Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

An antigenic difference between cells forming early and late haematopoietic spleen colonies (CFU-S)

Abstract

Murine pluripotent haematopoietic stem cells have generally been assayed by their ability to form macroscopic colonies of haematopoietic cells in the spleens of heavily irradiated recipient mice (colony-forming unit-spleen or CFU-S assay)1. However, recent evidence suggests that there are distinct sub-populations of CFU-S2. Most spleen colonies present 7–8 days after injection consist of differentiated erythroid cells, contain no primitive myeloid or erythroid precursor cells and disappear from the spleen within 3 days, whereas the majority of colonies present at 10–12 days contain primitive precursors, are multilineal and cannot be detected at 7–8 days2. Furthermore, many 10-day-old spleen colonies do not contain cells capable of forming spleen colonies in secondary irradiated recipients (an index of the self-renewal capacity of stem cells) whereas at day 14 almost all colonies contain these CFU-S3. These studies suggest that only when colonies are scored at or later than 11–12 days is the spleen colony technique adequate for the assay of multipotential stem cells. We now report an antigenic difference between subpopulations of CFU-S forming early (day 8) and late (day 14) spleen colonies which has been used to purify multipotential haematopoietic stem cells from murine bone marrow.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Till, J. E. & McCulloch, E. A. Radiat. Res. 14, 213–222 (1961).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Magli, M. C., Iscove, N. N. & Odartchenko, N. Nature 295, 527–529 (1982).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Siminovitch, L., McCulloch, E. A. & Till, J. E. J. cell comp. Physiol. 62, 327–336 (1963).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hogarth, P. M., Crewther, P. E. & McKenzie, I. F. C. Eur. J. Immun. 12, 374–379 (1982).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Harris, R. A., Hogarth, P. M., McKenzie, I. F. C. & Penington, D. G. Expl Hemat. 11, 527–541 (1983).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hogarth, P. M., Edwards, J., McKenzie, I. F. C., Goding, J. W. & Liew, F. Y. Immunology 46, 135–144 (1982).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Hodgson, G. S. & Bradley, T. R. Nature 281, 381–382 (1979).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hodgson, G. S. & Bradley, T. R. Cancer Treat. Rep. 63, 1761–1769 (1979).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lahiri, S. K., Keizer, H. J. & van Putten, L. M. Cell Tissue Kinet. 3, 355–362 (1970).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mo nette, F. C. & de Mello, J. B. Cell Tissue Kinet. 12, 161–175 (1979).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Visser, J. W. M. & Eliason, J. F. Cell Tissue Kinet. 16, 385–392 (1983).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Nicola, N. A. & Johnson, G. R. Blood 60, 1019–1029 (1982).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nakahata, T. & Ogawa, M. Proc. natn. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 79, 3843–3847 (1982).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Boggs, D. R., Boggs, S. S., Saxe, D. F., Gress, L. A. & Canfield, D. R. J. clin. Invest. 70, 242–253 (1982).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Visser, J. W. M. & Bol, S. J. L. Stem Cells 1, 240–249 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hoang, T. et al. Blood 61, 580–588 (1983).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Harris, R., Hogarth, P., Wadeson, L. et al. An antigenic difference between cells forming early and late haematopoietic spleen colonies (CFU-S). Nature 307, 638–641 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1038/307638a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/307638a0

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing