Limits...
Gene Signature of Human Oral Mucosa Fibroblasts: Comparison with Dermal Fibroblasts and Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells.

Miyoshi K, Horiguchi T, Tanimura A, Hagita H, Noma T - Biomed Res Int (2015)

Bottom Line: As a common feature of fibroblasts, both hOFs and hDFs expressed glycolipid metabolism-related genes at higher levels compared with hOF-iPSCs.Distinct characteristics of hOFs compared with hDFs included a high expression of glycoprotein genes, involved in signaling, extracellular matrix, membrane, and receptor proteins, besides a low expression of HOX genes, the hDFs-markers.The results of the pathway analyses indicated that tissue-reconstructive, proliferative, and signaling pathways are active, whereas senescence-related genes in p53 pathway are inactive in hOFs.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Molecular Biology, Institute of Health Biosciences, The University of Tokushima Graduate School, 3-18-15 Kuramoto-cho, Tokushima 770-8504, Japan.

ABSTRACT
Oral mucosa is a useful material for regeneration therapy with the advantages of its accessibility and versatility regardless of age and gender. However, little is known about the molecular characteristics of oral mucosa. Here we report the first comparative profiles of the gene signatures of human oral mucosa fibroblasts (hOFs), human dermal fibroblasts (hDFs), and hOF-derived induced pluripotent stem cells (hOF-iPSCs), linking these with biological roles by functional annotation and pathway analyses. As a common feature of fibroblasts, both hOFs and hDFs expressed glycolipid metabolism-related genes at higher levels compared with hOF-iPSCs. Distinct characteristics of hOFs compared with hDFs included a high expression of glycoprotein genes, involved in signaling, extracellular matrix, membrane, and receptor proteins, besides a low expression of HOX genes, the hDFs-markers. The results of the pathway analyses indicated that tissue-reconstructive, proliferative, and signaling pathways are active, whereas senescence-related genes in p53 pathway are inactive in hOFs. Furthermore, more than half of hOF-specific genes were similarly expressed to those of hOF-iPSC genes and might be controlled by WNT signaling. Our findings demonstrated that hOFs have unique cellular characteristics in specificity and plasticity. These data may provide useful insight into application of oral fibroblasts for direct reprograming.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Characterization of hOFs in comparison with hDFs and hOF-iPSCs. (a) Strategy to define the characteristics of hOFs. The differentially expressed gene groups between hOFs and hDFs were rearranged by the expression similarity with hOF-iPSCs. The readout for hOFs indicates the characteristics of hOFs. Each gene in G1–G4 is listed in Supplementary Tables S4–S7, respectively. (b) The characterization of each gene group categorized in (a). Numbers indicate the percentage of gene numbers in the individual categories compared with total numbers. The groups colored in yellow show the molecules receiving environmental stimuli. The groups colored in pink represent molecules involved in controlling cell fate. (c) The list of individual transcriptional regulators found in (b). Each indicated number is the average signal value in each cell type. (d) Expression levels of reprograming enhancers among the three cell types. Each indicated number is the average signal value in each cell type. Red: hOFs > hDFs > hOF-iPSCs; blue: hOFs = hDFs > hOF-iPSCs. The full names of each gene listed in (d) are shown in Supplementary Table S8.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4538314&req=5

fig4: Characterization of hOFs in comparison with hDFs and hOF-iPSCs. (a) Strategy to define the characteristics of hOFs. The differentially expressed gene groups between hOFs and hDFs were rearranged by the expression similarity with hOF-iPSCs. The readout for hOFs indicates the characteristics of hOFs. Each gene in G1–G4 is listed in Supplementary Tables S4–S7, respectively. (b) The characterization of each gene group categorized in (a). Numbers indicate the percentage of gene numbers in the individual categories compared with total numbers. The groups colored in yellow show the molecules receiving environmental stimuli. The groups colored in pink represent molecules involved in controlling cell fate. (c) The list of individual transcriptional regulators found in (b). Each indicated number is the average signal value in each cell type. (d) Expression levels of reprograming enhancers among the three cell types. Each indicated number is the average signal value in each cell type. Red: hOFs > hDFs > hOF-iPSCs; blue: hOFs = hDFs > hOF-iPSCs. The full names of each gene listed in (d) are shown in Supplementary Table S8.

Mentions: To further define the characteristics of hOFs, gene groups in hOFs > hDFs and hOFs < hDFs were filtered by similarity in gene-expression level to hOF-iPSCs (Figure 4(a)).


Gene Signature of Human Oral Mucosa Fibroblasts: Comparison with Dermal Fibroblasts and Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells.

Miyoshi K, Horiguchi T, Tanimura A, Hagita H, Noma T - Biomed Res Int (2015)

Characterization of hOFs in comparison with hDFs and hOF-iPSCs. (a) Strategy to define the characteristics of hOFs. The differentially expressed gene groups between hOFs and hDFs were rearranged by the expression similarity with hOF-iPSCs. The readout for hOFs indicates the characteristics of hOFs. Each gene in G1–G4 is listed in Supplementary Tables S4–S7, respectively. (b) The characterization of each gene group categorized in (a). Numbers indicate the percentage of gene numbers in the individual categories compared with total numbers. The groups colored in yellow show the molecules receiving environmental stimuli. The groups colored in pink represent molecules involved in controlling cell fate. (c) The list of individual transcriptional regulators found in (b). Each indicated number is the average signal value in each cell type. (d) Expression levels of reprograming enhancers among the three cell types. Each indicated number is the average signal value in each cell type. Red: hOFs > hDFs > hOF-iPSCs; blue: hOFs = hDFs > hOF-iPSCs. The full names of each gene listed in (d) are shown in Supplementary Table S8.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4538314&req=5

fig4: Characterization of hOFs in comparison with hDFs and hOF-iPSCs. (a) Strategy to define the characteristics of hOFs. The differentially expressed gene groups between hOFs and hDFs were rearranged by the expression similarity with hOF-iPSCs. The readout for hOFs indicates the characteristics of hOFs. Each gene in G1–G4 is listed in Supplementary Tables S4–S7, respectively. (b) The characterization of each gene group categorized in (a). Numbers indicate the percentage of gene numbers in the individual categories compared with total numbers. The groups colored in yellow show the molecules receiving environmental stimuli. The groups colored in pink represent molecules involved in controlling cell fate. (c) The list of individual transcriptional regulators found in (b). Each indicated number is the average signal value in each cell type. (d) Expression levels of reprograming enhancers among the three cell types. Each indicated number is the average signal value in each cell type. Red: hOFs > hDFs > hOF-iPSCs; blue: hOFs = hDFs > hOF-iPSCs. The full names of each gene listed in (d) are shown in Supplementary Table S8.
Mentions: To further define the characteristics of hOFs, gene groups in hOFs > hDFs and hOFs < hDFs were filtered by similarity in gene-expression level to hOF-iPSCs (Figure 4(a)).

Bottom Line: As a common feature of fibroblasts, both hOFs and hDFs expressed glycolipid metabolism-related genes at higher levels compared with hOF-iPSCs.Distinct characteristics of hOFs compared with hDFs included a high expression of glycoprotein genes, involved in signaling, extracellular matrix, membrane, and receptor proteins, besides a low expression of HOX genes, the hDFs-markers.The results of the pathway analyses indicated that tissue-reconstructive, proliferative, and signaling pathways are active, whereas senescence-related genes in p53 pathway are inactive in hOFs.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Molecular Biology, Institute of Health Biosciences, The University of Tokushima Graduate School, 3-18-15 Kuramoto-cho, Tokushima 770-8504, Japan.

ABSTRACT
Oral mucosa is a useful material for regeneration therapy with the advantages of its accessibility and versatility regardless of age and gender. However, little is known about the molecular characteristics of oral mucosa. Here we report the first comparative profiles of the gene signatures of human oral mucosa fibroblasts (hOFs), human dermal fibroblasts (hDFs), and hOF-derived induced pluripotent stem cells (hOF-iPSCs), linking these with biological roles by functional annotation and pathway analyses. As a common feature of fibroblasts, both hOFs and hDFs expressed glycolipid metabolism-related genes at higher levels compared with hOF-iPSCs. Distinct characteristics of hOFs compared with hDFs included a high expression of glycoprotein genes, involved in signaling, extracellular matrix, membrane, and receptor proteins, besides a low expression of HOX genes, the hDFs-markers. The results of the pathway analyses indicated that tissue-reconstructive, proliferative, and signaling pathways are active, whereas senescence-related genes in p53 pathway are inactive in hOFs. Furthermore, more than half of hOF-specific genes were similarly expressed to those of hOF-iPSC genes and might be controlled by WNT signaling. Our findings demonstrated that hOFs have unique cellular characteristics in specificity and plasticity. These data may provide useful insight into application of oral fibroblasts for direct reprograming.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus