Definitive Hematopoiesis in the Yolk Sac Emerges from Wnt-Responsive Hemogenic Endothelium Independently of Circulation and Arterial Identity.

Adult-repopulating hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) emerge in low numbers in the midgestation mouse embryo from a subset of arterial endothelium, through an endothelial-to-hematopoietic transition. HSC-producing arterial hemogenic endothelium relies on the establishment of embryonic blood flow and arterial identity, and requires β-catenin signaling. Specified prior to and during the formation of these initial HSCs are thousands of yolk sac-derived erythro-myeloid progenitors (EMPs). EMPs ensure embryonic survival prior to the establishment of a permanent hematopoietic system, and provide subsets of long-lived tissue macrophages. While an endothelial origin for these HSC-independent definitive progenitors is also accepted, the spatial location and temporal output of yolk sac hemogenic endothelium over developmental time remain undefined. We performed a spatiotemporal analysis of EMP emergence, and document the morphological steps of the endothelial-to-hematopoietic transition. Emergence of rounded EMPs from polygonal clusters of Kit(+) cells initiates prior to the establishment of arborized arterial and venous vasculature in the yolk sac. Interestingly, Kit(+) polygonal clusters are detected in both arterial and venous vessels after remodeling. To determine whether there are similar mechanisms regulating the specification of EMPs with other angiogenic signals regulating adult-repopulating HSCs, we investigated the role of embryonic blood flow and Wnt/β-catenin signaling during EMP emergence. In embryos lacking a functional circulation, rounded Kit(+) EMPs still fully emerge from unremodeled yolk sac vasculature. In contrast, canonical Wnt signaling appears to be a common mechanism regulating hematopoietic emergence from hemogenic endothelium. These data illustrate the heterogeneity in hematopoietic output and spatiotemporal regulation of primary embryonic hemogenic endothelium. Stem Cells 2016;34:431-444.

KEYWORDS: {{ getKeywords(articleDetailText.words) }}