Transcriptome-wide noise controls lineage choice in mammalian progenitor cells

Phenotypic cell-to-cell variability within clonal populations may be a manifestation of ‘gene expression noise’, or it may reflect stable phenotypic variants. Such ‘non-genetic cell individuality’ can arise from the slow fluctuations of protein levels in mammalian cells. These fluctuations produce persistent cell individuality, thereby rendering a clonal population heterogeneous. However, it remains unknown whether this heterogeneity may account for the stochasticity of cell fate decisions in stem cells. Here we show that in clonal populations of mouse haematopoietic progenitor cells, spontaneous ‘outlier’ cells with either extremely high or low expression levels of the stem cell marker Sca-1 (also known as Ly6a; ref. 9) reconstitute the parental distribution of Sca-1 but do so only after more than one week. This slow relaxation is described by a gaussian mixture model that incorporates noise-driven transitions between discrete subpopulations, suggesting hidden multi-stability within one cell type. Despite clonality, the Sca-1 outliers had distinct transcriptomes. Although their unique gene expression profiles eventually reverted to that of the median cells, revealing an attractor state, they lasted long enough to confer a greatly different proclivity for choosing either the erythroid or the myeloid lineage. Preference in lineage choice was associated with increased expression of lineage-specific transcription factors, such as a >200-fold increase in Gata1 (ref. 10) among the erythroid-prone cells, or a >15-fold increased PU.1 (Sfpi1) (ref. 11) expression among myeloid-prone cells. Thus, clonal heterogeneity of gene expression level is not due to independent noise in the expression of individual genes, but reflects metastable states of a slowly fluctuating transcriptome that is distinct in individual cells and may govern the reversible, stochastic priming of multipotent progenitor cells in cell fate decision.

[1]  P. Verhulst.  Notice sur la loi que la population pursuit dans son accroissement , 1838 .

[2]  P. Verhulst,et al.  Notice sur la loi que la population suit dans son accroissement. Correspondance Mathematique et Physique Publiee par A , 1838 .

[3]  G. Uhlenbeck,et al.  On the Theory of the Brownian Motion , 1930 .

[4]  P. Mazur.  On the theory of brownian motion , 1959 .

[5]  R. Mazo.  On the theory of brownian motion , 1973 .

[6]  H. Akaike.  A new look at the statistical model identification , 1974 .

[7]  D. Koshland,et al.  Non-genetic individuality: chance in the single cell , 1976, Nature.

[8]  I. Weissman,et al.  Mouse hematopoietic stem-cell antigen Sca-1 is a member of the Ly-6 antigen family. , 1989, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  K. Keyomarsi,et al.  Synchronization of tumor and normal cells from G1 to multiple cell cycles by lovastatin. , 1991, Cancer research.

[10]  V L Bautch,et al.  Embryonic stem cell-derived cystic embryoid bodies form vascular channels: an in vitro model of blood vessel development. , 1992, Development.

[11]  S. Collins,et al.  Lymphohematopoietic progenitors immortalized by a retroviral vector harboring a dominant-negative retinoic acid receptor can recapitulate lymphoid, myeloid, and erythroid development. , 1994, Genes & development.

[12]  W. DeSarbo,et al.  A mixture likelihood approach for generalized linear models , 1995 .

[13]  T. Moon.  The expectation-maximization algorithm , 1996, IEEE Signal Process. Mag..

[14]  L. Laloux,et al.  Phase space geometry and slow dynamics , 1995, cond-mat/9510079.

[15]  T. Enver,et al.  Do stem cells play dice? , 1998, Blood.

[16]  G E Marti,et al.  Quantitative flow cytometry: inter-laboratory variation. , 1998, Cytometry.

[17]  F. Grosveld,et al.  An intrinsic but cell-nonautonomous defect in GATA-1-overexpressing mouse erythroid cells , 2000, Nature.

[18]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Significance analysis of microarrays applied to the ionizing radiation response , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  C. Ball,et al.  Identification of genes periodically expressed in the human cell cycle and their expression in tumors. , 2002, Molecular biology of the cell.

[20]  Anil K. Jain,et al.  Unsupervised Learning of Finite Mixture Models , 2002, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[21]  Stuart H. Orkin,et al.  Hematopoiesis and stem cells: plasticity versus developmental heterogeneity , 2002, Nature Immunology.

[22]  S. Orkin,et al.  Distinct Domains of the GATA-1 Cofactor FOG-1 Differentially Influence Erythroid versus Megakaryocytic Maturation , 2002, Molecular and Cellular Biology.

[23]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model selection and multimodel inference : a practical information-theoretic approach , 2003 .

[24]  Sui Huang,et al.  Gene Expression Dynamics Inspector (GEDI): for integrative analysis of expression profiles , 2003, Bioinform..

[25]  Mads Kærn,et al.  Noise in eukaryotic gene expression , 2003, Nature.

[26]  Rebecca Branner,et al.  All or none , 2003 .

[27]  J. Raser,et al.  Control of Stochasticity in Eukaryotic Gene Expression , 2004, Science.

[28]  P. Swain,et al.  Gene Regulation at the Single-Cell Level , 2005, Science.

[29]  F. Rosenbauer,et al.  Role of Transcription Factors C/EBPα and PU.1 in Normal Hematopoiesis and Leukemia , 2005, International journal of hematology.

[30]  T. Elston,et al.  Stochasticity in gene expression: from theories to phenotypes , 2005, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[31]  F. Ruscetti,et al.  Autocrine transforming growth factor-β regulation of hematopoiesis: many outcomes that depend on the context , 2005, Oncogene.

[32]  Hannah H. Chang,et al.  Multistable and multistep dynamics in neutrophil differentiation , 2006, BMC Cell Biology.

[33]  A. van Oudenaarden,et al.  Noise Propagation in Gene Networks , 2005, Science.

[34]  Gabriel S. Eichler,et al.  Cell fates as high-dimensional attractor states of a complex gene regulatory network. , 2005, Physical review letters.

[35]  R. Milo,et al.  Variability and memory of protein levels in human cells , 2006, Nature.

[36]  E. Stanley,et al.  Colony-stimulating factor-1 in immunity and inflammation. , 2006, Current opinion in immunology.

[37]  Nicholas J. Guido,et al.  A bottom-up approach to gene regulation , 2006, Nature.

[38]  The effects of molecular noise and size control on variability in the budding yeast cell cycle , 2007, Nature.

[39]  W. Stanford,et al.  Concise Review: Stem Cell Antigen‐1: Expression, Function, and Enigma , 2007, Stem cells.

[40]  Nikos V Mantzaris,et al.  From single-cell genetic architecture to cell population dynamics: quantitatively decomposing the effects of different population heterogeneity sources for a genetic network with positive feedback architecture. , 2007, Biophysical journal.

[41]  Sui Huang,et al.  Bifurcation dynamics in lineage-commitment in bipotent progenitor cells. , 2007, Developmental biology.

[42]  Jeffrey W. Smith,et al.  Stochastic Gene Expression in a Single Cell , 2022 .