| Literature DB >> 26150966 |
Steven Busschots1, Sharon O'Toole2, John J O'Leary1, Britta Stordal3.
Abstract
Many protocols used for measuring the growth of adherent monolayer cells in vitro are invasive, destructive and do not allow for the continued, undisturbed growth of cells within flasks. Protocols often use indirect methods for measuring proliferation. Microscopy techniques can analyse cell proliferation in a non-invasive or non-destructive manner but often use expensive equipment and software algorithms. In this method images of cells within flasks are captured by photographing under a standard inverted phase contract light microscope using a digital camera with a camera lens adaptor. Images are analysed for confluence using ImageJ freeware resulting in a measure of confluence known as an Area Fraction (AF) output. An example of the AF method in use on OVCAR8 and UPN251 cell lines is included. •Measurements of confluence from growing adherent cell lines in cell culture flasks is obtained in a non-invasive, non-destructive, label-free manner.•The technique is quick, affordable and eliminates sample manipulation.•The technique provides an objective, consistent measure of when cells reach confluence and is highly correlated to manual counting with a haemocytometer. The average correlation co-efficient from a Spearman correlation (n = 3) was 0.99 ± 0.008 for OVCAR8 (p = 0.01) and 0.99 ± 0.01 for UPN251 (p = 0.01) cell lines.Entities:
Keywords: Area Fraction Output Attached Cell Confluency; Area fraction; Cell count; Confluence; ImageJ; Non-destructive; Phase-contrast microscopy
Year: 2014 PMID: 26150966 PMCID: PMC4487325 DOI: 10.1016/j.mex.2014.11.002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: MethodsX ISSN: 2215-0161
Fig. 1T25 cardboard cover design for AF calculation method. (a) Shows the cardboard cover design next to T25 flask. (b) and (c) show how cover is placed onto a T25 flask before photography.
Fig. 2Example of images generated from the AF calculation method. (a) Original image generated from section 2.3.1 of UPN251 cells. (b) Image ‘Drawing of X.JPG’ generated after analysis step 7, represents the cells counted from the analysis of original image. (c) Image ‘Drawing of X.JPG’ after accuracy step 5. This is the image that is used in the overlay onto the original image, to check for accuracy of the generated count versus the cells present in original image. (d) The result of the merged images (‘a’ and ‘c’) after completion of accuracy steps. In this case the count looks accurate as each cell is labelled with red numbering.
Fig. 3AF output photo analysis of newly seeded versus confluent flasks. The left image is the original phase contrast photograph; the right is after analysis with ImageJ software. (a) OVCAR8 cells after seeding. AF value of 1.2 was achieved in this case. (b) OVCAR8 upon reaching confluence. AF value of 35.1 was achieved in this case.
Fig. 4Correlation of AF method with cell counts using a haemocytometer. The average total cell count per T25 flask for each day of a four day growth curve is shown on the x-axis of each graph and the AF output average for the same T25 flask for each day is shown on the y-axis. For each graph error bars represent the standard deviation. (a) Shows a representative graph for OVCAR8. (b) Shows a representative graph for UPN251.
Fig. 5Tracking cell recovery using AF. Graphs show the recovery of cells over a period of days after carboplatin exposure. The cells received 3-day exposures to carboplatin every 4–5 weeks. Each dose of drug received, denotes a new round of drugging (Round 1–6). The x-axis shows the days after the drug has been removed from the cells and the y-axis gives the AF output at each time point measured. (a) OVCAR8 cells after exposure to 4 μg/ml carboplatin. (b) UPN251 cells after exposure to 2 μg/ml carboplatin.