Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 476

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Epigenetic dynamics of stem cells and cell lineage commitment: digging Waddington's canal

Hemberger, Myriam, Dean, Wendy, Reik, Wolf·2009·Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology
DOI 10.1038/nrm2727
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

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/nrm2727

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 10 references

Research works printed but not linked: 115

  1. Sasaki, H. & Matsui, Y. Epigenetic events in mammalian germ-cell development: reprogramming and beyond. Nature Rev. Genet. 9, 129–140 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  2. Dean, W., Santos, F. & Reik, W. Epigenetic reprogramming in early mammalian development and following somatic nuclear transfer. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 14, 93–100 (2003). · DOI · Paper page
  3. Surani, M. A., Hayashi, K. & Hajkova, P. Genetic and epigenetic regulators of pluripotency. Cell 128, 747–762 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  4. Oswald, J. et al. Active demethylation of the paternal genome in the mouse zygote. Curr. Biol. 10, 475–478 (2000). · DOI · Paper page
  5. Mayer, W., Niveleau, A., Walter, J., Fundele, R. & Haaf, T. Demethylation of the zygotic paternal genome. Nature 403, 501–502 (2000). · DOI · Paper page
  6. Santos, F., Hendrich, B., Reik, W. & Dean, W. Dynamic reprogramming of DNA methylation in the early mouse embryo. Dev. Biol. 241, 172–182 (2002). A detailed analysis of the DNA methylation dynamics in pre-implantation mouse development. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Howell, C. Y. et al. Genomic imprinting disrupted by a maternal effect mutation in the Dnmt1 gene. Cell 104, 829–838 (2001). · DOI · Paper page
  8. Vincent, S. D. et al. The zinc finger transcriptional repressor Blimp1/Prdm1 is dispensable for early axis formation but is required for specification of primordial germ cells in the mouse. Development 132, 1315–1325 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  9. Hayashi, K., de Sousa Lopes, S. M. & Surani, M. A. Germ cell specification in mice. Science 316, 394–396 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  10. Saitou, M., Barton, S. C. & Surani, M. A. A molecular programme for the specification of germ cell fate in mice. Nature 418, 293–300 (2002). · DOI · Paper page
  11. Yamazaki, Y. et al. Reprogramming of primordial germ cells begins before migration into the genital ridge, making these cells inadequate donors for reproductive cloning. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 12207–12212 (2003). · DOI · Paper page
  12. Lee, J. et al. Erasing genomic imprinting memory in mouse clone embryos produced from day 11.5 primordial germ cells. Development 129, 1807–1817 (2002). · DOI · Paper page
  13. Hajkova, P. et al. Chromatin dynamics during epigenetic reprogramming in the mouse germ line. Nature 452, 877–881 (2008). A comprehensive study of the dynamic changes of a range of epigenetic modifications during germ cell development. · DOI · Paper page
  14. Seki, Y. et al. Cellular dynamics associated with the genome-wide epigenetic reprogramming in migrating primordial germ cells in mice. Development 134, 2627–2638 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  15. Seki, Y. et al. Extensive and orderly reprogramming of genome-wide chromatin modifications associated with specification and early development of germ cells in mice. Dev. Biol. 278, 440–458 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  16. Hajkova, P. et al. Epigenetic reprogramming in mouse primordial germ cells. Mech. Dev. 117, 15–23 (2002). · DOI · Paper page
  17. Ancelin, K. et al. Blimp1 associates with Prmt5 and directs histone arginine methylation in mouse germ cells. Nature Cell Biol. 8, 623–630 (2006). · DOI · Paper page
  18. Morgan, H. D., Dean, W., Coker, H. A., Reik, W. & Petersen-Mahrt, S. K. Activation-induced cytidine deaminase deaminates 5-methylcytosine in DNA and is expressed in pluripotent tissues: implications for epigenetic reprogramming. J. Biol. Chem. 279, 52353–52360 (2004). · DOI · Paper page
  19. Barreto, G. et al. Gadd45a promotes epigenetic gene activation by repair-mediated DNA demethylation. Nature 445, 671–675 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  20. Gehring, M., Reik, W. & Henikoff, S. DNA demethylation by DNA repair. Trends Genet. 25, 82–90 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  21. Huh, J. H., Bauer, M. J., Hsieh, T. F. & Fischer, R. L. Cellular programming of plant gene imprinting. Cell 132, 735–744 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  22. Rai, K. et al. DNA demethylation in zebrafish involves the coupling of a deaminase, a glycosylase, and gadd45. Cell 135, 1201–1212 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  23. Govin, J. et al. Pericentric heterochromatin reprogramming by new histone variants during mouse spermiogenesis. J. Cell Biol. 176, 283–294 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  24. Martens, J. H. et al. The profile of repeat-associated histone lysine methylation states in the mouse epigenome. EMBO J. 24, 800–812 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  25. Peters, A. H. et al. Loss of the Suv39h histone methyltransferases impairs mammalian heterochromatin and genome stability. Cell 107, 323–337 (2001). · DOI · Paper page
  26. Santos, F., Peters, A. H., Otte, A. P., Reik, W. & Dean, W. Dynamic chromatin modifications characterise the first cell cycle in mouse embryos. Dev. Biol. 280, 225–236 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  27. van der Heijden, G. W. et al. Asymmetry in histone H3 variants and lysine methylation between paternal and maternal chromatin of the early mouse zygote. Mech. Dev. 122, 1008–1022 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  28. Puschendorf, M. et al. PRC1 and Suv39h specify parental asymmetry at constitutive heterochromatin in early mouse embryos. Nature Genet. 40, 411–420 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  29. Probst, A. V., Santos, F., Reik, W., Almouzni, G. & Dean, W. Structural differences in centromeric heterochromatin are spatially reconciled on fertilisation in the mouse zygote. Chromosoma 116, 403–415 (2007). · DOI
  30. Monk, M., Boubelik, M. & Lehnert, S. Temporal and regional changes in DNA methylation in the embryonic, extraembryonic and germ cell lineages during mouse embryo development. Development 99, 371–382 (1987). · DOI · Paper page
  31. Rougier, N. et al. Chromosome methylation patterns during mammalian preimplantation development. Genes Dev. 12, 2108–2113 (1998). · DOI · Paper page
  32. Howlett, S. K. & Reik, W. Methylation levels of maternal and paternal genomes during preimplantation development. Development 113, 119–127 (1991). · DOI · Paper page
  33. Edwards, C. A. & Ferguson-Smith, A. C. Mechanisms regulating imprinted genes in clusters. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 19, 281–289 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  34. Lane, N. et al. Resistance of IAPs to methylation reprogramming may provide a mechanism for epigenetic inheritance in the mouse. Genesis 35, 88–93 (2003). · DOI · Paper page
  35. Chapman, V., Forrester, L., Sanford, J., Hastie, N. & Rossant, J. Cell lineage-specific undermethylation of mouse repetitive DNA. Nature 307, 284–286 (1984). · DOI · Paper page
  36. Rossant, J., Sanford, J. P., Chapman, V. M. & Andrews, G. K. Undermethylation of structural gene sequences in extraembryonic lineages of the mouse. Dev. Biol. 117, 567–573 (1986). · DOI
  37. Farthing, C. R. et al. Global mapping of DNA methylation in mouse promoters reveals epigenetic reprogramming of pluripotency genes. PLoS Genet. 4, e1000116 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  38. Tanaka, T. S. et al. Gene expression profiling of embryo-derived stem cells reveals candidate genes associated with pluripotency and lineage specificity. Genome Res. 12, 1921–1928 (2002). · DOI · Paper page
  39. Morgan, H. D., Santos, F., Green, K., Dean, W. & Reik, W. Epigenetic reprogramming in mammals. Hum. Mol. Genet. 14, R47–R58 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  40. Erhardt, S. et al. Consequences of the depletion of zygotic and embryonic enhancer of zeste 2 during preimplantation mouse development. Development 130, 4235–4248 (2003). · DOI · Paper page
  41. Sarmento, O. F. et al. Dynamic alterations of specific histone modifications during early murine development. J. Cell Sci. 117, 4449–4459 (2004). · DOI · Paper page
  42. Matsui, Y., Zsebo, K. & Hogan, B. L. Derivation of pluripotential embryonic stem cells from murine primordial germ cells in culture. Cell 70, 841–847 (1992). · DOI · Paper page
  43. Resnick, J. L., Bixler, L. S., Cheng, L. & Donovan, P. J. Long-term proliferation of mouse primordial germ cells in culture. Nature 359, 550–551 (1992). · DOI · Paper page
  44. Evans, M. J. & Kaufman, M. H. Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature 292, 154–156 (1981). Pioneering work that describes the first derivation of pluripotent, self-renewing embryonic stem cells in mice. · DOI · Paper page
  45. Tesar, P. J. Derivation of germ-line-competent embryonic stem cell lines from preblastocyst mouse embryos. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 8239–8244 (2005). · DOI
  46. Brons, I. G. et al. Derivation of pluripotent epiblast stem cells from mammalian embryos. Nature 448, 191–195 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  47. Tesar, P. J. et al. New cell lines from mouse epiblast share defining features with human embryonic stem cells. Nature 448, 196–199 (2007). References 48 and 49 identify a pluripotent cell population in the post-implantation epiblast that can give rise to self-renewing epiblast stem cells with unique characteristics compared with ES cells. · DOI · Paper page
  48. Durcova-Hills, G., Tang, F., Doody, G., Tooze, R. & Surani, M. A. Reprogramming primordial germ cells into pluripotent stem cells. PLoS ONE 3, e3531 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  49. Niwa, H. How is pluripotency determined and maintained? Development 134, 635–646 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  50. Loh, Y. H. et al. The Oct4 and Nanog transcription network regulates pluripotency in mouse embryonic stem cells. Nature Genet. 38, 431–440 (2006). One of the first large-scale chromatin immunoprecipitation screens identifying the transcriptional network established by the pluripotency factors OCT4 and NANOG in mouse ES cells. · DOI · Paper page
  51. Sharov, A. A. et al. Identification of Pou5f1, Sox2, and Nanog downstream target genes with statistical confidence by applying a novel algorithm to time course microarray and genome-wide chromatin immunoprecipitation data. BMC Genomics 9, 269 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  52. Wu, Q. et al. Sall4 interacts with Nanog and co-occupies Nanog genomic sites in embryonic stem cells. J. Biol. Chem. 281, 24090–24094 (2006). · DOI · Paper page
  53. Yang, J. et al. Genome-wide analysis reveals Sall4 to be a major regulator of pluripotency in murine-embryonic stem cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 19756–19761 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  54. Chew, J. L. et al. Reciprocal transcriptional regulation of Pou5f1 and Sox2 via the Oct4/Sox2 complex in embryonic stem cells. Mol. Cell. Biol. 25, 6031–6046 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  55. Rodda, D. J. et al. Transcriptional regulation of Nanog by OCT4 and SOX2. J. Biol. Chem. 280, 24731–24737 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  56. Liang, J. et al. Nanog and Oct4 associate with unique transcriptional repression complexes in embryonic stem cells. Nature Cell Biol. 10, 731–739 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  57. Boyer, L. A. et al. Polycomb complexes repress developmental regulators in murine embryonic stem cells. Nature 441, 349–353 (2006). Genome-wide profile of the target genes of PcG proteins that identifies that PcG proteins repress a large cohort of developmental regulators in ES cells, the expression of which would otherwise promote differentiation. · DOI · Paper page
  58. Lee, T. I. et al. Control of developmental regulators by polycomb in human embryonic stem cells. Cell 125, 301–313 (2006). · DOI · Paper page
  59. Azuara, V. et al. Chromatin signatures of pluripotent cell lines. Nature Cell Biol. 8, 532–538 (2006). · DOI · Paper page
  60. Fouse, S. D. et al. Promoter CpG methylation contributes to ES cell gene regulation in parallel with Oct4/Nanog, PcG complex, and histone H3 K4/K27 trimethylation. Cell Stem Cell 2, 160–169 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  61. Ura, H. et al. STAT3 and Oct-3/4 control histone modification through induction of Eed in embryonic stem cells. J. Biol. Chem. 283, 9713–9723 (2008). · DOI
  62. 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). · DOI · Paper page
  63. Feldman, N. et al. G9a-mediated irreversible epigenetic inactivation of Oct-3/4 during early embryogenesis. Nature Cell Biol. 8, 188–194 (2006). · DOI · Paper page
  64. Epsztejn-Litman, S. et al. De novo DNA methylation promoted by G9a prevents reprogramming of embryonically silenced genes. Nature Struct. Mol. Biol. 15, 1176–1183 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  65. Hattori, N. et al. Epigenetic regulation of Nanog gene in embryonic stem and trophoblast stem cells. Genes Cells 12, 387–396 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  66. Li, J. Y. et al. Synergistic function of DNA methyltransferases Dnmt3a and Dnmt3b in the methylation of Oct4 and Nanog. Mol. Cell. Biol. 27, 8748–8759 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  67. Dietrich, J. E. & Hiiragi, T. Stochastic patterning in the mouse pre-implantation embryo. Development 134, 4219–4231 (2007). A detailed investigation of the expression of lineage-determining transcription factors in the early mouse embryo that shows the stochasticity of their expression until the mid-to-late blastocyst stage. · DOI · Paper page
  68. Ralston, A. & Rossant, J. Cdx2 acts downstream of cell polarization to cell-autonomously promote trophectoderm fate in the early mouse embryo. Dev. Biol. 313, 614–629 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  69. Jedrusik, A. et al. Role of Cdx2 and cell polarity in cell allocation and specification of trophectoderm and inner cell mass in the mouse embryo. Genes Dev. 22, 2692–2706 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  70. Hayashi, K., Lopes, S. M., Tang, F. & Surani, M. A. Dynamic equilibrium and heterogeneity of mouse pluripotent stem cells with distinct functional and epigenetic states. Cell Stem Cell 3, 391–401 (2008). ES cells fluctuate in their expression of developmental key genes, such as Stella , and these STELLA-positive and STELLA-negative subpopulations, although epigenetically and functionally distinct, are interconvertible. · DOI · Paper page
  71. Chambers, I. et al. Nanog safeguards pluripotency and mediates germline development. Nature 450, 1230–1234 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  72. Cui, L. et al. Spatial distribution and initial changes of SSEA-1 and other cell adhesion-related molecules on mouse embryonic stem cells before and during differentiation. J. Histochem. Cytochem. 52, 1447–1457 (2004). · DOI
  73. Furusawa, T., Ohkoshi, K., Honda, C., Takahashi, S. & Tokunaga, T. Embryonic stem cells expressing both platelet endothelial cell adhesion molecule-1 and stage-specific embryonic antigen-1 differentiate predominantly into epiblast cells in a chimeric embryo. Biol. Reprod. 70, 1452–1457 (2004). · doi:10.1095/biolreprod.103.024190
  74. Payer, B. et al. Generation of stella–GFP transgenic mice: a novel tool to study germ cell development. Genesis 44, 75–83 (2006). · DOI
  75. Toyooka, Y., Shimosato, D., Murakami, K., Takahashi, K. & Niwa, H. Identification and characterization of subpopulations in undifferentiated ES cell culture. Development 135, 909–918 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  76. Zernicka-Goetz, M. The first cell-fate decisions in the mouse embryo: destiny is a matter of both chance and choice. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 16, 406–412 (2006). · doi:10.1016/j.gde.2006.06.011
  77. Rossant, J. & Tam, P. P. Blastocyst lineage formation, early embryonic asymmetries and axis patterning in the mouse. Development 136, 701–713 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  78. Niwa, H., Miyazaki, J. & Smith, A. G. Quantitative expression of Oct-3/4 defines differentiation, dedifferentiation or self-renewal of ES cells. Nature Genet. 24, 372–376 (2000). · DOI · Paper page
  79. Mitsui, K. et al. The homeoprotein Nanog is required for maintenance of pluripotency in mouse epiblast and ES cells. Cell 113, 631–642 (2003). · DOI · Paper page
  80. Niwa, H. et al. Interaction between Oct3/4 and Cdx2 determines trophectoderm differentiation. Cell 123, 917–929 (2005). An important concept in the cell lineage specification process is the mutual inhibitory interaction of transcription factors with opposing functions. · DOI · Paper page
  81. Nishioka, N. et al. Tead4 is required for specification of trophectoderm in pre-implantation mouse embryos. Mech. Dev. 125, 270–283 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  82. Yagi, R. et al. Transcription factor TEAD4 specifies the trophectoderm lineage at the beginning of mammalian development. Development 134, 3827–3836 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  83. Donnison, M. et al. Loss of the extraembryonic ectoderm in Elf5 mutants leads to defects in embryonic patterning. Development 132, 2299–2308 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  84. Ng, R. K. et al. Epigenetic restriction of embryonic cell lineage fate by methylation of Elf5. Nature Cell Biol. 10, 1280–1290 (2008). DNA methylation establishes a major epigenetic restriction of cell lineage fate by regulating the trophoblast-reinforcing gatekeeper gene Elf5 . · DOI · Paper page
  85. Dodge, J. E., Kang, Y. K., Beppu, H., Lei, H. & Li, E. Histone H3-K9 methyltransferase ESET is essential for early development. Mol. Cell. Biol. 24, 2478–2486 (2004). · DOI · Paper page
  86. O'Carroll, D. et al. The polycomb-group gene Ezh2 is required for early mouse development. Mol. Cell. Biol. 21, 4330–4336 (2001). · DOI · Paper page
  87. Torres-Padilla, M. E., Parfitt, D. E., Kouzarides, T. & Zernicka-Goetz, M. Histone arginine methylation regulates pluripotency in the early mouse embryo. Nature 445, 214–218 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  88. Yamanaka, Y., Ralston, A., Stephenson, R. O. & Rossant, J. Cell and molecular regulation of the mouse blastocyst. Dev. Dyn. 235, 2301–2314 (2006). · DOI · Paper page
  89. Nishioka, N. et al. The Hippo signaling pathway components Lats and Yap pattern Tead4 activity to distinguish mouse trophectoderm from inner cell mass. Dev. Cell 16, 398–410 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  90. Hirasawa, R. & Sasaki, H. Dynamic transition of Dnmt3b expression in mouse pre- and early post-implantation embryos. Gene Expr. Patterns 9, 27–30 (2009). · DOI
  91. Watanabe, D., Suetake, I., Tada, T. & Tajima, S. Stage- and cell-specific expression of Dnmt3a and Dnmt3b during embryogenesis. Mech. Dev. 118, 187–190 (2002). · DOI · Paper page
  92. Waddington, C. H. Organisers and Genes (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 1940).
  93. Takahashi, K. et al. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from adult human fibroblasts by defined factors. Cell 131, 861–872 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  94. Meissner, A., Wernig, M. & Jaenisch, R. Direct reprogramming of genetically unmodified fibroblasts into pluripotent stem cells. Nature Biotechnol. 25, 1177–1181 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  95. Okita, K., Nakagawa, M., Hyenjong, H., Ichisaka, T. & Yamanaka, S. Generation of mouse induced pluripotent stem cells without viral vectors. Science 322, 949–953 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  96. Feng, B. et al. Reprogramming of fibroblasts into induced pluripotent stem cells with orphan nuclear receptor Esrrb. Nature Cell Biol. 11, 197–203 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  97. Mikkelsen, T. S. et al. Dissecting direct reprogramming through integrative genomic analysis. Nature 454, 49–55 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  98. Shi, Y. et al. A combined chemical and genetic approach for the generation of induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 2, 525–528 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  99. Huangfu, D. et al. Induction of pluripotent stem cells by defined factors is greatly improved by small-molecule compounds. Nature Biotechnol. 26, 795–797 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  100. 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). Gene expression noise causes fluctuations in protein levels that produce persistent cell individuality in clonal populations. This stochasticity can drive lineage specification. · DOI · Paper page
  101. MacArthur, B. D., Please, C. P. & Oreffo, R. O. Stochasticity and the molecular mechanisms of induced pluripotency. PLoS ONE 3, e3086 (2008). Computational modelling of how the positive interference of stochastic gene expression levels can lead to lineage choice and enables reprogramming to iPS cells. · DOI
  102. Slotkin, R. K. et al. Epigenetic reprogramming and small RNA silencing of transposable elements in pollen. Cell 136, 461–472 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  103. Wang, J. et al. The lysine demethylase LSD1 (KDM1) is required for maintenance of global DNA methylation. Nature Genet. 41, 125–129 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  104. Ayoub, N., Jeyasekharan, A. D., Bernal, J. A. & Venkitaraman, A. R. HP1-β mobilization promotes chromatin changes that initiate the DNA damage response. Nature 453, 682–686 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  105. Chin, H. G. et al. Automethylation of G9a and its implication in wider substrate specificity and HP1 binding. Nucleic Acids Res. 35, 7313–7323 (2007). · DOI
  106. Wei, F., Scholer, H. R. & Atchison, M. L. Sumoylation of Oct4 enhances its stability, DNA binding, and transactivation. J. Biol. Chem. 282, 21551–21560 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  107. Cardoso, M. C. & Leonhardt, H. DNA methyltransferase is actively retained in the cytoplasm during early development. J. Cell Biol. 147, 25–32 (1999). · DOI · Paper page
  108. Tanaka, S., Kunath, T., Hadjantonakis, A. K., Nagy, A. & Rossant, J. Promotion of trophoblast stem cell proliferation by FGF4. Science 282, 2072–2075 (1998). The successful derivation and maintenance of stem cells of the trophoblast lineage that retain the established lineage restriction and contribute exclusively to placental structures in chimeras. · DOI · Paper page
  109. Kunath, T. et al. Imprinted X-inactivation in extra-embryonic endoderm cell lines from mouse blastocysts. Development 132, 1649–1661 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  110. Yeom, Y. I. et al. Germline regulatory element of Oct-4 specific for the totipotent cycle of embryonal cells. Development 122, 881–894 (1996). · DOI · Paper page
  111. Avilion, A. A. et al. Multipotent cell lineages in early mouse development depend on SOX2 function. Genes Dev. 17, 126–140 (2003). · DOI · Paper page
  112. Payer, B. et al. Stella is a maternal effect gene required for normal early development in mice. Curr. Biol. 13, 2110–2117 (2003). · DOI · Paper page
  113. Strumpf, D. et al. Cdx2 is required for correct cell fate specification and differentiation of trophectoderm in the mouse blastocyst. Development 132, 2093–2102 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  114. McConnell, J., Petrie, L., Stennard, F., Ryan, K. & Nichols, J. Eomesodermin is expressed in mouse oocytes and pre-implantation embryos. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 71, 399–404 (2005). · DOI
  115. Uy, G. D., Downs, K. M. & Gardner, R. L. Inhibition of trophoblast stem cell potential in chorionic ectoderm coincides with occlusion of the ectoplacental cavity in the mouse. Development 129, 3913–3924 (2002). · DOI

Cited by

See all 476

Metadata

Authors
Hemberger, M., Dean, W., & Reik, W.
Venue
Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2009-07-15
Volume
10
Issue
8
Pages
526-537
ISSN
  • 1471-0072 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-0080
DOI
10.1038/nrm2727
OpenAlex
W2007497552
Cited by
476
References
10
FWCI
2.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Epigenetic dynamics of stem cells and cell lineage commitment: digging Waddington's canal. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nrm2727
The paper
Hemberger, M., Dean, W., & Reik, W. (2009). Epigenetic dynamics of stem cells and cell lineage commitment: digging Waddington's canal. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm2727

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.