Skip to main content
. 2012 Apr 30;7(4):e36405. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0036405

Figure 5. Repression of Smad-dependent transcription by RA and SDIA.

Figure 5

(A) Expression of Notch ligands and receptors in PA6, determined by qPCR, relative to their values in undifferentiated ES cells. Data are represented in log(2) scale as the average ± SEM of 3 independent RNA extractions conducted in triplicate. (B) ES cells were induced to differentiate on PA6 cells in serum-free medium in the presence of DMSO (as vehicle control) or a γ-Secretase Inhibitor (γSI) and expression of the neroectodermal markers Sox1 and Nestin was analysed by qPCR. Data are represented as the average ± SEM of a representative experiment conducted in triplicate. (C) ES cells were induced to differentiate on PA6 cells in serum-free medium supplemented with BMP4 and RA in the presence of DMSO (as vehicle control) or γ-Secretase Inhibitor (γSI). Representative micrographs show morphology of differentiated colonies (phase contrast; left hand panels) and expression of Desmin (green immunofluorescence; middle panels). DAPI was used as nuclear counterstaining (blue; right hand panels). (D) Percentage of colonies positive for Desmin, represented as the average ± SEM of 3 independent differentiation experiments. (E) Reporter assays of Smad-dependent transcription in ES cells plated either on gelatine (black bars) or mitomycin C-treated PA6 cells (white bars) and stimulated as indicated. Data were normalised to unstimulated (control) ES cells plated on gelatine and represented as the average ± SEM of 3 independent experiments conducted in triplicate. (*) p-value<0.05, n = 3. (F) Schematic illustrating crosstalk between the BMP4-, RA- and SDIA/Jag1-activated pathways in controlling ES cell differentiation. Scale bar in (C), 50 µm.