Paolo Armando Gagliardi1, Alberto Puliafito2, Laura di Blasio1, Federica Chianale2, Desiana Somale1, Giorgio Seano1, Federico Bussolino3, Luca Primo3. 1. 1] Department of Oncology, University of Torino, Torino, 10043, Italy [2] Candiolo Cancer Institute-FPO IRCCS, Candiolo, 10060, Italy. 2. Candiolo Cancer Institute-FPO IRCCS, Candiolo, 10060, Italy. 3. 1] Department of Oncology, University of Torino, Torino, 10043, Italy [2] Candiolo Cancer Institute-FPO IRCCS, Candiolo, 10060, Italy [3] Center for Molecular Systems Biology, University of Torino, 10124, Torino, Italy.
Abstract
Cellular protrusions are highly dynamic structures involved in fundamental processes, including cell migration and invasion. For a cell to migrate, its leading edge must form protrusions, and then adhere or retract. The spatial and temporal coordination of protrusions and retraction is yet to be fully understood. The study of protrusion dynamics mainly relies on live-microscopy often coupled to fluorescent labeling. Here we report the use of an alternative, label-free, quantitative and rapid assay to analyze protrusion dynamics in a cell population based on the real-time recording of cell activity by means of electronic sensors. Cells are seeded on a plate covered with electrodes and their shape changes map into measured impedance variations. Upon growth factor stimulation the impedance increases due to protrusive activity and decreases following retraction. Compared to microscopy-based methods, impedance measurements are suitable to high-throughput studies on different cell lines, growth factors and chemical compounds. We present data indicating that this assay lends itself to dissect the biochemical signaling pathways controlling adhesive protrusions. Indeed, we show that the protrusion phase is sustained by actin polymerization, directly driven by growth factor stimulation. Contraction instead mainly relies on myosin action, pointing at a pivotal role of myosin in lamellipodia retraction.
Cellular protrusions are highly dynamic structures involved in fundamental processes, including cell migration and invasion. For a cell to migrate, its leading edge must form protrusions, and then adhere or retract. The spatial and temporal coordination of protrusions and retraction is yet to be fully understood. The study of protrusion dynamics mainly relies on live-microscopy often coupled to fluorescent labeling. Here we report the use of an alternative, label-free, quantitative and rapid assay to analyze protrusion dynamics in a cell population based on the real-time recording of cell activity by means of electronic sensors. Cells are seeded on a plate covered with electrodes and their shape changes map into measured impedance variations. Upon growth factor stimulation the impedance increases due to protrusive activity and decreases following retraction. Compared to microscopy-based methods, impedance measurements are suitable to high-throughput studies on different cell lines, growth factors and chemical compounds. We present data indicating that this assay lends itself to dissect the biochemical signaling pathways controlling adhesive protrusions. Indeed, we show that the protrusion phase is sustained by actin polymerization, directly driven by growth factor stimulation. Contraction instead mainly relies on myosin action, pointing at a pivotal role of myosin in lamellipodia retraction.
Cell migration plays crucial roles in many physiological processes and contributes to
cancer cells invasion and dissemination. Migration strategies employed by cells change
in response to the diverse environmental stimuli, such as rigidity of the substrate,
molecular composition of the extracellular matrix or spatio-temporally varying
concentrations of soluble molecules such as growth factors or cytokines. Typically,
migration through/on a matrix involves the generation of cell protrusions, i.e.
extensions of plasma membrane outside the cell body1. So far, different
types of protrusion have been identified to contribute to cell migration and invasion in
specific contexts, cell types and microenvironment2. For example,
fibroblasts form either lamellipodia3 or lobopodia4
according to extracellular matrix dimensionality and elasticity. Filopodia are more
explorative structures5 and are relevant in the guidance of neuronal
growth cones6 and endothelial tip cell during sprouting angiogenesis7. Membrane blebs instead are typical of amoeboid type of cell migration
and invasion and have been described in leucocytes8, D. discoideum9 and H. histolytica10. In lamellipodia and filopodia actin
polymerization drives forward protrusion of the plasma membrane2. For
this reason, much emphasis has been placed on delineating molecular regulators and
upstream cellular signaling of actin polymerization, which in turn control cell
protrusion formation11. However, the dynamics of cell protrusions also
include their retraction. Extension and retraction should occur in a coordinated fashion
in order to drive efficient cell migration12.A challenging feature of studying protrusion dynamics is the ability to provide
quantitative as well as time-resolved data. The most common approach to this problem is
the use of live-microscopy on 2D adherent cells which employs different imaging
techniques such as standard wide-field, confocal or total internal reflection
fluorescence (TIRF) microscopy131415. There exist advanced
implementations of these methods such as Stroboscopic Analysis of Cell Dynamics16 and fluorescent speckle microscopy, which visualizes the movement and
assembly/disassembly of actin filaments in protrusive structures17.
Atomic force microscopy has also been used to measure lamellipodia dynamics and
thickness in adenocarcinoma cells or in migrating keratocytes1819.These approaches are powerful as they all allow single cell or even subcellular
resolution, and represent the method of choice to study protrusion dynamics. However,
such methods present a few drawbacks: i) they often require complex image and/or
mathematical processing to obtain quantitative results, ii) they are hardly suitable for
high throughput studies such as biochemical functional or drug screening and iii) are
subject to cell to cell variability.Here, we make use of a well-established technique based on the measurement of the
frequency dependent electrical impedance of cell-covered electrodes subject to a small
alternate electric current2021. Cells adhering on the electrodes vary
the impedance in a frequency dependent manner. By properly modulating the frequency of
the current, its amplitude, the time duration of the experiment and the size and
arrangement of electrodes, a number of different biological processes can be
quantified21222324252627.Here we employ the impedance reading (IR) technique to quantitatively measure protrusion
dynamics and validate the results by direct comparison with quantitative data of cell
surface variation, obtained through image analysis of live TIRF microscopy. Our data
provide insights on how lamellipodia protrusion and retraction are regulated. We present
data directly and quantitatively linking the amplitude of the response and its kinetics
to the ligand concentration. By direct comparison of microscopy data with IR data we can
dissect the different parts of the response into molecularly distinct events mediated by
actin polymerization and myosin contraction that can be inhibited separately by specific
drugs.
Results
Impedance reading variations can be quantitatively mapped into cell
protrusion dynamics
The non-transformed mammary epithelial cells MCF10A are highly sensitive to EGF
stimulation in chemotaxis28 and, when sparsely seeded on a flat
substrate, respond to EGF stimulation by producing fast growing
lamellipodia29. We investigated protrusive activity in MCF10A
cells by imaging cells stably transduced with LifeAct-GFP by TIRF microscopy.
Under these experimental conditions, lamellipodia were easily identifiable as
rapid growing flat meshes of actin filaments1. Upon EGF
stimulation, cells extended lamellipodia for about 100–400 seconds,
and started then to retract, slowly reducing the adhering surface (Fig.1A, Video
S1). This behavior is clearly visible in a kymograph representation (Fig. 1B). To quantitatively measure protrusion dynamics we
calculated in each time frame the area of cells adherent to the surface. While
the area was stable in untreated cells, EGF stimulation caused a rapid increase
of cell area that, after reaching the maximum value, decreased (Fig. 1C).
Figure 1
EGF stimulation induces protrusion formation and retraction.
(A) MCF10A cells were infected with pLKO.1 LifeAct-GFP, deprived of
EGF for 6 hours and kept in a humidified chamber at
37 °C and 5% CO2. Cells were then imaged by means of
TIRF microscopy. The depth of the evanescent field was kept at
90 nm. Cells were imaged over a time period of
1180 seconds and either stimulated or not with
5 ng/ml EGF. The time at which the stimulus was added was set to
t = 0 seconds. Images were acquired
every 20 seconds (Video
S1). Four time-points are reported in the figure:
−60 seconds (before EGF addition, quiescent cell),
120 seconds (protrusion), 260 seconds (maximum
extension) and 1120 seconds (retraction). Scale bars,
10 μm. (B) Kymograph of a pLKO.1 LifeAct-GFP
MCF10A cell stimulated as in A. A segment perpendicular to lamellipodium was
used to monitor fluorescence intensity at each time points, and then the
different time points were assembled. (C) Cell surface area variation
observed by TIRF microscopy of pLKO.1 LifeAct-GFP MCF10A cells stimulated
with EGF or unstimulated in which only the medium containing EGF was added
(vehicle). Dark thick lines represent the mean values while light shades
represent the area included between + SD and – SD.
This approach is powerful and quantitative but it is time expensive and biased by
cell to cell variability. In order to be able to observe protrusion dynamics in
a more rapid and reproducible manner, we employed a method based on IR. To
quantify the impedance change over-time, a unit-less parameter is used that
evaluates the relative change of impedance with respect to a reference impedance
value without cells and to the impedance at beginning of the measurement. This
parameter is called the cell index (CI). An increase in cell surface area
contacting the electrodes will result in a larger impedance and consequently in
an increase in cell index. Conversely, when cell diminish their adherent surface
area, the cell-index will decrease. To better compare IR experimental
measurements obtained under unstimulated and stimulated conditions, cell-index
is further post-processed to obtain a quantity called Baseline Δ
Cell Index. Further details are given in the Materials and Methods section.MCF10A cells generated a reproducible and specific impedance variation pattern in
response to EGF stimulation: immediately after EGF addition CI increased
rapidly, reaching a maximum between 100 and 400 seconds, and then decreasing
back close to initial values (Fig. 2A). In order to
precisely compare IR and TIRF microscopy data we defined 4 quantitative
indicators, schematically explained in Fig. 2B: the time
at which the cell-index reaches its maximum indicating how fast is the response
globally, the value of cell-index at maximum indicating the intensity of the
response, and protrusion or retraction slopes indicating the steepness of the
protrusion or retraction phases respectively (Fig.
2B).
Figure 2
Real-time evaluation of cell protrusion dynamics by IR.
(A) Baseline Δ cell index values obtained by IR of MCF10A
cells stimulated or not with EGF at t = 0.
(B) Cartoon showing the indicators that we use for quantification of
the IR response to EGF stimulation. The point where the EGF response curve
reaches the highest value corresponds to Maximum Cell Index and the Maximum
Cell Index Time (tm). The protrusion slope is calculated as
the mean slope between t0 and tm, where
t0 is the first time point after growth factor addition.
The retraction slope is calculated as the mean slope between
tm and t2m, where t2m is
twice tm. (C) Maximum Cell Index Time
(tm) of a number of experiments performed by means of
TIRF microscopy or IR of MCF10A stimulates with 10 ng/ml of EGF.
Each point represents a separate experiment. Dashes represent the mean
values. (D) Protrusion slope, (E) retraction slope and
(F) maximum value of Baseline Δ cell index curve of
MCF10A stimulated or not with 5 ng/ml EGF.
***P < 0.001.
Both IR and TIRF microscopy approaches revealed that the mean maximum cell index
time was at about 250 seconds (Fig. 2C), thus
indicating that IR is indeed a reliable readout for adherent surface area.
Furthermore, protrusion and retraction slopes and the maximum intensity of
response (maximum CI) were all significantly modulated by EGF stimulation and
allow quantitative comparison between different experiments (Fig.
2D,E,F).
EGF stimulation affects cell protrusion dynamics in a concentration
dependent manner
To assess the reliability of IR in detecting cell protrusion dynamics we first
performed a control experiment to establish the linearity of the CI with respect
to cell density. By increasing the number of plated cells, the shape of the
curves was similar while the maximum value of cell index raised (Fig. S1A). In particular we found that the
maximum cell index values of EGF-stimulated curves increased linearly with the
cell number in the range between
1 × 103 and
3 × 104 cells (Fig. S1C). Cell densities lower than
3 × 103 produced maximum
cell index values upon EGF stimulation almost undistinguishable from that of
vehicle treated cells (Fig. S1D).
Therefore, we used 5 × 103
cells/well in all experiments.To become sensitive to EGF stimulation cells need a period of EGF deprivation. We
investigated how the length of EGF deprivation influenced the protrusion
dynamics (Fig. S1B) and we observed
that short EGF deprivation time (0.5 hours) was sufficient to detect
protrusion and contraction in response to EGF addition. However, better
responses in term of maximum cell index were achieved after an EGF deprivation
period ranging between 2 and 8 hours (Fig. S1E). Interestingly, longer EGF
deprivation times reduced the cell ability to produce protrusions in response to
EGF (Fig. S1E). Therefore we used in
following experiments a starving period of 6 hours.Then, we evaluated the effect of varying concentration of EGF on protrusion
dynamics by employing 0.3 ng/ml to 30 ng/ml (Fig. 3A). Even at 0.3 ng/ml we were able to
detect variations of impedance values. Interestingly, we observed that
protrusion slope (Fig. 3B), retraction slope (Fig. 3C) and maximum cell index value (Fig.
3D) raised with the EGF concentration reaching, however, highest
values around 3-5 ng/ml of EGF. Thus, IR is a sensitive method to
detect in real-time the EGF-induced protrusive activity in a bulk population of
cells over a wide range of concentrations.
Figure 3
EGF affects protrusion dynamics in a concentration dependent manner.
5 × 103 MCF10A cells were
deprived of EGF for 6 hours and stimulated with increasing
concentrations of EGF. (A) IR of MCF10A cells stimulated with 0.3, 1,
3, 10, 30 ng/ml of EGF. (B) Protrusion slope, (C)
retraction slope and (D) maximum value of Baseline Δ cell
index in function of EGF concentration.
IR is a suitable method to monitor protrusion dynamics induced by
different growth factors and in different cellular models
One of the drawbacks of IR based techniques is that impedance variations have to
be mapped to a known biological behavior. It is therefore of interest to verify
whether the analysis based on our 4 quantitative indicators of the curve can be
generalized to the use of other factors and cell lines. This largely depends on
how universal is the behavior in response to growth factors of different origins
and biological functions. To verify this hypothesis we verified the shape and
type of response with other cell lines and growth factors.First we studied the MCF10A response to the Hepatocyte Growth Factor (HGF) by
TIRF microscopy. HGF induced the formation of large protrusions of polymerized
actin, visualized by LifeAct-GFP, in form of both lamellipodia and filopodia
(Fig. 4A, Video
S2). In the same experimental conditions, but monitored by IR, HGF
induced the increase of CI, corresponding to the protrusion phase, and the
subsequent reduction relative to the retraction phase (Fig.
4B). Next, we evaluated by IR the response of HeLa cells to EGF and
HGF stimulation. HeLa cells showed response analogous to that of MCF10A cells
with a maximum in the impedance variation followed by retraction at both
5 ng/ml EGF (Fig. S2A)
and 50 ng/ml HGF (Fig.
S2B).
Figure 4
IR of protrusion dynamics in different cellular models and growth
factors.
(A) MCF10A cells were infected with pLKO.1 LifeAct-GFP, deprived of
growth factors for 6 hours and kept in a humidified chamber at
37 °C and 5% CO2. Cells were then imaged by means of
TIRF microscopy. The depth of the evanescent field was kept at
90 nm. Cells were imaged over a time period of
1780 seconds and stimulated or not with 50 ng/ml
HGF. The time at which the stimulus was added was set to
t = 0 seconds. Images were acquired every
20 seconds (Video
S2). Four time-points are reported in the figure: −60
seconds (before HGF addition, quiescent cell), 240 seconds
(protrusion), 500 seconds (maximum extension) and
1700 seconds (retraction). Scale bars,
10 μm. (B) Baseline Δ cell index
values of MCF10A cells stimulated or not with 50 ng/ml HGF at
t = 0. (C) Baseline Δ cell index
values of HUVECs stimulated or not 10 ng/ml VEGF. (D)
Baseline Δ cell index values of A431 cells stimulated or not
with 5 ng/ml EGF.
Furthermore, the IR method was applied to non-epithelial primary cells
– human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) –
stimulated with EGF (Fig. S2C) or
Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) (Fig. 4C). Both
the growth factors were able to induce a significant increase of impedance,
generating curves similar to MCF10A and HeLa cells.Finally we tested A431epidermoid carcinoma cells, which harbor Epidermal Growth
Factor Receptor (EGFR) overexpression30. Both EGF (Fig. 4D) and HGF (Fig.
S2D) were able to induce a significant change of impedance, yielding a
response qualitatively similar to that obtained with other cell lines and growth
factors, showing a rapid protrusion and retraction phases after EGF stimulation.
Interestingly the retraction phase did not simply recover the prestimulus
values, but showed an overshooting behavior. Furthermore, we noted that HGF
stimulation shows slightly different responses regarding the retraction slope
and the intensity after stimulus. This suggests that protrusive activity
monitored by IR is sensitive to the number of receptors on the cell surface and
to the different receptor kinetics. This technique is thus also suitable for
quantitative studies on the receptor-ligand dynamics in response to changes in
expression, receptor trafficking and temporally varying stimuli.
The effect of specific drugs on the response can be quantitated by
comparing response curve
The suitability of IR for signaling studies was evaluated by inhibiting molecular
component of signaling pathways activated by EGF and resulting in protrusion
formation. Since the response to signaling is clearly induced by the presence of
EGF, we checked whether blocking EGFR would result in absence of response.Cetuximab is a clinically approved humanized monoclonal antibody that binds and
inhibits EGFR31. As expected, Cetuximab treatment of MCF10A cells
transduced with LifeAct-GFP completely abolished the response in TIRF microscopy
experiments (Fig. 5A, Video S3). Analogously, EGF stimulation did
not induce a noticeable variation in cell index in Cetuximab-treated cells
(Fig. 5B), and both protrusion (Fig.
5C) and retraction slope (Fig. 5D) were
significantly reduced compared to untreated cells.
Figure 5
Protrusion is regulated by a signalling pathway starting from EGFR and
culminating in actin polymerization.
(A) MCF10A cells, stably transduced with pLKO.1 LifeAct-GFP, were
seeded and maintained in absence of growth factors for 6 hours,
pretreated with 1 μg/ml Cetuximab and stimulated
with 5 ng/ml EGF at t = 0. Time lapse
movie at TIRF microscope of a representative cell (Video S3) was recorded with interval of
20 seconds. Scale bars, 10 μm.
(B) Baseline Δ cell index values, (C) protrusion
slope and (D) retraction slope of MCF10A treated or not with
1 μg/ml Cetuximab during growth factors deprivation
and stimulated with 5 ng/ml EGF, evaluated by IR. (E) A
representative MCF10A cell, stably transduced with pLKO.1 LifeAct-GFP, was
stimulated with 5 ng/ml EGF in presence of
1 μM Latrunculin (Video S4). Scale bars,
10 μm. (F) Baseline Δ cell index
values, (G) protrusion slope and (H) retraction slope of
MCF10A treated or not with 1 μM Latrunculin during
growth factors deprivation, stimulated with 5 ng/ml EGF and evaluated by IR.
***P < 0.001.
It is well established that EGF acute stimulation activates a signaling cascade
that eventually promotes actin polymerization13. To confirm this
observation we tested whether we could inhibit cell response by blocking actin
polymerization with Latrunculin. Latrunculin is a chemical inhibitor that binds
to actin preventing its polymerization, thus resulting in a complete disruption
of actin cytoskeleton32. Treatment of MCF10A with Latrunculin
caused a rapid dissolution of stress fibers and prevented protrusion formation
(Fig. 5E, Video
S4) in TIRF microscopy experiments. The same result was obtained by
IR. In presence of Latrunculin the cell index did not increase upon EGF
stimulation (Fig. 5F). Thus both protrusion (Fig. 5G) and retraction slope (Fig.
5H) were dramatically reduced.
Different types of protrusions can be detected by IR
Cells can form different type of protrusions. Among these, lamellipodia and
filopodia are the most extensively characterized in cells grown on 2D. In
particular, EGF-stimulated MCF10A cells preferentially produce lamellipodia29. However lamellipodia formation can be shifted to filopodia
formation by the inhibition of Arp2/3 mediated actin branching3334. By treating cells with Arp2/3 inhibitor, we showed that
lamellipodia formation in LifeAct-GFP MCF10A stimulated with EGF was completely
abolished as shown in Fig. 6A, Video S5. However, observations in TIRF
microscopy showed that cells extended filopodia instead of lamellipodia (Fig. 6A, video
S5). Therefore, we investigated whether filopodia dynamics was
detectable by IR. Cells treated with CK-666 responded to EGF stimulation
similarly to untreated cells in terms of cell index (Fig.
6B). Interestingly, no changes in protrusion slope were detected
(Fig. 6C), while we noticed a moderate decrease of
retraction slope (Fig. 6D). These data indicate that
retraction kinetics in filopodia might be regulated differently than in
lamellipodia and provide evidence that this technique is able to detect adhesive
protrusions of different sizes and types. In addition, these results demonstrate
the advantages of comparing direct TIRF microscopy observations with IR
measurements.
Figure 6
IR of filopodia and the effect of myosin inhibition.
(A) MCF10A cells, stably transduced with pLKO.1 LifeAct-GFP, were
seeded and maintained in absence of growth factors for 6 hours,
pretreated with 100 μM CK-666 and stimulated with
5 ng/ml EGF at t = 0. Time lapse movie
at TIRF microscope of a representative cell (Video S5) recorded with interval of
20 seconds. Scale bars, 10 μm.
(B) Baseline Δ cell index values, (C) protrusion
slope and (D) retraction slope of MCF10A treated or not with
100 μM CK-666 during growth factors deprivation,
stimulated with 5 ng/ml EGF and evaluated by IR. (E) A
MCF10A cell, stably transduced with pLKO.1 LifeAct-GFP stimulated with
5 ng/ml EGF in presence of 100 μM
Blebbistatin (Video S6). Newly
formed lamellipodia are indicated with white arrows. Scale bars,
10 μm. (F) Baseline Δ cell index
values, (G) protrusion slope and (H) retraction slope of
MCF10A treated or not with 100 μM Blebbistatin
during growth factors deprivation, stimulated with 5 ng/ml EGF
and evaluated by IR. **P < 0.05,
***P < 0.001.
IR reveals the myosin role in the retraction phase of protrusion
dynamics
Although it has been shown that lamellipodia have continuous cycles of protrusion
and retraction12, retraction is much less characterized than
protrusion, in particular for what concerns molecules and signaling pathways
involved. For instance, it is unclear if the speed of retraction is directly
dependent on the tension of the plasma membrane or whether a myosin-dependent
active contraction is involved3536. We therefore investigated
if the retraction phase in our model was dependent on myosin activity, treating
MCF10A cell with Blebbistatin, an inhibitor of myosin-II ATPase activity37. As expected, the presence of Blebbistatin did not impair
EGF-induced lamellipodia extension, which is known to be a process that does not
require myosin activity. However, lamellipodia were not retracted after their
formation and instead were maintained extended during the observation period
(Fig. 6E, Video
S6). Similarly, Blebbistatin treatment on MCF10A induced a sharp
increase of cell index monitored by IR after EGF stimulation. However, after
having reached the maximum value, cell index values remained stationary (Fig. 6F). Consequently, treatment with Blebbistatin did not
reduce protrusion slope (Fig. 6G), while completely
abolished the retraction slope (Fig. 6H). These data
indicate that retraction phase monitored in real-time by IR is a process
mediated by myosin contraction and seem to rule out actin de-polymerization as
the sole responsible mechanism for protrusion retraction.
Discussion
Lamellipodia, together with filopodia, are the most frequently observed protrusive
structures in cells migrating in a 2D environment1. Here we report
quantitative measurements of protruding activity of epithelial cells upon growth
factor stimulation by means of IR techniques. By directly comparing TIRF microscopy
experiments and IR measurements we were able to dissect the impedance response into
distinct phases that can be separately altered by specific drugs. Indeed, formation
and retraction of cell protrusions exactly coincide with the increase and decrease
of IR signal, respectively. The dynamics and extent of the process can be precisely
quantified and it is analogous to that detected by TIRF microscopy or reported in
literature133839.The IR method is effective to monitor protrusive activity induced by several
pro-migratory factors, such as EGF, HGF and VEGF, and is applicable to different
types of cells. Furthermore, this method is suitable for functional study of
signaling pathway involved in protrusive activity and, potentially, in cell
migration. For example, an EGFR blocking antibody completely inhibited the effects
of EGF on protrusion formation.EGF was shown to activate the small GTPases Rac1 and Cdc42 at the leading edge40 and Rac1 activation was shown to be downstream of MAPK pathway upon
EGF stimulation in the formation of lamellipodia13. The ultimate
effect of these signaling cascades is the activation of actin polymerization at the
front of growing lamellipodia or filopodia. Our results confirm that impedance
variations detected after EGF stimulation are indeed totally dependent on actin
polymerization, in agreement with published evidence1. Interestingly,
thanks to IR we are able to detect not only lamellipodia but also filopodia, as
shown in cells treated with an Arp2/3 inhibitor.What molecular players act in the phase of retraction of the lamellipodium is more
debated. Although lamellipodia do not contain myosin41, it has been
reported that at the peak of protrusion myosin II filaments form in lamella, a more
stable region of cellular protrusions, driving the formation of actin-arc and then
shrinking protrusions12. Our results indicate that, upon growth
factors induced protrusion, retraction phase is determined by myosin contraction.
This suggests that myosin activity might be important not only in the cell tail
retraction but also in the leading edge dynamics. A critical role for myosin in
periodic contractions at the leading edge has been reported, where myosin II pulls
the rear of the lamellipodial actin network, causing upward bending, edge
retraction, and initiation of new adhesion sites42. Here we showed
that after stimulation with growth factors, similar lamellipodia dynamics are
observable. It is worth noting that protrusion and contraction are synchronized in
the population due to the starving, thus making the response particularly clean and
reproducible.The response to a soluble cue, such as a growth factor, is particularly relevant
during directed migration of mesenchymal and epithelial cells. How lamellipodia
dynamics contribute to directional cell migration is not completely known, however
very recently it has been shown that localized Myosin II inactivation provides the
asymmetry of force needed for directional migration of mesenchymal cells43.Interestingly, it has been shown that lamellipodia are critical protrusive structures
also in 3D migration24. A recent paper44 introduces
the possibility of integrating microfluidics with impedance reading to measure
chemotaxis in 3D matrices. Although this kind of application of impedance based
assays are presently limited by the need of cell-electrode contact, we cannot
exclude interesting future progress in this field.In conclusion we have presented quantitative measurements on protrusion dynamics that
map distinct response phases as observed in TIRF microscopy to separate regimes of
impedance variation in IR measurements. Such clear and direct correspondence makes
the interpretation of drug treatments and genetic modifications straightforward.
Furthermore, we present data on how the retraction of the lamellipodium produced
upon acute growth factor stimulation is driven by myosin and rule out the
possibility that this is solely driven by actin de-polymerization.
Materials and methods
Cell lines
MCF10A (CRL-10317), 293T (CRL-11268), A431 (CRL-1555) and HeLa (CCL-2) cell lines
were obtained from ATCC resource center ( http://www.atcc.org). All experiments were performed on cell
lines passaged for <3 months after thawing. 293T, A431 and HeLa cells
were cultured in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle’s Medium,
DMEM, (Sigma-Aldrich, St Louis, MO, USA). The culture medium was supplemented
with 10% fetal bovine serum (Gibco, Life Technologies, Rockville, MD, USA),
200 U/ml of penicillin and 200 μg/ml
streptomycin (Sigma-Aldrich, St Louis, MO, USA). MCF10A cells were cultured as
described45. Human EC were isolated from umbilical cord
veins, characterized and grown in M199 (Sigma-Aldrich, St Louis, MO, USA)
containing 20% fetal bovine serum (Gibco, Life Technologies, Rockville, MD,
USA), bovine brain extract, heparin (50 μg/ml,
Sigma-Aldrich, St Louis, MO, USA) and penicillin-streptomycin
(200 U/ml, Sigma-Aldrich, St Louis, MO, USA) on gelatin-coated
tissue culture dishes, as previously described46. Human umbilical
cords were kindly donated by O.I.R.M- S. Anna Hospital (Agreement n.619,
19/06/07) with prior written informed consent.
Reagents
HumanEpidermal Growth Factor (EGF) and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor
(VEGF)-A165 were purchased from R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN, USA. HumanHepatocyte Growth Factor (HGF) was purchased from PeproTech, Rocky Hill, NJ,
USA. Cetuximab was purchased from Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany. Latrunculin A
and CK-666 from Sigma-Aldrich, St Louis, MO, USA. Blebbistatin from Calbiochem,
San Diego, CA, USA.
Impedance reading (IR) of protrusion dynamics
IR is a label-free non-invasive technique based on the measurement of the
frequency dependent electrical impedance of cell-covered electrodes subject to
an alternate small electric current. This method was originally invented and
developed by Giaever and Keese2021. IR methods have been
successfully applied to the study of cell adhesion224748,
cell proliferation and viability49, cell migration50, trans-endothelial invasion51, wound healing52,
cell-cell adhesion26, apoptosis24 and
cytotoxicity25.The theoretical details of how this method works are detailed elsewhere21, here we only give a succinct description of the experimental
system. Briefly cells adhering on top of the electrode can vary the impedance of
the electrode by increasing the measured voltage drop either influencing
paracellular (avoiding the cell) or transcellular (passing through the cell)
currents. The relative importance of these two contributions depends on the
frequency of the applied current. In the settings of the commercial system we
are using (xCELLigence), the impedance is mostly due to transcellular currents.
Indeed the impedance values obtained at intermediate frequencies (in the 1 to
10 kHz range) depend both on the fraction of the electrode area
covered with the spreading cells and on the space between the electrode and the
basal cell membrane. On the contrary at higher frequencies (in the 10 to
50 kHz range) the capacitive contribution to the impedance is
dominating. Thus in this regime the measurements of impedance reflect
essentially the fraction of the electrode covered with cells, thereby being a
large scale substitute for area measurements in microscopy experiments53.There exist a number of different applications to this method in cell biology and
several commercially available setups including ECIS (Electric Cell-substrate
Impedance Sensing) from Applied Biophysics, xCELLigence (Real Time Cell Electric
Sensing; RT-CES) from Acea Biosciences, the one used in this paper, and Cellkey
(Cellular Dielectric Spectroscopy; CDS) from Molecular Devices.Experiments were performed using the xCELLigence RTCA DP instrument (ACEA, San
Diego, CA, USA) which was placed in a humidified incubator at
37 °C and 5% CO2. IR of protrusion dynamics was
performed using modified 16-well plates with micro electrodes attached at the
bottom of the wells (E-plate, ACEA, San Diego, CA, USA). Cells were seeded one
day before the assay in culture medium. The following day complete medium was
substituted with 100 μl/well of culture medium without
growth (DMEM supplemented 200 U/ml of penicillin and
200 μg/ml streptomycin). After 6 hours of
EGF deprivation, the E-plates were placed on the RTCA DP instrument and the
impedance value of each well was automatically acquired by the xCELLigence
system and expressed as a Cell Index value. Impedance was recorded every 5
seconds for one hour. At least two technical replicates of each experimental
condition were used in each biological replicate. After 2 minutes,
growth factors were added with an additional volume of
100 μl/well. Inhibitors were added one hour before
growth factors addition during to the EGF deprivation period and then added
together with growth factors to maintain the same final concentrations. In order
to correctly take into account the baseline value of impedance, the value of the
first time-point after EGF addition was subtracted to the cell index values.
Furthermore, point-by-point subtraction of the values of unstimulated cells was
performed on each curve, to obtain the Baseline Δ Cell index values.
The Slope of Baseline Δ Cell index curves in a chosen Time period
was calculated by fitting the points to a straight line. The protrusion slope is
calculated as the mean slope between t0 and tm,
where t0 is the first time point after growth factor addition and
tm is the time point at which Baseline Δ Cell
index reaches the maximum value. The retraction slope is calculated as the mean
slope between tm and t2m, where t2m
is twice tm.
Lentivirus production
LifeAct-GFP was kindly provided by Roland Wedlich-Söldner, Max Planck
Institute of Biochemistry, Martinsried, Germany, and was inserted in pLKO.1
lentiviral vector in the place of puromicin resistance sequence as previously
described54. Lentivirus were produced by calcium phosphate
transfection of lentiviral plasmids (pLKO.1 LifeAct-GFP) together with packaging
(pCMVdR8.74) and envelope (pMD2.G-VSVG) plasmids in 293T cells as previously
described55. Supernatant was harvested 24 and
48 hours post-transfection, filtered with
0.45 μm filters, precipitated (19000xG for
2 hours at 20 °C) and suspended in PBS at a
higher concentration. The multiplicity of infection (MOI) was determined by
infecting HeLa cells in presence of 8 μg/ml of polybrene
and the quantification of GFP-positive cells was performed by flow
cytometry.
LifeAct-GFP dynamics with TIRF microscopy
MCF10A cells were infected with pLKO.1 LifeAct-GFP using a M.O.I. equal to 2.
Then cells were seeded at low density on glass bottom plates (Porvair, Norfolk,
UK) coated with 1 μg/ml fibronectin (Sigma-Aldrich, St
Louis, MO, USA). After an overnight starving in medium w/o growth factors (DMEM
supplemented 200 U/ml of penicillin and
200 μg/ml streptomycin), cells were placed on an
inverted microscope equipped with a 37 °C humidified
chamber with 5% CO2, and visualized using True MultiColor Laser TIRF Leica AM
TIRF MC (Leica Microsystems, Wetzlar, Germany) equipped with a 63X oil immersion
objective (HCX PL APO 63x/1.47 OIL CORR TIRF) and Hamamatsu EM-CCD camera
C9100-02. Images were acquired through Leica LAS AF6000 modular system software.
The depth of the evanescent field was kept at 90 nm. Time lapse
movies were performed with a 20 seconds interval and EGF or HGF were
added at the 4th frame. Cell area was calculated using
ImageJ56.
Statistical analysis
For scatter plot representation, the central line depicts median values. All the
remaining data are represented as mean value of both technical and biological
replicates, while error bars report the standard deviation. Statistical
significance was determined by Student’s t-test.
Author Contributions
P.A.G., A.P. and L.P. conceived the idea and wrote the manuscript; P.A.G., A.P. and
F.C. performed the experiments and analyzed the data; L.d.B., D.S., G.S. and F.B.
analyzed and discussed the data; all authors reviewed and approved the
manuscript.
Additional Information
How to cite this article: Armando Gagliardi, P. et al. Real-time
monitoring of cell protrusion dynamics by impedance responses. Sci. Rep.
5, 10206; doi: 10.1038/srep10206 (2015).
Authors: Grégory Giannone; Benjamin J Dubin-Thaler; Hans-Günther Döbereiner; Nelly Kieffer; Anne R Bresnick; Michael P Sheetz Journal: Cell Date: 2004-02-06 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Holger Gerhardt; Matthew Golding; Marcus Fruttiger; Christiana Ruhrberg; Andrea Lundkvist; Alexandra Abramsson; Michael Jeltsch; Christopher Mitchell; Kari Alitalo; David Shima; Christer Betsholtz Journal: J Cell Biol Date: 2003-06-16 Impact factor: 10.539
Authors: Paolo Armando Gagliardi; Desiana Somale; Alberto Puliafito; Giulia Chiaverina; Laura di Blasio; Michele Oneto; Paolo Bianchini; Federico Bussolino; Luca Primo Journal: J Cell Biol Date: 2017-11-21 Impact factor: 10.539
Authors: Jozef B J H van Duuren; Mathias Müsken; Bianka Karge; Jürgen Tomasch; Christoph Wittmann; Susanne Häussler; Mark Brönstrup Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-07-12 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Yao Huang; David J Burns; Benjamin E Rich; Ian A MacNeil; Abhijit Dandapat; Sajjad M Soltani; Samantha Myhre; Brian F Sullivan; Carol A Lange; Leo T Furcht; Lance G Laing Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2017-03-16 Impact factor: 4.430