Int J Stem Cells.  2025 Feb;18(1):12-20. 10.15283/ijsc23173.

Crosstalk between Signaling Pathways and Energy Metabolism in Pluripotency

• Kim KT
• Kim SM
• Cha HJ

• KMID: 2565193
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.15283/ijsc23173

Abstract

The sequential change from totipotency to multipotency occurs during early mammalian embryo development. However, due to the lack of cellular models to recapitulate the distinct potency of stem cells at each stage, their molecular and cellular characteristics remain ambiguous. The establishment of isogenic naïve and primed pluripotent stem cells to represent the pluripotency in the inner cell mass of the pre-implantation blastocyst and in the epiblast from the post-implantation embryo allows the understanding of the distinctive characteristics of two different states of pluripotent stem cells. This review discusses the prominent disparities between naïve and primed pluripotency, including signaling pathways, metabolism, and epigenetic status, ultimately facilitating a comprehensive understanding of their significance during early mammalian embryonic development.

Keyword

Naïve pluripotent stem cells; Primed pluripotent stem cells; Signaling pathways; Cellular metabolism; Early embryo development; Pluripotent stem cells

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Graphical illustration of main signaling pathways in naïve (A) and primed (B) pluripotent stem cells (PSCs). (A) (i) BMP4 mediates active phosphorylation of Smad1/5/8 to form protein complex with Smad4 to induce Dusp9, encoding Mkp4 (a dual phosphatase for MAPK) to inactivate Erk1/2. (ii) LIF binds to gp130/LIFR and activates JAK/STAT3 pathway to induce naïve pluripotency. Upon LIF mediated LIFR phosphorylation recruits Zap70 and Shp2 serving as both negative feedback of JAK/STAT3 signaling and a signaling transducer to Ras/Raf toward Erk1/2 activation. PKC and SRC serve as upstream kinase transducing signals toward Erk1/2. (iii) Wnt binding to LRP and Fz receptor inhibits β-catenin destruction complex (i.e., Gsk3β/Axin1/APC) and stabilizes β-catenin for Tcf3 inhibition. Plasma membrane localization of β-catenin/Oct4 in a complex with E-cadherin is found in naïve PSCs. CHIR99021 as a Gsk3β inhibitor; PD0325901 as a Mek1 inhibitor. (B) (i) Fgf2 binding to Fgf2 receptor recruits Shp2 to the plasma membrane, to serve a binding site for Grb2. Sos activation by Grb2 binding activates Ras and the downstream signaling which leads to lineage specification. PKC and SRC serve as upstream kinase transducing signals toward Erk1/2. Activin binding to Activin Receptor (ActR) induces Smad2/3 phosphorylation. Gray-colored proteins refer to inhibited proteins.

• 

  Fig. 2 Graphical illustration of main metabolism pathways in naïve (A) and primed (B) pluripotent stem cells (PSCs). (A) Bivalent metabolism with active glycolysis and OxPHOS contributes to ATP production. Excess glucose is converted and stored as glycogen by activation of Gys1 upon Gsk3β inhibition. Subsequent inhibition of AMPK by glycogen activates de novo fatty acid synthesis in naïve PSCs. (B) The attenuated mitochondrial metabolism in primed pluripotency is highlighted. Primed PSCs predominantly utilize glycolysis to generate ATP. The activation of AMPK due to depletion of glycogen inhibits overall fatty acid synthesis. However, certain fatty acids (e.g., MUFAs), are recognized for their crucial function in sustaining primed human PSCs. Decreased fatty acid oxidation by epigenetic suppression of CPT1 is a typical feature of primed PSCs. Gray-colored proteins refer to inhibited proteins. The unique mitochondrial structure distinguishing naïve from primed PSCs is also underlined.

Reference

References

1. Nichols J, Smith A. 2009; Naive and primed pluripotent states. Cell Stem Cell. 4:487–492. DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2009.05.015. PMID: 19497275.

2. Nichols J, Smith A. 2012; Pluripotency in the embryo and in culture. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 4:a008128. DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a008128. PMID: 22855723. PMCID: PMC3405859.

3. Cha Y, Han MJ, Cha HJ, et al. 2017; Metabolic control of primed human pluripotent stem cell fate and function by the miR-200c-SIRT2 axis. Nat Cell Biol. 19:445–456. DOI: 10.1038/ncb3517. PMID: 28436968. PMCID: PMC5545746.

4. Kim KT, Oh JY, Park S, et al. 2022; Live isolation of naïve ESCs via distinct glucose metabolism and stored glycogen. Metab Eng. 72:97–106. DOI: 10.1016/j.ymben.2022.03.003. PMID: 35283260.

5. Kim SM, Kwon EJ, Oh JY, et al. 2023; Ampk activation by glycogen expenditure primes the exit of naïve pluripotency. bioRxiv. 541467 [Online]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.05.19.541467. cited 2023 May 22. DOI: 10.1101/2023.05.19.541467.

6. Koo KM, Go YH, Kim SM, et al. 2023; Label-free and non-destructive identification of naïve and primed embryonic stem cells based on differences in cellular metabolism. Biomaterials. 293:121939. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2022.121939. PMID: 36521427.

7. Kumar B, Elsässer SJ. 2019; Quantitative multiplexed ChIP reveals global alterations that shape promoter bivalency in ground state embryonic stem cells. Cell Rep. 28:3274–3284.e5. DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2019.08.046. PMID: 31533047. PMCID: PMC6859498.

8. Kumar B, Navarro C, Winblad N, et al. 2022; Polycomb repressive complex 2 shields naïve human pluripotent cells from trophectoderm differentiation. Nat Cell Biol. 24:845–857. DOI: 10.1038/s41556-022-00916-w. PMID: 35637409. PMCID: PMC9203276.

9. Cho SJ, Kim KT, Kim JS, et al. 2018; A fluorescent chemical probe CDy9 selectively stains and enables the isolation of live naïve mouse embryonic stem cells. Biomaterials. 180:12–23. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.07.007. PMID: 30014963.

10. Kinoshita M, Smith A. 2018; Pluripotency deconstructed. Dev Growth Differ. 60:44–52. DOI: 10.1111/dgd.12419. PMID: 29359419.

11. Smith A. 2017; Formative pluripotency: the executive phase in a developmental continuum. Development. 144:365–373. DOI: 10.1242/dev.142679. PMID: 28143843. PMCID: PMC5430734.

12. Weinberger L, Ayyash M, Novershtern N, Hanna JH. 2016; Dynamic stem cell states: naive to primed pluripotency in rodents and humans. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 17:155–169. DOI: 10.1038/nrm.2015.28. PMID: 26860365.

13. Hanna JH, Saha K, Jaenisch R. 2010; Pluripotency and cellular reprogramming: facts, hypotheses, unresolved issues. Cell. 143:508–525. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2010.10.008. PMID: 21074044. PMCID: PMC3032267.

14. Ying QL, Wray J, Nichols J, et al. 2008; The ground state of embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Nature. 453:519–523. DOI: 10.1038/nature06968. PMID: 18497825. PMCID: PMC5328678.

15. Huyghe A, Furlan G, Ozmadenci D, et al. 2020; Netrin-1 promotes naive pluripotency through Neo1 and Unc5b co-regulation of Wnt and MAPK signalling. Nat Cell Biol. 22:389–400. DOI: 10.1038/s41556-020-0483-2. PMID: 32231305.

16. Cheng JG, Chen JR, Hernandez L, Alvord WG, Stewart CL. 2001; Dual control of LIF expression and LIF receptor function regulate Stat3 activation at the onset of uterine receptivity and embryo implantation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 98:8680–8685. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.151180898. PMID: 11438698. PMCID: PMC37495.

17. Brons IG, Smithers LE, Trotter MW, et al. 2007; Derivation of pluripotent epiblast stem cells from mammalian embryos. Nature. 448:191–195. DOI: 10.1038/nature05950. PMID: 17597762.

18. Tesar PJ, Chenoweth JG, Brook FA, et al. 2007; New cell lines from mouse epiblast share defining features with human embryonic stem cells. Nature. 448:196–199. DOI: 10.1038/nature05972. PMID: 17597760.

19. Cha Y, Moon BH, Lee MO, et al. 2010; Zap70 functions to maintain stemness of mouse embryonic stem cells by negatively regulating Jak1/Stat3/c-Myc signaling. Stem Cells. 28:1476–1486. DOI: 10.1002/stem.470. PMID: 20641039. PMCID: PMC3164580.

20. Niwa H, Burdon T, Chambers I, Smith A. 1998; Self-renewal of pluripotent embryonic stem cells is mediated via activation of STAT3. Genes Dev. 12:2048–2060. DOI: 10.1101/gad.12.13.2048. PMID: 9649508. PMCID: PMC316954.

21. van Oosten AL, Costa Y, Smith A, Silva JC. 2012; JAK/STAT3 signalling is sufficient and dominant over antagonistic cues for the establishment of naive pluripotency. Nat Commun. 3:817. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1822. PMID: 22569365. PMCID: PMC3567838.

22. Kisseleva T, Bhattacharya S, Braunstein J, Schindler CW. 2002; Signaling through the JAK/STAT pathway, recent advances and future challenges. Gene. 285:1–24. DOI: 10.1016/S0378-1119(02)00398-0. PMID: 12039028.

23. Chan AC, Iwashima M, Turck CW, Weiss A. 1992; ZAP-70: a 70 kd protein-tyrosine kinase that associates with the TCR zeta chain. Cell. 71:649–662. DOI: 10.1016/0092-8674(92)90598-7. PMID: 1423621.

24. Cha Y, Park KS. 2010; SHP2 is a downstream target of ZAP70 to regulate JAK1/STAT3 and ERK signaling pathways in mouse embryonic stem cells. FEBS Lett. 584:4241–4246. DOI: 10.1016/j.febslet.2010.09.016. PMID: 20846526.

25. Jiao H, Berrada K, Yang W, Tabrizi M, Platanias LC, Yi T. 1996; Direct association with and dephosphorylation of Jak2 kinase by the SH2-domain-containing protein tyrosine phosphatase SHP-1. Mol Cell Biol. 16:6985–6992. DOI: 10.1128/MCB.16.12.6985. PMID: 8943354. PMCID: PMC231702.

26. Feng GS. 2007; Shp2-mediated molecular signaling in control of embryonic stem cell self-renewal and differentiation. Cell Res. 17:37–41. DOI: 10.1038/sj.cr.7310140. PMID: 17211446.

27. Kim SM, Kwon EJ, Kim YJ, et al. 2022; Dichotomous role of Shp2 for naïve and primed pluripotency maintenance in embryonic stem cells. Stem Cell Res Ther. 13:329. DOI: 10.1186/s13287-022-02976-z. PMID: 35850773. PMCID: PMC9290224.

28. Burdon T, Stracey C, Chambers I, Nichols J, Smith A. 1999; Suppression of SHP-2 and ERK signalling promotes self-renewal of mouse embryonic stem cells. Dev Biol. 210:30–43. DOI: 10.1006/dbio.1999.9265. PMID: 10364425.

29. Shimizu T, Ueda J, Ho JC, et al. 2012; Dual inhibition of Src and GSK3 maintains mouse embryonic stem cells, whose differentiation is mechanically regulated by Src signaling. Stem Cells. 30:1394–1404. DOI: 10.1002/stem.1119. PMID: 22553165.

30. Li Z, Fei T, Zhang J, et al. 2012; BMP4 Signaling Acts via dual-specificity phosphatase 9 to control ERK activity in mouse embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell. 10:171–182. DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2011.12.016. PMID: 22305567.

31. Dance M, Montagner A, Salles JP, Yart A, Raynal P. 2008; The molecular functions of Shp2 in the Ras/Mitogen-activated protein kinase (ERK1/2) pathway. Cell Signal. 20:453–459. DOI: 10.1016/j.cellsig.2007.10.002. PMID: 17993263.

32. Brumbaugh J, Hou Z, Russell JD, et al. 2012; Phosphorylation regulates human OCT4. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 109:7162–7168. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1203874109. PMID: 22474382. PMCID: PMC3358887.

33. Kim SH, Kim MO, Cho YY, et al. 2014; ERK1 phosphorylates Nanog to regulate protein stability and stem cell self-renewal. Stem Cell Res. 13:1–11. DOI: 10.1016/j.scr.2014.04.001. PMID: 24793005.

34. Dhaliwal NK, Miri K, Davidson S, Tamim El Jarkass H, Mitchell JA. 2018; KLF4 nuclear export requires ERK activation and initiates exit from naive pluripotency. Stem Cell Reports. 10:1308–1323. DOI: 10.1016/j.stemcr.2018.02.007. PMID: 29526737. PMCID: PMC6000723.

35. Hamilton WB, Brickman JM. 2014; Erk signaling suppresses embryonic stem cell self-renewal to specify endoderm. Cell Rep. 9:2056–2070. DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2014.11.032. PMID: 25533345.

36. Nichols J, Silva J, Roode M, Smith A. 2009; Suppression of Erk signalling promotes ground state pluripotency in the mouse embryo. Development. 136:3215–3222. DOI: 10.1242/dev.038893. PMID: 19710168. PMCID: PMC2739140.

37. Cheng AM, Saxton TM, Sakai R, et al. 1998; Mammalian Grb2 regulates multiple steps in embryonic development and malignant transformation. Cell. 95:793–803. DOI: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81702-X. PMID: 9865697.

38. Arman E, Haffner-Krausz R, Chen Y, Heath JK, Lonai P. 1998; Targeted disruption of fibroblast growth factor (FGF) receptor 2 suggests a role for FGF signaling in pregastrulation mammalian development. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 95:5082–5087. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.95.9.5082. PMID: 9560232. PMCID: PMC20217.

39. Feldman B, Poueymirou W, Papaioannou VE, DeChiara TM, Goldfarb M. 1995; Requirement of FGF-4 for postimplantation mouse development. Science. 267:246–249. DOI: 10.1126/science.7809630. PMID: 7809630.

40. Yang W, Klaman LD, Chen B, et al. 2006; An Shp2/SFK/Ras/Erk signaling pathway controls trophoblast stem cell survival. Dev Cell. 10:317–327. DOI: 10.1016/j.devcel.2006.01.002. PMID: 16516835.

41. Mossahebi-Mohammadi M, Quan M, Zhang JS, Li X. 2020; FGF signaling pathway: a key regulator of stem cell pluripotency. Front Cell Dev Biol. 8:79. DOI: 10.3389/fcell.2020.00079. PMID: 32133359. PMCID: PMC7040165.

42. Simon CS, Rahman S, Raina D, Schröter C, Hadjantonakis AK. 2020; Live visualization of ERK activity in the mouse blastocyst reveals lineage-specific signaling dynamics. Dev Cell. 55:341–353.e5. DOI: 10.1016/j.devcel.2020.09.030. PMID: 33091370. PMCID: PMC7658048.

43. Lanner F, Rossant J. 2010; The role of FGF/Erk signaling in pluripotent cells. Development. 137:3351–3360. DOI: 10.1242/dev.050146. PMID: 20876656.

44. Clevers H. 2006; Wnt/beta-catenin signaling in development and disease. Cell. 127:469–480. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2006.10.018. PMID: 17081971.

45. Theunissen TW, Powell BE, Wang H, et al. 2014; Systematic identification of culture conditions for induction and maintenance of naive human pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell. 15:524–526. Erratum for: Cell Stem Cell 2014;15:471-487. DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2014.09.003. PMID: 28903030. PMCID: PMC4534765.

46. Carbognin E, Betto RM, Soriano ME, Smith AG, Martello G. 2016; Stat3 promotes mitochondrial transcription and oxidative respiration during maintenance and induction of naive pluripotency. EMBO J. 35:618–634. DOI: 10.15252/embj.201592629. PMID: 26903601. PMCID: PMC4801951.

47. Cole MF, Johnstone SE, Newman JJ, Kagey MH, Young RA. 2008; Tcf3 is an integral component of the core regulatory circuitry of embryonic stem cells. Genes Dev. 22:746–755. DOI: 10.1101/gad.1642408. PMID: 18347094. PMCID: PMC2275428.

48. Miyabayashi T, Teo JL, Yamamoto M, McMillan M, Nguyen C, Kahn M. 2007; Wnt/beta-catenin/CBP signaling maintains long-term murine embryonic stem cell pluripotency. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 104:5668–5673. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0701331104. PMID: 17372190. PMCID: PMC1838514.

49. ten Berge D, Kurek D, Blauwkamp T, et al. 2011; Embryonic stem cells require Wnt proteins to prevent differentiation to epiblast stem cells. Nat Cell Biol. 13:1070–1075. DOI: 10.1038/ncb2314. PMID: 21841791. PMCID: PMC4157727.

50. Wagner RT, Xu X, Yi F, Merrill BJ, Cooney AJ. 2010; Canonical Wnt/β-catenin regulation of liver receptor homolog-1 mediates pluripotency gene expression. Stem Cells. 28:1794–1804. DOI: 10.1002/stem.502. PMID: 20734354. PMCID: PMC2996860.

51. Faunes F, Hayward P, Descalzo SM, et al. 2013; A membrane-associated β-catenin/Oct4 complex correlates with ground-state pluripotency in mouse embryonic stem cells. Development. 140:1171–1183. DOI: 10.1242/dev.085654. PMID: 23444350. PMCID: PMC3585656.

52. Folmes CD, Terzic A. 2014; Metabolic determinants of embryonic development and stem cell fate. Reprod Fertil Dev. 27:82–88. DOI: 10.1071/RD14383. PMID: 25472047. PMCID: PMC4444364.

53. Kaneko KJ. 2016; Metabolism of preimplantation embryo development: a bystander or an active participant? Curr Top Dev Biol. 120:259–310. DOI: 10.1016/bs.ctdb.2016.04.010. PMID: 27475855.

54. Tsogtbaatar E, Landin C, Minter-Dykhouse K, Folmes CDL. 2020; Energy metabolism regulates stem cell pluripotency. Front Cell Dev Biol. 8:87. DOI: 10.3389/fcell.2020.00087. PMID: 32181250. PMCID: PMC7059177.

55. Brown JJ, Whittingham DG. 1991; The roles of pyruvate, lactate and glucose during preimplantation development of embryos from F1 hybrid mice in vitro. Development. 112:99–105. DOI: 10.1242/dev.112.1.99. PMID: 1769345.

56. Vander Heiden MG, Cantley LC, Thompson CB. 2009; Understanding the Warburg effect: the metabolic requirements of cell proliferation. Science. 324:1029–1033. DOI: 10.1126/science.1160809. PMID: 19460998. PMCID: PMC2849637.

57. Waisman A, Sevlever F, Elías Costa M, et al. 2019; Cell cycle dynamics of mouse embryonic stem cells in the ground state and during transition to formative pluripotency. Sci Rep. 9:8051. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-44537-0. PMID: 31142785. PMCID: PMC6541595.

58. Zaveri L, Dhawan J. 2018; Cycling to meet fate: connecting pluripotency to the cell cycle. Front Cell Dev Biol. 6:57. DOI: 10.3389/fcell.2018.00057. PMID: 29974052. PMCID: PMC6020794.

59. Kim H, Jang H, Kim TW, et al. 2015; Core pluripotency factors directly regulate metabolism in embryonic stem cell to maintain pluripotency. Stem Cells. 33:2699–2711. DOI: 10.1002/stem.2073. PMID: 26059508.

60. Lee J, Kim HK, Han YM, Kim J. 2008; Pyruvate kinase isozyme type M2 (PKM2) interacts and cooperates with Oct-4 in regulating transcription. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 40:1043–1054. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocel.2007.11.009. PMID: 18191611.

61. Sone M, Morone N, Nakamura T, et al. 2017; Hybrid cellular metabolism coordinated by Zic3 and Esrrb synergistically enhances induction of naive pluripotency. Cell Metab. 25:1103–1117.e6. DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2017.04.017. PMID: 28467928.

62. Zhang J, Ratanasirintrawoot S, Chandrasekaran S, et al. 2016; LIN28 regulates stem cell metabolism and conversion to primed pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell. 19:66–80. DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2016.05.009. PMID: 27320042.

63. Thomson JL, Brinster RL. 1966; Glycogen content of preimplantation mouse embryos. Anat Rec. 155:97–102. DOI: 10.1002/ar.1091550111. PMID: 4164096.

64. Hardie DG, Ross FA, Hawley SA. 2012; AMPK: a nutrient and energy sensor that maintains energy homeostasis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 13:251–262. DOI: 10.1038/nrm3311. PMID: 22436748. PMCID: PMC5726489.

65. Chirala SS, Chang H, Matzuk M, et al. 2003; Fatty acid synthesis is essential in embryonic development: fatty acid synthase null mutants and most of the heterozygotes die in utero. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 100:6358–6363. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0931394100. PMID: 12738878. PMCID: PMC164451.

66. Wang L, Zhang T, Wang L, et al. 2017; Fatty acid synthesis is critical for stem cell pluripotency via promoting mitochondrial fission. EMBO J. 36:1330–1347. DOI: 10.15252/embj.201695417. PMID: 28377463. PMCID: PMC5430220.

67. Tanosaki S, Tohyama S, Fujita J, et al. 2020; Fatty acid synthesis is indispensable for survival of human pluripotent stem cells. iScience. 23:101535. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2020.101535. PMID: 33083764. PMCID: PMC7509212.

68. Yan H, Malik N, Kim YI, et al. 2021; Fatty acid oxidation is required for embryonic stem cell survival during metabolic stress. EMBO Rep. 22:e52122. DOI: 10.15252/embr.202052122. PMID: 33950553. PMCID: PMC8183408.

69. Cornacchia D, Zhang C, Zimmer B, et al. 2019; Lipid deprivation induces a stable, naive-to-primed intermediate state of pluripotency in human PSCs. Cell Stem Cell. 25:120–136.e10. DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2019.05.001. PMID: 31155483. PMCID: PMC7549840.

70. Zhong L, Gordillo M, Wang X, et al. 2023; Dual role of lipids for genome stability and pluripotency facilitates full potency of mouse embryonic stem cells. Protein Cell. 14:591–602. DOI: 10.1093/procel/pwad008. PMID: 37029701. PMCID: PMC10392030.

71. Yanes O, Clark J, Wong DM, et al. 2010; Metabolic oxidation regulates embryonic stem cell differentiation. Nat Chem Biol. 6:411–417. DOI: 10.1038/nchembio.364. PMID: 20436487. PMCID: PMC2873061.

72. Sperber H, Mathieu J, Wang Y, et al. 2015; The metabolome regulates the epigenetic landscape during naive-to-primed human embryonic stem cell transition. Nat Cell Biol. 17:1523–1535. DOI: 10.1038/ncb3264. PMID: 26571212. PMCID: PMC4662931.

73. Ben-David U, Gan QF, Golan-Lev T, et al. 2013; Selective elimination of human pluripotent stem cells by an oleate synthesis inhibitor discovered in a high-throughput screen. Cell Stem Cell. 12:167–179. DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2012.11.015. PMID: 23318055.

74. Mannully CT, Bruck-Haimson R, Zacharia A, et al. 2022; Lipid desaturation regulates the balance between self-renewal and differentiation in mouse blastocyst-derived stem cells. Cell Death Dis. 13:1027. DOI: 10.1038/s41419-022-05263-0. PMID: 36477438. PMCID: PMC9729213.

75. Prieto J, García-Cañaveras JC, León M, et al. 2021; c-MYC triggers lipid remodelling during early somatic cell reprogramming to pluripotency. Stem Cell Rev Rep. 17:2245–2261. DOI: 10.1007/s12015-021-10239-2. PMID: 34476741. PMCID: PMC8599373.

76. Kim MK, Park JK, Paek SK, et al. 2018; Effects and pregnancy outcomes of L-carnitine supplementation in culture media for human embryo development from in vitro fertilization. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 44:2059–2066. DOI: 10.1111/jog.13763. PMID: 30066982.

77. Carrillo-González DF, Maldonado-Estrada JG. 2020; L-carnitine supplementation in culture media improves the pregnancy rate of in vitro produced embryos with sexed semen from Bos taurus indicus cows. Trop Anim Health Prod. 52:2559–2565. DOI: 10.1007/s11250-020-02281-y. PMID: 32440939.

78. Krisher RL, Prather RS. 2012; A role for the Warburg effect in preimplantation embryo development: metabolic modification to support rapid cell proliferation. Mol Reprod Dev. 79:311–320. DOI: 10.1002/mrd.22037. PMID: 22431437. PMCID: PMC3328638.

79. Simmet K, Zakhartchenko V, Wolf E. 2018; Comparative aspects of early lineage specification events in mammalian embryos - insights from reverse genetics studies. Cell Cycle. 17:1688–1695. DOI: 10.1080/15384101.2018.1496747. PMID: 29995579. PMCID: PMC6133330.

80. Vardhana SA, Arnold PK, Rosen BP, et al. 2019; Glutamine independence is a selectable feature of pluripotent stem cells. Nat Metab. 1:676–687. DOI: 10.1038/s42255-019-0082-3. PMID: 31511848. PMCID: PMC6737941.

81. Tohyama S, Fujita J, Hishiki T, et al. 2016; Glutamine oxidation is indispensable for survival of human pluripotent stem cells. Cell Metab. 23:663–674. DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2016.03.001. PMID: 27050306.

82. Carey BW, Finley LW, Cross JR, Allis CD, Thompson CB. 2015; Intracellular α-ketoglutarate maintains the pluripotency of embryonic stem cells. Nature. 518:413–416. DOI: 10.1038/nature13981. PMID: 25487152. PMCID: PMC4336218.

83. Zhou W, Choi M, Margineantu D, et al. 2012; HIF1α induced switch from bivalent to exclusively glycolytic metabolism during ESC-to-EpiSC/hESC transition. EMBO J. 31:2103–2116. DOI: 10.1038/emboj.2012.71. PMID: 22446391. PMCID: PMC3343469.

84. Martello G, Sugimoto T, Diamanti E, et al. 2012; Esrrb is a pivotal target of the Gsk3/Tcf3 axis regulating embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Cell Stem Cell. 11:491–504. Erratum in: Cell Stem Cell 2013;12:630. DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2012.06.008. PMID: 23040478. PMCID: PMC3465555.

85. Stirparo GG, Kurowski A, Yanagida A, et al. 2021; OCT4 induces embryonic pluripotency via STAT3 signaling and metabolic mechanisms. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 118:e2008890118. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2008890118. PMID: 33452132. PMCID: PMC7826362.

86. Moussaieff A, Rouleau M, Kitsberg D, et al. 2015; Glycolysis-mediated changes in acetyl-CoA and histone acetylation control the early differentiation of embryonic stem cells. Cell Metab. 21:392–402. DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2015.02.002. PMID: 25738455.

87. Yang J, Ryan DJ, Wang W, et al. 2017; Establishment of mouse expanded potential stem cells. Nature. 550:393–397. DOI: 10.1038/nature24052. PMID: 29019987. PMCID: PMC5890884.

88. Xu Y, Zhao J, Ren Y, et al. 2022; Derivation of totipotent-like stem cells with blastocyst-like structure forming potential. Cell Res. 32:513–529. DOI: 10.1038/s41422-022-00668-0. PMID: 35508506. PMCID: PMC9160264.

89. Fu X, Djekidel MN, Zhang Y. 2020; A transcriptional roadmap for 2C-like-to-pluripotent state transition. Sci Adv. 6:eaay5181. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aay5181. PMID: 32523982. PMCID: PMC7259939.

90. Io S, Kabata M, Iemura Y, et al. 2021; Capturing human trophoblast development with naive pluripotent stem cells in vitro. Cell Stem Cell. 28:1023–1039.e13. DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2021.03.013. PMID: 33831365.

91. Linneberg-Agerholm M, Wong YF, Romero Herrera JA, Monteiro RS, Anderson KGV, Brickman JM. 2019; Naïve human pluripotent stem cells respond to Wnt, Nodal and LIF signalling to produce expandable naïve extra-embryonic endoderm. Development. 146:dev180620. DOI: 10.1242/dev.180620. PMID: 31740534.

92. Pham TXA, Panda A, Kagawa H, et al. 2022; Modeling human extraembryonic mesoderm cells using naive pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell. 29:1346–1365.e10. DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2022.08.001. PMID: 36055191. PMCID: PMC9438972.

93. Kagawa H, Javali A, Khoei HH, et al. 2022; Human blastoids model blastocyst development and implantation. Nature. 601:600–605. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-04267-8. PMID: 34856602. PMCID: PMC8791832.

94. Moris N, Anlas K, van den Brink SC, et al. 2020; An in vitro model of early anteroposterior organization during human development. Nature. 582:410–415. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-020-2383-9. PMID: 32528178.

95. Liu L, Oura S, Markham Z, et al. 2023; Modeling post-implantation stages of human development into early organogenesis with stem-cell-derived peri-gastruloids. Cell. 186:3776–3792.e16. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2023.07.018. PMID: 37478861.

96. Pedroza M, Gassaloglu SI, Dias N, et al. 2023; Self-patterning of human stem cells into post-implantation lineages. Nature. 622:574–583. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06354-4. PMID: 37369348. PMCID: PMC10584676.

97. Weatherbee BAT, Gantner CW, Iwamoto-Stohl LK, et al. 2023; Pluripotent stem cell-derived model of the post-implantation human embryo. Nature. 622:584–593. Erratum in: Nature 2023;621:E30. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06368-y. PMID: 37369347. PMCID: PMC10584688.

98. Yamanaka Y, Hamidi S, Yoshioka-Kobayashi K, et al. 2023; Reconstituting human somitogenesis in vitro. Nature. 614:509–520. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-022-05649-2. PMID: 36543322.