular Medicine
    • Molecular Systems Biology
    • Rockefeller University Press
    • Journal of Cell Biology
    • Journal of Experimental Medicine
    • Journal of General Physiology
    • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
    • Genes & Development
    • Genome Research

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Life Science Alliance
  • Other Publications
    • EMBO Press
    • The EMBO Journal
    • EMBO reports
    • EMBO Molecular Medicine
    • Molecular Systems Biology
    • Rockefeller University Press
    • Journal of Cell Biology
    • Journal of Experimental Medicine
    • Journal of General Physiology
    • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
    • Genes & Development
    • Genome Research
  • My alerts
Life Science Alliance

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Newest Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Methods & Resources
    • Archive
    • Subjects
  • Collections
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • License, Copyright, Fee
    • FAQ
    • Why Submit
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editors & Staff
    • Board Members
    • Licensing and Reuse
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Privacy Policy
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
    • LSA LLC
  • Alerts
  • Follow lsa Template on Twitter
Research Article
Source Data
Transparent Process
Open Access

Glycine cleavage system determines the fate of pluripotent stem cells via the regulation of senescence and epigenetic modifications

Shengya Tian, Junru Feng, Yang Cao, View ORCID ProfileShengqi Shen, Yongping Cai, View ORCID ProfileDongdong Yang, Ronghui Yan, Lihua Wang, Huafeng Zhang, Xiuying Zhong  Correspondence email, View ORCID ProfilePing Gao  Correspondence email
Shengya Tian
1School of Medicine and Institutes for Life Sciences, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China
2Hefei National Laboratory for Physical Sciences at Microscale, The Chinese Academy of Sciences Key Laboratory of Innate Immunity and Chronic Disease, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Division of Life Science and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Junru Feng
2Hefei National Laboratory for Physical Sciences at Microscale, The Chinese Academy of Sciences Key Laboratory of Innate Immunity and Chronic Disease, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Division of Life Science and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yang Cao
2Hefei National Laboratory for Physical Sciences at Microscale, The Chinese Academy of Sciences Key Laboratory of Innate Immunity and Chronic Disease, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Division of Life Science and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Shengqi Shen
2Hefei National Laboratory for Physical Sciences at Microscale, The Chinese Academy of Sciences Key Laboratory of Innate Immunity and Chronic Disease, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Division of Life Science and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Shengqi Shen
Yongping Cai
3Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dongdong Yang
2Hefei National Laboratory for Physical Sciences at Microscale, The Chinese Academy of Sciences Key Laboratory of Innate Immunity and Chronic Disease, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Division of Life Science and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Dongdong Yang
Ronghui Yan
2Hefei National Laboratory for Physical Sciences at Microscale, The Chinese Academy of Sciences Key Laboratory of Innate Immunity and Chronic Disease, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Division of Life Science and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lihua Wang
2Hefei National Laboratory for Physical Sciences at Microscale, The Chinese Academy of Sciences Key Laboratory of Innate Immunity and Chronic Disease, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Division of Life Science and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Huafeng Zhang
2Hefei National Laboratory for Physical Sciences at Microscale, The Chinese Academy of Sciences Key Laboratory of Innate Immunity and Chronic Disease, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Division of Life Science and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Xiuying Zhong
1School of Medicine and Institutes for Life Sciences, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: zhongxy@scut.edu.cn
Ping Gao
1School of Medicine and Institutes for Life Sciences, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China
2Hefei National Laboratory for Physical Sciences at Microscale, The Chinese Academy of Sciences Key Laboratory of Innate Immunity and Chronic Disease, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Division of Life Science and Medicine, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
4Guangzhou Regenerative Medicine and Health Guangdong Laboratory, Guangzhou, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ping Gao
  • For correspondence: pgao2@ustc.edu.cn
Published 27 September 2019. DOI: 10.26508/lsa.201900413
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • Metrics
  • Reviewer Comments
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Supplementary Materials
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1. The Gldc-mediated GCS is activated in PSCs and during somatic cell reprogramming.

    (A) The heat map from the RNA-seq analysis showed alterations in the expression of metabolic genes in mESCs and iPSCs relative to the expression of these genes in MEFs. The colours indicate the ln-transformed FPKM values. (B) Gene ontology term enrichment was assessed using the algorithm on the DAVID website. (C) RNA-seq analysis results comparing mESCs with MEFs and comparing iPSCs with MEFs. Each point represents the log2-transformed fold change for a given transcript. Genes significantly up-regulated in mESCs and iPSCs are annotated. (D) Schematic diagram of the glycine, serine, and threonine metabolism pathway. (E, F) qRT-PCR (E) and Western blot (F) analyses of the expression of the enzymes in glycine, serine, and threonine metabolic pathway in MEFs, mESCs, and iPSCs. ACTIN served as the loading control. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 compared with MEFs; t test. (G) qRT-PCR analysis of the expression of Gldc, endogenous Pou5f1, Sox2, and Nanog during reprogramming at the indicated times. The mRNA levels were normalized to the expression levels on day 0. *P < 0.05 compared with the expression levels on day 0; t test. (H) The enzymatic activity of the GCS was measured in MEFs, mESCs, and iPSCs. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 compared with MEFs; t test. (I) The enzymatic activity of the GCS was measured during reprogramming for the indicated times. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the activity on day 0; t test. (J) MEFs, mESCs, and iPSCs were first cultured in glycine starvation medium for 12 h, and the medium was then refreshed with medium containing 13C-labelled glycine. The amount of 13C-labelled glycine in the culture medium from MEFs, iPSCs, and mESCs was measured by GC/MS at the indicated time. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 compared with MEFs; t test. (K) The enzymatic activity of the GCS was measured in V6.5 cells stably expressing shGldc or nontargeting control (NTC) shRNAs. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test.

    Source data are available for this figure.

    Source Data for Figure 1[LSA-2019-00413_SdataF1.pdf]

  • Figure S1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S1. Gldc-mediated GCS activation occurs in PSCs or during somatic cell reprogramming.

    (A) List of the top 20 significantly differentially expressed genes between MEFs and mESCs or iPSCs. (B) Western blot analysis of the expression of GLDC during four factor–induced reprogramming at the indicated time points. ACTIN served as the loading control. (C) Western blot analysis of GLDC expression during three factor (Oct4, Sox2, and Klf4)–induced reprogramming at the indicated time points. ACTIN served as the loading control. qRT-PCR analysis of the expression of endogenous Pou5f1, Sox2, and Nanog during three factor (Oct4, Sox2, and Klf4)–induced reprogramming at the indicated time points. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. (D) Western blot analysis of GLDC expression during Oct4, Sox2, Nanog, and Lin28A–induced reprogramming at the indicated time points. ACTIN served as the loading control. qRT-PCR analysis of the expression of endogenous Pou5f1, Sox2, and Nanog during Oct4, Sox2, Nanog, and Lin28A–induced reprogramming at the indicated time points. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. (E) Western blot analysis of the expression of GLDC, OCT4, SOX2, and NANOG in V6.5 cells cultured in RA differentiation medium at the indicated time points. ACTIN served as the loading control.

    Source data are available for this figure.

    Source Data for Figure S1[LSA-2019-00413_SdataFS1.pdf]

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2. Sox2 and Lin28A cooperatively control Gldc expression.

    (A) qRT-PCR and Western blot analysis of the expression of Gldc in MEF cells overexpressing Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, c-Myc, Nanog, and Lin28A individually. ACTIN served as the loading control. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 compared with the EV control; t test. (B) qRT-PCR and Western blot analysis of the expression of Gldc in V6.5 cells stably expressing shSox2 or the NTC. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test. ACTIN served as the loading control. (C) ChIP-qPCR analysis of potential binding site occupancy by Sox2 in the Gldc promoter in V6.5 cells using IgG or anti-Sox2 antibody. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the IgG control; t test. (D) Schematic diagram showing the Sox2-binding fragment in the Gldc promoter. (E) HEK293 cells were cotransfected with pSIN-3×flag-Sox2 and pGL2-P-Gldc wild-type, pGL2-P-Gldc mutant, or pGL2-P-EV luciferase vectors. A dual luciferase assay was performed 48 h after transfection. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared between the indicated groups; t test. (F) Western blot analysed the expression of GLDC in V6.5 cells stably expressing shLin28A or NTC. ACTIN served as loading control. (G) RIP assay followed by qPCR analysed the interaction between Gldc mRNA and Lin28A. Pkm2 served as positive control, Acsl6 served as negative control. Data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with IgG; t test. (H) Western blot analysis of GLDC expression in Dgcr8−/− V6.5 cells stably expressing Lin28A wild-type, Lin28A-mutant, or empty vector (EV). ACTIN served as the loading control. (I) RIP assay was performed in V6.5 cells transfected with pSIN-3×flag-Lin28A wild-type, pSIN-3×flag-Lin28A mutant, or pSIN-3×flag-EV using anti-Flag antibody, followed by qPCR to investigate the interaction between Gldc mRNA and Lin28A. Pkm2 served as the positive control and Acsl6 served as the negative control. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with empty vector; #P < 0.05 compared with Lin28A wild-type; t test. (J) Mutants of Gldc used in the dual luciferase assay. (K) HEK293 cells were cotransfected with pSIN-3×flag-Lin28A and either pSI-check2-Gldc region 1/2/3, full-length Gldc, or pSI-check2-EV luciferase vectors. A dual luciferase assay was performed 48 h after transfection. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared between CTR; t test. (L) HEK293 cells were cotransfected with pSIN-3×flag-Lin28A and either pSI-check2-Gldc full-length, pSI-check2-Gldc full-length with region 1/2 deleted, or pSI-check2-EV luciferase vectors. A dual luciferase assay was performed 48 h after transfection. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared between the indicated groups, #P < 0.05 compared with pSI-check2-Gldc full-length; t test. (M) V6.5 cells were infected with viruses expressing shSox2 and shLin28A, followed by analysis of GLDC expression by Western blotting (left) and analysis of GCS enzymatic activity (right). ACTIN served as the loading control. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test.

    Source data are available for this figure.

    Source Data for Figure 2[LSA-2019-00413_SdataF2.pdf]

  • Figure S2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S2. Sox2 and Lin28A cooperatively control Gldc expression.

    (A) ChIP-seq results showing the Sox2-binding regions in the Gldc promoter. (B) qRT-PCR analysis of the expression of Gldc in V6.5 cells stably expressing shLin28A or the NTC. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. (C) Western blot analysis of the expression of GLDC in Dgcr8−/− V6.5 cells stably expressing Lin28A or EV. ACTIN served as the loading control. (D) The CSD and CCHC RNA-binding domains in Lin28A were mutated as indicated. (E) CLIP-seq results showing Lin28A-binding regions in Gldc mRNA. NS, not significant.

    Source data are available for this figure.

    Source Data for Figure S2[LSA-2019-00413_SdataFS2.pdf]

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3. GCS promotes the production of one-carbon units and prevents the accumulation of MG.

    (A) Schematic diagram of metabolic flux related to the GCS. (B) Metabolites related to the GCS were measured by LC/GC-MS in V6.5 cells stably expressing shGldc or the NTC. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test. (C) MG measurement with biological kit in V6.5 cells stably expressing shGldc or the NTC. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test. (D) LC-MS analysis of the production of 13C-labelled SAM from 13C-labelled glycine in V6.5 cells stably expressing shGldc or the NTC. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test. (E) GC-MS analysis of the production of 13C-labelled formate from 13C-labelled glycine in V6.5 cells stably expressing shGldc or the NTC. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test. (F) GC-MS analysis of the formate content in reprogramming cells expressing shGldc or the NTC. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test. (G) Cellular MG levels were measured in reprogramming cells expressing shGldc or the NTC. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test. (H, I) MEF cells with Gldc knockdown (H) or overexpression (I) were infected with virus expressing the four factors to induce iPSC formation. AP staining (upper panel) showed the iPSC colonies formed. The AP- and Ssea1-positive iPSC colonies were counted (lower panel). The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC/EV; t test. (J) Immunofluorescence analysis was performed in iPSCs generated from the experiment shown in (I) using anti-Oct-4/-Sox2/-Ssea1/-Nanog antibodies. Nuclei were visualized by DAPI staining. (K) Haematoxylin and eosin staining of teratoma sections derived from the iPSCs generated from the experiment shown in (I) showing the differentiation of iPSCs into cell types of the three germ layers: keratinous epithelium (a, a′), cartilage (b, b′), and glandular tissue (c, c′). Scale bars, 50 μm. (L) Formate was added to the medium of MEF cells with Gldc knockdown starting from 2 d after infection with virus expressing the four factors. AP staining (upper panel) showed the iPSC colonies formed. The AP- and Ssea1-positive iPSC colonies were counted (lower panel). The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC. #P < 0.05 compared with the Gldc knockdown group; t test. (M) MG was added to the medium of Gldc-overexpressing MEF cells starting from 2 d after infection with virus expressing the four factors. AP staining (upper panel) showed the iPSC colonies formed. The AP- and Ssea1-positive iPSC colonies were counted (lower panel). The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the indicated groups; t test. NS, not significant.

  • Figure S3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S3. GCS promotes the production of one-carbon units and prevents the accumulation of MG.

    (A) Western blot analysis of GLDC expression in V6.5 cells stably expressing shGldc and the NTC. ACTIN served as the loading control. (B) Gldc-overexpressing MEF cells were infected with virus expressing three factors to induce iPSC formation. AP staining (upper panel) showed the iPSC colonies formed. The AP- and Ssea1-positive iPSC colonies were counted (lower panel). The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the EV control; t test.

    Source data are available for this figure.

    Source Data for Figure S3[LSA-2019-00413_SdataFS3.pdf]

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4. The GCS is required for the maintenance of PSC pluripotency by facilitating H3K4me3.

    (A) GSEA of a gene set comprising stem cell pluripotency genes in shGldc- versus NTC-transfected V6.5 cells. (B, C) qRT–PCR (B) and Western blot (C) analysis of the regulation of pluripotency-related genes by Gldc in V6.5 cells. ACTIN served as the loading control. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test. (D) GSEA of a gene set comprising genes related to one-carbon metabolism in shGldc- versus NTC-transfected V6.5 cells. (E) Western blot analysis of various H3 lysine methylation in V6.5 cells expressing shGldc or the NTC. Total H3 was used as the loading control. (F) ChIP-qPCR analysis of H3K4me3 enrichment in the promoters of Pou5f1, Sox2, Klf4, and Nanog in V6.5 cells expressing shGldc or the NTC. Actb served as a negative control. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments relative to the input. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test. (G) Western blot analysis of H3K4me3 modifications in V6.5 cells stably expressing shGldc or the NTC with the supplementation of 1 mM formate for 48 h. Total H3 was used as the loading control. (H) ChIP-qPCR analysis of H3K4me3 enrichment in the promoters of Pou5f1, Sox2, Klf4, and Nanog in V6.5 cells expressing shGldc or NTC with the supplementation of 1 mM formate for 48 h. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments relative to the input. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test. (I) qRT-PCR analysis of the expression of Pou5f1, Sox2, Klf4, and Nanog in V6.5 cells stably expressing shGldc or the NTC with the supplementation of 1 mM formate for 48 h. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC, #P < 0.05 compared with the Gldc knockdown group; t test. (J) qRT-PCR analysis of the expression of endogenous Pou5f1, Sox2, Klf4, and Nanog in reprogramming cells expressing shGldc or the NTC with the supplementation of 1 mM formate for 48 h. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 compared with the indicated group, #P < 0.05 compared with the Gldc knockdown group; t test. (K) OICR-9429, Win6mer or vehicle (DMSO) was added to the medium of Gldc-overexpressing MEF cells starting from 2 d after infection with virus expressing the four factors. AP staining (upper panel) showed the iPSC colonies formed. The AP- and Ssea1-positive iPSC colonies were counted (lower panel). The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the indicated group; t test. (L) SAM iodide was added to the medium of Gldc knockdown MEF cells starting from 2 d after infection with virus expressing the four factors. AP staining (upper panel) showed the iPSC colonies formed. The AP- and Ssea1-positive iPSC colonies were counted (lower panel). The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC, #P < 0.05 compared with the Gldc knockdown group; t test. NS, not significant.

    Source data are available for this figure.

    Source Data for Figure 4[LSA-2019-00413_SdataF4.pdf]

  • Figure S4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S4. The GCS is required for the maintenance of PSC pluripotency by facilitating H3K4me3 methylation.

    (A) GSEA of a gene set comprising genes related to housekeeping in shGldc- versus NTC-transfected V6.5 cells. (B) qRT–PCR analysis of the regulation of pluripotency-related genes by Gldc in reprogramming cells. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test. (C) Western blot analysis of various H3 lysine methylation modifications in reprogramming cells expressing shGldc or the NTC. Total H3 was used as the loading control. (D) ChIP-qPCR analysis of H3K4me3 enrichment in the promoters of Pou5f1, Sox2, Klf4, and Nanog in reprogramming cells expressing shGldc or the NTC. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments relative to the input. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test. (E) Western blot analysis of H3K4me3 modification in reprogramming cells expressing shGldc or the NTC with supplementation of 1 mM formate for 48 h. Total H3 was used as the loading control.

    Source data are available for this figure.

    Source Data for Figure S4[LSA-2019-00413_SdataFS4.pdf]

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5. The GCS protects PSCs from MG-induced senescence.

    (A) Western blot analysis of the expression of senescence-related genes in V6.5 cells treated with various concentration gradients of MG. ACTIN served as the loading control. (B) Western blot analysis of the expression of senescence-related genes in reprogramming cells treated with MG. ACTIN served as the loading control. (C) Reprogramming cells were treated with MG or control, and the SA-β-gal-positive cells were counted. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with CTR; t test. Scale bars, 100 μm. (D) MG was added to the medium of MEF cells starting from 2 d after infection with virus expressing the four factors. AP staining (upper panel) showed the iPSC colonies formed. The AP- and Ssea1-positive iPSC colonies were counted (lower panel). The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with CTR; t test. (E) Western blot analysis of the expression of senescence-related genes and argpyrimidine in V6.5 cells stably expressing shGldc or the NTC. ACTIN served as the loading control. (F) Western blot analysis of the expression of senescence-related genes and argpyrimidine in reprogramming cells expressing shGldc the NTC at various time points. ACTIN served as the loading control. (G) Reprogramming cells were infected with viruses expressing shGldc or the NTC, and SA-β-gal–positive cells were counted. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the indicated group; t test. Scale bars, 100 μm. (H) V6.5 cells stably expressing shGldc or the NTC were further infected with viruses expressing pSIN-3×flag-Glo1 or were supplemented with 1 mM carnosine, followed by qRT-PCR analysis of senescence-related genes. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC, #P < 0.05 compared with the Gldc knockdown group; t test. (I) V6.5 cells stably expressing shGldc or the NTC were further infected with viruses expressing pSIN-3×flag-Glo1 or EV, followed by Western blot analysis of senescence-related genes and argpyrimidine modification. ACTIN served as the loading control. (J) Reprogramming cells expressing shGldc or the NTC were further infected with viruses expressing pSIN-3×flag-Glo1 or EV, followed by Western blot analysis of senescence-related genes and argpyrimidine modification. ACTIN served as the loading control. (K) Reprogramming cells expressing shGldc or the NTC were further infected with viruses expressing pSIN-3×flag-Glo1 or EV, and SA-β-gal–positive cells were counted. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC, #P < 0.05 compared with the Gldc knockdown group; t test. Scale bars, 100 μm. (L) Reprogramming cells expressing shGldc or the NTC were further infected with viruses expressing pSIN-3×flag-Glo1. AP staining (upper panel) showed the iPSC colonies formed. The AP- and Ssea1-positive iPSC colonies were counted (lower panel). The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC, #P < 0.05 compared with the Gldc knockdown group; t test. (M) MEFs were induced with the indicated factors. AP staining (upper panel) showed the iPSC colonies formed. The AP- and Ssea1-positive iPSC colonies were counted (lower panel). The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC, #P < 0.05 compared with the Gldc knockdown group; t test. NS, not significant.

    Source data are available for this figure.

    Source Data for Figure 5[LSA-2019-00413_SdataF5.pdf]

  • Figure S5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S5. The GCS protects pluripotent stem cells from MG-induced senescence.

    (A) V6.5 cells stably expressing shGldc (targeting the 3′UTR) were further infected with viruses expressing pSIN-3×flag-Gldc, and argpyrimidine-modified proteins were analysed by Western blotting. ACTIN served as the loading control. (B) qRT-PCR analysis of the expression of senescence-related genes in reprogramming cells expressing shGldc or the NTC at various time points. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 compared between the indicated groups; t test. (C) Carnosine was added to the medium of Gldc knockdown MEF cells starting from 2 d after infection with virus expressing the four factors. The AP- and Ssea1-positive iPSC colonies were counted. The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC, #P < 0.05 compared with the Gldc knockdown group; t test.

    Source data are available for this figure.

    Source Data for Figure S5[LSA-2019-00413_SdataFS5.pdf]

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6. The GCS promotes stem cell stemness and prevents cellular senescence in human stem cells.

    (A, B) qRT-PCR (A) and Western blot (B) analyse the expression of the enzymes in the glycine, serine, and threonine metabolic pathway in IMR90 cells and hESCs. ACTIN served as the loading control. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. (C) The enzymatic activity of the GCS was measured in IMR90 cells and hESCs. The data were presented as the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 compared with IMR90 cells; t test. (D) Western blot analysis of GLDC expression during reprogramming at the indicated time points. ACTIN served as the loading control. (E, F) Western blot analysis of GLDC expression in H9 cells stably expressing shSOX2 (E) or shLIN28A (F). ACTIN served as the loading control. (G) Western blot analysis of various H3 lysine methylation modifications in H9 cells stably expressing shGLDC or the NTC. Total H3 was used as the loading control. (H) Western blot analysis of argpyrimidine modifications in H9 cells stably expressing shGLDC or the NTC. ACTIN served as the loading control. (I) Western blot analysis of the expression of senescence-related genes in human-reprogrammed cells treated with MG. ACTIN served as the loading control. (J) Western blot analysis of the expression of senescence- or pluripotency-related genes in H9 cells stably expressing shGLDC or the NTC. ACTIN served as the loading control. (K) IMR90 cells with Gldc knockdown were infected with virus expressing the four factors to induce iPSC formation. AP staining (upper panel) showed the iPSC colonies formed. The AP-positive iPSC colonies were counted (lower panel). The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC; t test. (L) IMR90 cells were reprogrammed with the indicated factors. AP staining (upper panel) showed the iPSC colonies formed. The AP-positive iPSC colonies were counted (lower panel). The data were presented as the mean ± SD. *P < 0.05 compared with the NTC, #P < 0.05 compared with the Gldc knockdown group; t test.

    Source data are available for this figure.

    Source Data for Figure 6[LSA-2019-00413_SdataF6.pdf]

  • Figure 7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7. Working model: The GCS determines the fate of PSCs via regulation of senescence and epigenetic modifications.

    Metabolic remodelling has emerged as critical for stem cell pluripotency; here, we provide novel evidence to demonstrate that via regulation of senescence and epigenetic modifications, the GCS determines the fate of PSCs and the outcome of the cellular reprogramming.

Supplementary Materials

  • Figures
  • Table S1 Nucleotide sequence of primers used for qRT-PCR.

  • Table S2 Antibody information.

  • Table S3 shRNAs used in this study.

  • Table S4 Nucleotide sequence of primers used for RIP-qPCR.

  • Table S5 Nucleotide sequence of primers used for ChIP-qPCR.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Life Science Alliance.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Glycine cleavage system determines the fate of pluripotent stem cells via the regulation of senescence and epigenetic modifications
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Life Science Alliance
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Life Science Alliance web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Glycine cleavage system determines the pluripotency
Shengya Tian, Junru Feng, Yang Cao, Shengqi Shen, Yongping Cai, Dongdong Yang, Ronghui Yan, Lihua Wang, Huafeng Zhang, Xiuying Zhong, Ping Gao
Life Science Alliance Sep 2019, 2 (5) e201900413; DOI: 10.26508/lsa.201900413

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Glycine cleavage system determines the pluripotency
Shengya Tian, Junru Feng, Yang Cao, Shengqi Shen, Yongping Cai, Dongdong Yang, Ronghui Yan, Lihua Wang, Huafeng Zhang, Xiuying Zhong, Ping Gao
Life Science Alliance Sep 2019, 2 (5) e201900413; DOI: 10.26508/lsa.201900413
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
Issue Cover

In this Issue

Volume 2, No. 5
October 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Cover (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Masthead (PDF)
Advertisement

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Materials and Methods
    • Acknowledgements
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • Metrics
  • Reviewer Comments
  • PDF

Subjects

  • Stem Cells
  • Metabolism
  • Aging

EMBO Press LogoRockefeller University Press LogoCold Spring Harbor Logo

Content

  • Home
  • Newest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Subject Collections

For Authors

  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Guidelines
  • License, copyright, Fee

Other Services

  • Alerts
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feeds

More Information

  • Editors & Staff
  • Reviewer Guidelines
  • Feedback
  • Licensing and Reuse
  • Privacy Policy

ISSN: 2575-1077
© 2022 Life Science Alliance LLC

Life Science Alliance is registered as a trademark in the U.S. Patent and Trade Mark Office and in the European Union Intellectual Property Office.