4.7 Article

A balance between elongation and trimming regulates telomere stability in stem cells

期刊

NATURE STRUCTURAL & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
卷 24, 期 1, 页码 30-39

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nsmb.3335

关键词

-

资金

  1. Glenn Center for Research on Aging
  2. CIRM [TG2-01158]
  3. Salk Institute Cancer Center Core Grant [P30CA014195]
  4. NIH [R01GM087476, R01CA174942]
  5. Donald and Darlene Shiley Chair
  6. Highland Street Foundation
  7. Fritz B. Burns Foundation
  8. Emerald Foundation
  9. Glenn Center for Aging Research
  10. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [P30CA014195, R01CA174942] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  11. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [R01GM087476] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  12. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING [R01AG025837] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Telomere length maintenance ensures self-renewal of human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) and induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs); however, the mechanisms governing telomere length homeostasis in these cell types are unclear. Here, we report that telomere length is determined by the balance between telomere elongation, which is mediated by telomerase, and telomere trimming, which is controlled by XRCC3 and Nbsi, homologous recombination proteins that generate single-stranded C-rich telomeric DNA and double-stranded telomeric circular DNA (T-circles), respectively. We found that reprogramming of differentiated cells induces T-circle and single-stranded C-rich telomeric DNA accumulation, indicating the activation of telomere trimming pathways that compensate telomerase-dependent telomere elongation in hiPSCs. Excessive telomere elongation compromises telomere stability and promotes the formation of partially single-stranded telomeric DNA circles (C-circles) in hESCs, suggesting heightened sensitivity of stem cells to replication stress at overly long telomeres. Thus, tight control of telomere length homeostasis is essential to maintain telomere stability in hESCs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据