Cited by 596Hematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationAcute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchMesenchymal stem cell research

Clonal analysis of lineage fate in native haematopoiesis

Open access
Rodriguez-Fraticelli, Alejo E., Wolock, Samuel L., Weinreb, Caleb S., Panero, Riccardo, Patel, Sachin H., Jankovic, Maja, Sun, Jianlong, Calogero, Raffaele A. +2 more·2018·Nature

Abstract

Haematopoiesis, the process of mature blood and immune cell production, is functionally organized as a hierarchy, with self-renewing haematopoietic stem cells and multipotent progenitor cells sitting at the very top. Multiple models have been proposed as to what the earliest lineage choices are in these primitive haematopoietic compartments, the cellular intermediates, and the resulting lineage trees that emerge from them. Given that the bulk of studies addressing lineage outcomes have been performed in the context of haematopoietic transplantation, current models of lineage branching are more likely to represent roadmaps of lineage potential than native fate. Here we use transposon tagging to clonally trace the fates of progenitors and stem cells in unperturbed haematopoiesis. Our results describe a distinct clonal roadmap in which the megakaryocyte lineage arises largely independently of other haematopoietic fates. Our data, combined with single-cell RNA sequencing, identify a functional hierarchy of unilineage- and oligolineage-producing clones within the multipotent progenitor population. Finally, our results demonstrate that traditionally defined long-term haematopoietic stem cells are a significant source of megakaryocyte-restricted progenitors, suggesting that the megakaryocyte lineage is the predominant native fate of long-term haematopoietic stem cells. Our study provides evidence for a substantially revised roadmap for unperturbed haematopoiesis, and highlights unique properties of multipotent progenitors and haematopoietic stem cells in situ.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature25168

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Single-cell genomic approaches have produced compelling evidence that observed cellular heterogeneity reflects downstream lineage decisions.

    “Finally, while single-cell genomic approaches have produced compelling evidence that observed cellular heterogeneity reflects downstream lineage decisions (Herring et al., 2018; La Manno et al., 2018; Rodriguez-Fraticelli et al., 2018), in the absence of fate tracking, all inferred biases in native hematopoiesis are speculative (Pina et al., 2012; Velten et al., 2017).”

    From Unraveling Hematopoiesis through the Lens of Genomics (2020) · cites this paper as Rodriguez-Fraticelli et al., 2018

  • Direct genetic barcoding in HSCs has resulted in similar findings.

    “Direct genetic barcoding in HSCs has also resulted in similar findings (Rodriguez-Fraticelli et al., 2018).”

    From Unraveling Hematopoiesis through the Lens of Genomics (2020) · cites this paper as Rodriguez-Fraticelli et al., 2018

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rodriguez-Fraticelli, A. E., Wolock, S. L., Weinreb, C. S., Panero, R., Patel, S. H., Jankovic, M., Sun, J., Calogero, R. A., Klein, A. M., & Camargo, F. D.
Affiliations
  • Boston Children's Hospital (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Turin (IT)
Corresponding author
Camargo, Fernando D.
Venue
Nature
Published
2018-01
Volume
553
Issue
7687
Pages
212-216
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2781886817
Cited by
596
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 41 · 2025: 70 · 2024: 76 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 75 · 2021: 76 · 2020: 91 · 2019: 68 · 2018: 43
FWCI
49.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • Leukemia and Lymphoma Society
  • Life Sciences Research Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health (P01HL13147)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL128850, P01HL131477)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM080177)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (U54DK110805, P30DK034854)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Acute Myeloid Leukemia Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Mesenchymal stem cell research
Keywords
hematopoiesis, hematopoietic stem cells, multipotent progenitors, clonal tracing, transposon tagging, megakaryocyte lineage, single-cell transcriptomics, megakaryopoiesis
MeSH terms
Animals, Clone Cells, Female, Hematopoiesis, Hematopoietic Stem Cells, Male, Megakaryocytes, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Cell Lineage, Multipotent Stem Cells, Mice, Single-Cell Analysis, Transcriptome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review