Dynamics of alternative splicing during somatic cell reprogramming reveals functions for RNA-binding proteins CPSF3, hnRNP UL1, and TIA1

Background: Somatic cell reprogramming is the process that allows differentiated cells to revert to a pluripotent state. In contrast to the extensively studied rewiring of epigenetic and transcriptional programs required for reprogramming, the dynamics of post-transcriptional changes and their assoc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Vivori, Claudia, 1989-, Papasaikas, Panagiotis, Stadhouders, Ralph, Di Stefano, Bruno, 1984-, Ribó Rubio, Anna, Berenguer Balaguer, Clara, Generoso, Serena Francesca, 1988-, Mallol, Anna, Sardina, Jose Luis, Payer, Bernhard, Graf, T. (Thomas), Valcárcel, J. (Juan)
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2021
País:España
Institución:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
Repositorio:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
OAI Identifier:oai:recercat.cat:10230/49031
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/10230/49031
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-021-02372-5
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Alternative splicing
CPSF3
Pluripotency
Somatic cell reprogramming
TIA1
hnRNP UL1
Descripción
Sumario:Background: Somatic cell reprogramming is the process that allows differentiated cells to revert to a pluripotent state. In contrast to the extensively studied rewiring of epigenetic and transcriptional programs required for reprogramming, the dynamics of post-transcriptional changes and their associated regulatory mechanisms remain poorly understood. Here we study the dynamics of alternative splicing changes occurring during efficient reprogramming of mouse B cells into induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells and compare them to those occurring during reprogramming of mouse embryonic fibroblasts. Results: We observe a significant overlap between alternative splicing changes detected in the two reprogramming systems, which are generally uncoupled from changes in transcriptional levels. Correlation between gene expression of potential regulators and specific clusters of alternative splicing changes enables the identification and subsequent validation of CPSF3 and hnRNP UL1 as facilitators, and TIA1 as repressor of mouse embryonic fibroblasts reprogramming. We further find that these RNA-binding proteins control partially overlapping programs of splicing regulation, involving genes relevant for developmental and morphogenetic processes. Conclusions: Our results reveal common programs of splicing regulation during reprogramming of different cell types and identify three novel regulators of this process and their targets.