4.5 Review

Dendritic cell development at a clonal level within a revised 'continuous' model of haematopoiesis

Journal

MOLECULAR IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 124, Issue -, Pages 190-197

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.molimm.2020.06.012

Keywords

Dendritic cell; Continuous model; Haematopoiesis; Clonal lineage tracing; Cellular barcoding; Dendritic cell subsets

Funding

  1. National Health & Medical Research Council, Australia [11000033, 1124812, 1145184, 1184736]
  2. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [1184736, 1145184, 1124812] Funding Source: NHMRC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Understanding development of the dendritic cell (DC) subtypes continues to evolve. The origin and relationship of conventional DC type 1 (cDC1), cDC type 2 (cDC2) and plasmacytoid DCs (pDCs) to each other, and in relation to classic myeloid and lymphoid cells, has had a long and controversial history and is still not fully resolved. This review summarises the technological developments and findings that have been achieved at a clonal level, and how that has enhanced our knowledge of the process. It summarises the single cell lineage tracing technologies that have emerged, their application in in vitro and in vivo studies, in both mouse and human settings, and places the findings in a wider context of understanding haematopoiesis at a single cell or clonal level. In particular, it addresses the fate heterogeneity observed in many phenotypically defined progenitor subsets and how these findings have led to a departure from the classic ball-and-stick models of haematopoiesis to the emerging continuous model. Prior contradictions in DC development may be reconciled if they are framed within this revised model, where commitment to a lineage or cell type does not occur in an all-or-nothing process in defined progenitors but rather can occur at many stages of haematopoiesis in a dynamic process.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available