Evidence for close molecular proximity between reverting and undifferentiated cells

Abstract

Abstract Background According to Waddington’s epigenetic landscape concept, the differentiation process can be illustrated by a cell akin to a ball rolling down from the top of a hill (proliferation state) and crossing furrows before stopping in basins or “attractor states” to reach its stable differentiated state. However, it is now clear that some committed cells can retain a certain degree of plasticity and reacquire phenotypical characteristics of a more pluripotent cell state. In line with this dynamic model, we have previously shown that differentiating cells (chicken erythrocytic progenitors (T2EC)) retain for 24 h the ability to self-renew when transferred back in self-renewal conditions. Despite those intriguing and promising results, the underlying molecular state of those “reverting” cells remains unexplored. The aim of the present study was therefore to molecularly characterize the T2EC reversion process by combining advanced statistical tools to make the most of single-cell transcriptomic data. For this purpose, T2EC, initially maintained in a self-renewal medium (0H), were induced to differentiate for 24H (24H differentiating cells); then, a part of these cells was transferred back to the self-renewal medium (48H reverting cells) and the other part was maintained in the differentiation medium for another 24H (48H differentiating cells). For each time point, cell transcriptomes were generated using scRT-qPCR and scRNAseq. Results Our results showed a strong overlap between 0H and 48H reverting cells when applying dimensional reduction. Moreover, the statistical comparison of cell distributions and differential expression analysis indicated no significant differences between these two cell groups. Interestingly, gene pattern distributions highlighted that, while 48H reverting cells have gene expression pattern more similar to 0H cells, they are not completely identical, which suggest that for some genes a longer delay may be required for the cells to fully recover. Finally, sparse PLS (sparse partial least square) analysis showed that only the expression of 3 genes discriminates 48H reverting and 0H cells. Conclusions Altogether, we show that reverting cells return to an earlier molecular state almost identical to undifferentiated cells and demonstrate a previously undocumented physiological and molecular plasticity during the differentiation process, which most likely results from the dynamic behavior of the underlying molecular network.