Troy J Comi1, Thanh D Do1, Stanislav S Rubakhin1, Jonathan V Sweedler1. 1. Department of Chemistry and the Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign , Urbana, Illinois 61801, United States.
Abstract
The chemical differences between individual cells within large cellular populations provide unique information on organisms' homeostasis and the development of diseased states. Even genetically identical cell lineages diverge due to local microenvironments and stochastic processes. The minute sample volumes and low abundance of some constituents in cells hinder our understanding of cellular heterogeneity. Although amplification methods facilitate single-cell genomics and transcriptomics, the characterization of metabolites and proteins remains challenging both because of the lack of effective amplification approaches and the wide diversity in cellular constituents. Mass spectrometry has become an enabling technology for the investigation of individual cellular metabolite profiles with its exquisite sensitivity, large dynamic range, and ability to characterize hundreds to thousands of compounds. While advances in instrumentation have improved figures of merit, acquiring measurements at high throughput and sampling from large populations of cells are still not routine. In this Perspective, we highlight the current trends and progress in mass-spectrometry-based analysis of single cells, with a focus on the technologies that will enable the next generation of single-cell measurements.
The chemical differences between individual cells within large cellular populations provide unique information on organisms' homeostasis and the development of diseased states. Even genetically identical cell lineages diverge due to local microenvironments and stochastic processes. The minute sample volumes and low abundance of some constituents in cells hinder our understanding of cellular heterogeneity. Although amplification methods facilitate single-cell genomics and transcriptomics, the characterization of metabolites and proteins remains challenging both because of the lack of effective amplification approaches and the wide diversity in cellular constituents. Mass spectrometry has become an enabling technology for the investigation of individual cellular metabolite profiles with its exquisite sensitivity, large dynamic range, and ability to characterize hundreds to thousands of compounds. While advances in instrumentation have improved figures of merit, acquiring measurements at high throughput and sampling from large populations of cells are still not routine. In this Perspective, we highlight the current trends and progress in mass-spectrometry-based analysis of single cells, with a focus on the technologies that will enable the next generation of single-cell measurements.
Cells are the “atomic unit”
of life. Inspired by
Robert Hooke’s discovery of biological cells in 1665,[1] scientists, evoking the philosophical musings
of Marcus Aurelius,[2] began to ponder: “The
thing, what is it, fundamentally? What is its nature and substance,
its reason for being?” These central questions set the framework
for defining cell biology. Much of the early single-cell work relied
on observations of cells with optical microscopy; current research
has extended these investigations to the chemical and molecular regimes.
Studies examining complex chemical questions about cells have detailed,
extended, and even challenged established dogma as new measurements
are made.[3−7] Much of the research emphasis has shifted from the characterization
of bulk cell populations to that of individual cells, from cell types
to subtypes, and from directly observing macroscopic traits to measuring
single-cell genomes, proteomes, and metabolomes. While all cells share
a core set of biochemical compounds, they also display an astonishing
chemical diversity that allows the formation of unicellular communities
and complex multicellular species. With improved analytical capabilities,
morphologically homogeneous populations of cells emerge as unique,
with individual characteristics and properties.[3]Early successes of single-cell electrophoresis
were reported
from the 1950s to 1970s. In 1956, Edström[8] successfully determined the relative composition of ribose
nucleic acids within large, mammalian neuronal cells by microphoresis
with a cellulose fiber. Separation of hemoglobin from individual
erythrocytes using polyacrylamide fiber electrophoresis
followed in 1965.[9] Two-dimensional gel
electrophroesis of proteins from single Aplysia californica neurons was reported in 1977,[10] around
the time single-cell mass spectrometry (MS) began to develop. In their
pioneering work in the 1970s, Hillenkamp and co-workers[11] used laser ablation mass analysis to generate
mass spectra from tissue sections and cultured cells. They ablated
several <5-μm-diameter regions on an inner-ear tissue section
with a laser to obtain mass spectra containing low-molecular-weight
ions at each associated laser spot.[12] As
another example from the 1970s, Iliffe et al.[13] demonstrated single-cell gas chromatography–mass spectrometry
of amino acids in an Aplysia neuron. This period
also witnessed the introduction of flow cytometry and fluorescence-activated
cell sorting.[14] However, it was not until
1992, when James Eberwine’s group[15] demonstrated that the molecular profile of a single, potentiated
CA1 neuron depends on the abundance of multiple RNAs, that the field
of comprehensive single-cell chemical analysis began to take shape.After these early seminal reports, single-cell chemical characterization
approaches became more robust and provided greater information, enabling
astounding advances in bioanalytical techniques that have progressively
revealed single-cell heterogeneity. Interdisciplinary
developments include single-cell genomics and transcriptomics,[16−19] electrochemistry,[20−22] single-molecule microscopy and
spectroscopy,[23−26] nuclear magnetic resonance,[27,28] capillary electrophoresis
(CE),[29−32] MS,[6,33−37] and microfluidics,[38,39] to name a few. Clearly, single-cell “omics” comprises
a number of rapidly growing interdisciplinary fields. We view
MS as the major analytical platform for single-cell metabolomics
and proteomics (SCMP) due to its versatility, multiplexed
capabilities, and relatively high throughput. Modern MS instruments
provide limits of detection and analyte coverages that are suitable
for non-targeted SCMP. However, effective, high-throughput single-cell
sampling remains a major challenge. In fact, details related to sampling
often dictate the selection of the most appropriate MS instrument
and experimental protocols to use for a specific investigation.This Perspective describes recent progress in the development of
MS-based analytical techniques and the attendant cell isolation approaches
used for SCMP investigations. These diverse MS-based methodologies
are ideally suited for the characterization of heterogeneous
cellular populations through qualitative and quantitative chemical
profiling of individual cells.
Setting the Stage: Mass
Spectrometry Instrumentation in Single-Cell
Research
MS has evolved from a gas-phase, one-dimensional
analytical technique
into a versatile approach that provides high mass resolution, analyte
coverage, and sensitivity. Several key advances in instrumentation,
combined with innovative methodologies, have set performance benchmarks
for an eclectic range of MS applications (for comprehensive reviews,
see refs (40 and 41)). Here, we focus
on the aspects of MS that make it uniquely suited to single-cell analysis.The major challenges to single-cell chemical measurements lie in
the relatively small quantity of analytes, the low volume of material,
and the chemical diversity of cellular constituents. SCMP measurements
are made possible by improving the sensitivity and analyte coverage
of analytical techniques capable of handling the small-volume (femto-scale)
samples extracted from single cells (e.g., eukaryotic cells are 5–100
μm in diameter; bacterial cells range from 0.2 to 2 μm).
Small molecules, such as metabolites and lipids, are often concentrated
within cells, whereas peptides, proteins, and genetic material may
exist at only a few copies. Ionizing intact biomolecules requires
soft MS probes that minimize molecular fragmentation.A variety
of MS methods are suitable for single-cell studies. Matrix-assisted
laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) and electrospray ionization (ESI)
are two robust approaches for the ionization of intact peptides and
proteins from single cells. Secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS)
utilizes a focused, accelerated primary ion beam to sputter sample
surfaces and has been used for sampling from cells for several decades.
While traditional primary ion beams induce molecular fragmentation,
newly developed cluster ion sources can desorb and ionize intact metabolites,
lipids, and small peptides. Furthermore, SIMS ionization, when performed
below the static limit, causes negligible damage to sample surfaces,
which permits subsequent analyses of the same samples. Lastly, the
speed, sensitivity, and precision of inductively coupled plasma (ICP)
MS is the foundation for mass cytometry, a prominent technique for
targeted single-cell analysis.The detection limit of an MS-based
platform depends on the performance
of the mass analyzer. Many modern instruments offer sufficiently high
ion transmission efficiency, a wide mass range, and high mass accuracy
to measure cellular content, with several commercially available MS
platforms that are appropriate for SCMP measurements.[4,6,42,43] Among them, the time-of-flight (TOF) mass analyzer has been widely
used in single-cell research because of its relatively low cost, large m/z detection window, and satisfactory
performance for most MS profiling and imaging experiments, especially
when fast scan rates are required. Limits of detection for TOF-MS
can be below an attomole of a peptide while maintaining a mass resolution
above 20 000. Spectra are acquired in tens of microseconds,
though several hundred TOF spectra are frequently summed for a better
signal-to-noise ratio (S/N). In “omics” work requiring
high mass accuracy and mass resolution, ion cyclotron resonance (ICR)[44,45] and Orbitrap mass analyzers[46] offer superior
performance. Based on the duration of the transient acquired for Fourier
transformation, resolution in excess of 100 000 is routine,
with an acquisition frequency of about 1 Hz. In hybrid instruments,
high-resolution mass analyzers are coupled to collision cells, enabling
selection of precursor ions and exact mass measurements on their fragments.
Multistage fragmentation of ions (MS)
and analysis of fragments are essential for characterization of unknowns.Herein, we focus on the strengths, weaknesses, and future prospects
of MS-based SCMP methods. From among a myriad of techniques, these
were chosen to provide an overview of the field because they offer
great promise for advancing single-cell research. As stated earlier,
sample properties and preparation strategies oftentimes determine
the appropriate MS instrument to use for a specific application. Thus,
while this discussion focuses on the MS technologies, it is organized
by the sampling approaches. In the first method (Figure A), intact tissue slices can
be directly analyzed using imaging technologies that provide subcellular
spatial resolution. Alternatively, targeted cells can be isolated
from tissues (Figure B) prior to MS measurements. The success of this approach depends
on prior classification of cell types and subtypes, and on the dexterity
of the researcher performing the cell isolation. Finally, single-cell
samples can be prepared by digesting tissues into thousands to millions
of single cells (Figure C). Dissociation alleviates the stringent requirements of the first
two methods and creates additional opportunities for cells to stabilize
prior to analysis.
Figure 1
Overview of the single-cell sampling methods covered in
this Perspective.
(A) Tissue may be sectioned and mounted on a suitable surface for
imaging native distributions of analytes. (B) Specific large cells
can be isolated from tissue for subsequent analysis. (C) Cells from
tissue may be dissociated or cultured in growth medium.
Overview of the single-cell sampling methods covered in
this Perspective.
(A) Tissue may be sectioned and mounted on a suitable surface for
imaging native distributions of analytes. (B) Specific large cells
can be isolated from tissue for subsequent analysis. (C) Cells from
tissue may be dissociated or cultured in growth medium.
Direct Tissue Analysis: Placing Single Cells
into Context
Mass spectrometry imaging (MSI), an information-rich
approach for
direct tissue analysis, provides unprecedented details on the chemical
composition of tissue and cell specimens. Typically, an MS image is
acquired by sampling a regularly spaced grid on a thin tissue section
or dispersed cell population, collecting a mass spectrum at each spot.
MSI is an attractive option when determining the spatial context of
individual cells within tissues is important, or when single-cell
isolation is not feasible. Different MS ionization methods facilitate
the successful analysis of numerous biochemical classes, including
proteins, small peptides, lipids, and metabolites (Figure ). MALDI-MSI (Figure A) is the most common technique
used in tissue imaging. A recent review by Römpp and Spengler[47] highlights several successful studies in which
MALDI-MSI provided detailed histological information on phospholipids,
drug molecules, neuropeptides, and tryptic peptides at (or close to)
the single-cell level. While 10–35-μm pixel widths are
common, MALDI-MSI at 3 μm spatial resolution was performed on
the lateral ventricle region of a coronal mouse brain section to image
phospholipids.[47]
Figure 2
Several MSI methods obtain
single-cell resolution. (A) Application
of a matrix is required for MALDI-MSI and must be optimized to maintain
native spatial distributions. While spatial resolution is poorer than
with SIMS, MALDI ionization is much softer, such that intact lipids
and peptides are detectable. (B) SIMS provides the highest spatial
resolution with focused primary ion beams but is limited in analyte
coverage, typically detecting fragment ions and small compounds. (C)
Imaging mass cytometry is capable of targeted localization of protein
antigens with resolutions similar to SIMS.
Several MSI methods obtain
single-cell resolution. (A) Application
of a matrix is required for MALDI-MSI and must be optimized to maintain
native spatial distributions. While spatial resolution is poorer than
with SIMS, MALDI ionization is much softer, such that intact lipids
and peptides are detectable. (B) SIMS provides the highest spatial
resolution with focused primary ion beams but is limited in analyte
coverage, typically detecting fragment ions and small compounds. (C)
Imaging mass cytometry is capable of targeted localization of protein
antigens with resolutions similar to SIMS.MSI at nanometer resolution can be achieved by SIMS imaging,
which
employs a tightly focused, accelerated primary ion beam for desorption
and ionization (Figure B). SIMS is suitable for mapping elements, metabolites, small molecules,
lipids, and peptide fragments at subcellular resolution (for a review
on the fundamentals of SIMS, see Boxer et al.[48]). Several primary ion beams are suitable for biological analyses.
High-energy and reactive sources may provide sufficient ion current
to afford submicron spatial resolution but tend to fragment the chemical
bonds of larger molecules.[48] Ostrowski
et al.[49] utilized an indium liquid metal
ion beam focused to 200 nm to examine the plasma membrane of Tetrahymena. The images revealed a decrease in abundance
of phosphatidylcholine and an increase in aminoethylphosphonolipid
at highly curved fusion pores, which are utilized during cell mating.
Subsequent to this report, a variety of cell types have been analyzed
by SIMS imaging,[50−54] providing subcellular distributions of lipids, metabolites, and
small molecules.Elemental secondary ions can be characterized
by a magnetic sector
analyzer equipped with up to seven detectors set to particular m/z values—a technique referred
to as nanoSIMS. State-of-the-art nanoSIMS is quantitative, can achieve
spatial resolution <50 nm, and allows 3D chemical mapping. NanoSIMS
has been applied for subcellular-resolution imaging of metabolic pathways,
interacting microorganisms, and microbial communities.[34,55−59] The main drawbacks are relatively low sample throughput and the
high cost of isotope-labeled substrates. Nevertheless, the clever
use of isotopes allows nanoSIMS to interrogate the 3D composition
of representative cell subtypes.Recent developments with polyatomic
and cluster ion sources have
expanded the biochemical coverage of SIMS by allowing direct measurement
of intact molecules below m/z 2000.
The cluster ion sources achieve primary ion beam diameters approaching
1 μm, equivalent to high-resolution MALDI sources.[60] Complementary MS imaging, non-MS analyses,[61] and matrix-enhanced reagents[62−64] have been incorporated
to improve molecular coverage and quantitation of SIMS imaging. Aspects
of the sample preparation pipeline contribute significantly to the
spatial integrity of measured molecular distributions. SIMS is especially
sensitive to minute amounts of environmental contamination, as analysis
is restricted to the topmost layer of the surface. While primary ion
beams may be focused to tens of nanometers, obtaining such high spatial
resolution is still extremely challenging.Most MSI experiments
are non-targeted and label free, but at the
pixel widths required for subcellular imaging, only abundant compounds
will be detectible. Imaging mass cytometry (Figure C), can improve the limits of detection for
specific compounds by using affinity-based probes to selectively localize
target antigens. As a direct analog to immuno-gold staining used with
electron microscopy, imaging mass cytometry couples metal-conjugated
antibodies developed for mass cytometry with a laser or ion beam,
allowing antigen localization in tissue sections and individual cells.
Giesen et al.[65] used imaging mass cytometry
with a high spatial resolution laser ablation system to localize 32
proteins and post-translational modifications (PTMs) at 1 μm
resolution to delineate cell heterogeneity in humanbreast cancer
tissue sections. Angelo et al.[66] adapted
the mass cytometry pipeline to SIMS imaging, effectively improving
the spatial resolution of the method to 50 nm. The chelated metal
isotope adducts generated secondary ions, which were analyzed via
a magnetic sector mass spectrometer equipped with multiple detectors.
The technique, referred to as multiplexed ion beam imaging (MIBI),
was successfully applied to humanbreast cancer samples to reveal
tumor immunophenotypes. The current acquisition rate for MIBI is 2
h for a 0.250 mm2 field-of-view for 10 distinct targets.[66]Rastering the desorption probe over large
areas, as in MSI, effectively
analyzes each cell, but does so at the expense of throughput and considerable
cost in instrument time and assay sensitivity. At the Nyquist frequency
to resolve individual cells, each cell should be sampled at least
four times; this divides the cellular analytes among each pixel and
may cause some compounds to fall below the limit of detection. Still,
the drive to acquire higher resolution MS images has spurred the development
of improved ion beam optics, sensitive mass analyzers, and optimized
sample preparation protocols. We expect instrument capabilities will
continue to progress and cellular resolution will become standard
in commercial MALDI-MS instrumentation over the next few decades.
A limitation to the continued development of smaller pixel sizes is
the absolute abundance of compounds within a given region. A 1-μm
pixel contains just over 1% of the area of a 10-μm-diameter
cell, requiring analyte concentrations 2 orders of magnitude higher
to be observable in a single pixel as opposed to the entire cell.
Compounding this effect for MALDI-MS is the compromise between analyte
extraction and delocalization during matrix application.Imaging
mass cytometry circumvents these issues with the application
of rare-earth-labeled antibodies. Each antibody holds several hundred
isotope atoms, which amplifies the signal from a single binding event.
The shortcomings of mass cytometry imaging are inherited from affinity
labels: the a priori selection of antigens, cost
of generating antibodies, and limited plexity (though not as severe
as fluorescence probes). We envision mass cytometry imaging experiments
will be performed on a tissue section following non-targeted MSI acquisition,
similar to work performed with immunohistochemistry. Such an experiment
could place the non-targeted data into the context of more traditional
cell subtyping to improve biomarker identification. As subcellular
MSI resolution becomes more widespread, the distinction between imaging
and single-cell analysis will be less pronounced. The capability to
examine each cell within its native environment would revolutionize
medical, pharmaceutical, and fundamental research.
Specific Cell-Type
Targeting: Meeting the Needs for Separation
and Quantitation
When molecular characterization is the paramount
experimental objective,
measurements that do not provide spatial information can be undertaken.
Additional analytical dimensions, such as separation and quantitation,
can be coupled with MS to enable information-rich single-cell measurements.
CE is a qualitative and quantitative technique used in analyses of
single cells and subcellular compartments. It features rapid analyte
separations based on the electrophoretic mobility of molecules, including
those with the same molecular weights (e.g., diastereomers), with
high resolving power and low sample consumption (a microliter or less).[31,32] Many aspects of CE have greatly progressed in recent decades, and
include the development of advanced separation modes and nanoscale
sampling, and the interface of CE with different detection methods.[30,67] While CE is powerful on its own, it is even more productive when
coupled with optical, electrochemical, or MS-based detection. For
example, CE-MS provides a label-free and unique characterization method
for investigation of endogenous biomolecules in complex cellular mixtures
(Figure ). Hyphenating
CE with other detection modalities, such as laser-induced fluorescence,
allows targeted cell analysis based on chemical signatures, but those
approaches are limited to molecules with native fluorescence and those
that can be tagged with a fluorophore via derivatization chemistry.[67] Single-cell metabolomics studies using CE-ESI-MS
have demonstrated detection limits for molecules in the low nanomolar
range, high-efficiency separations, and increased analyte coverage.
The injection of only 0.1% of the total content from a single Aplysia californica metacerebral cell (150 μm in diameter)
yielded unambiguous detection of more than 100 compounds.[68] Preconcentration methods further improve analyte
coverage, especially when initial concentrations of extracted analytes
are below the detection limits of MS systems.[30,42] Improvements in sheathless CE-MS interfaces have allowed investigation
of complex bioanalytical problems, as in the characterization of protein
isoforms and combinatorial PTMs reported by Yates and co-workers.[69,70] Recent examples from Dovichi[71] and Nemes[72,73] of the developing Xenopus laevis embryo demonstrate
the great promise for CE-MS-based single-cell proteomics.
Figure 3
Illustration
of an experimental workflow utilizing CE-MS to separate
and quantify endogenous molecules in single cells. Specific cell types
are either (A) isolated from tissue manually or (B) chemically labeled
and sorted by microfluidic devices. Each cell is homogenized or lysed,
and its content is subjected to CE-MS separation and quantitation.
Illustration
of an experimental workflow utilizing CE-MS to separate
and quantify endogenous molecules in single cells. Specific cell types
are either (A) isolated from tissue manually or (B) chemically labeled
and sorted by microfluidic devices. Each cell is homogenized or lysed,
and its content is subjected to CE-MS separation and quantitation.Though capable of sensitive, quantitative
analysis, a limitation
of CE is its low throughput. Even a state-of-the-art CE platform operates
at a rate of less than one cell per minute.[74,75] Typical separations, performed in longer capillaries, can last between
5 and 60 min to achieve optimal resolution; however, chip-based CE
devices do increase throughput. Moreover, the duration of a set of
experiments may be constrained by the endurance of intact cells within
a physiological solution prior to analysis (a few hours), which ultimately
limits the number of cells that can be assayed from one population.[74] Further constraining throughput, each sample
and target analyte requires an optimal set of CE conditions, including
background electrolyte, chiral selectors, pH, separation voltage,
and temperature, among others.To increase throughput, researchers
have focused on the development
of automated cell-handling modules that are compatible with a wide
range of background electrolytes and analyte classes. CE columns can
be embedded in, or coupled with, microfluidic devices that permit
fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS) and automatic cell trapping,
culturing, sorting, and lysis prior to CE separation. Higher peak
capacities are achieved by combining multiple capillary columns in
series to provide complementary separation dimensions. Examples include
the velocity gap mode, which manipulates the electrical fields on
connected capillaries with conductivity detection at the joint,[76] and 2D-CE, which employs orthogonal separation
conditions in connected capillaries.[77]Recent advances in CE have overcome technical hurdles for the detection
and separation of chiral molecules, such as d/l-amino
acids and peptide diastereomers,[78] at a
resolution and sensitivity that is currently inaccessible by other
label-free, MS-coupled mobility spectrometry or spectroscopy approaches.[79] Furthermore, these molecules are separated non-destructively
with minimal loss, which is another advantage of CE over MS-based
separation methods. In addition, performing the separation postionization
can introduce additional complexity due to the formation of protomers
(molecular isomers that differ only in the site of protonation).[80] However, many conditions used in chiral separations
have yet to be made compatible with ESI-MS, awaiting future optimization.Owing to its superb sensitivity and prospects for high throughput,
CE-MS has become a method of choice for separation-based, quantitative
analyses of single cells. Compared to other single-cell techniques,
CE-MS applications that directly introduce cells into the capillary
for lysis and separation reduce the time between cell rupture and
analyte characterization. Such rapid analyses limit unwanted side
reactions and degradation that lead to non-specific profile variations.
The future of high-throughput CE-MS offers a unique approach to classify
cell types and identify new subtypes, which will provide complementary
profiles to other methods.
Dissociated and Cultured Cell Samples: Searching
for Cell Subtypes
and Rare Cells
In the final approach discussed here, cells
are either separated
from tissue sections by dissociation or cultured. Once in solution,
cells may be labeled for mass cytometry, or deposited onto a surface
for single-cell profiling. The native connections between cells in
the tissue are dismantled and extraction is more limited than with
specific cell isolation, but dissociated cell measurement approaches
can have a higher per-cell throughput than the cell-based MS methods
described above.Mass cytometry is one of the most versatile
MS-based techniques
for multiplexing single-cell measurements on an “omics”
scale. As briefly mentioned when discussing MSI, mass cytometry operates
much like flow cytometry, in which fluorescently labeled markers,
including antibodies, are used to characterize the presence of a panel
of antigens in large populations of individual cells. However, instead
of fluorescence labels, mass cytometry uses rare earth metal isotope
tags with high plexity (Figure A). The binding of the conjugates to molecular targets is
quantified with an inductively coupled plasma (ICP)-MS instrument.
The ICP torch completely consumes the cells while atomizing sample
droplets, which provides low background and elimination of matrix
effects.[81] The throughput of mass cytometry
is currently limited by the lifetime of analytes in the ion cloud
(∼300 μs),[82] which allows
measurement of up to 1000 cells per second.[83] This throughput is several-fold higher than that offered by imaging
mass cytometry but comes at the expense of information on tissue organization.
Most mass cytometers are coupled to TOF mass analyzers (e.g., the
commercialized CyTOF) as they are capable of rapid acquisition times
(13 μs per scan) and allow 20–30 scans per cell.[84] Additional DNA stains are used to discriminate
cellular events from debris and distinguish single cells from doublets
or aggregates of cells. Metal calibration beads are also spiked into
each sample to serve as internal standards.[85] Cell-based multiplexing methods, such as mass-tag cell barcoding,[86,87] can be utilized to reduce antibody consumption, acquisition time,
and eliminate cell-to-antibody ratio-dependent effects.[81,82] For example, a binary barcoding can utilize n rare
metal isotopes to uniquely label 2 individual
cell samples before they are mixed, stained, and analyzed in one batch.[88] Mass cytometry has assisted the discovery of
complex aspects of single-cell chemistry, including different stages
of the cell cycle, phenotypes and signaling responses, cytokine expression,
and cell viability.[82,88−92]
Figure 4
Analysis of dissociated or cultured cells provides the
highest
throughput of any SCMP-MS method. (A) Mass cytometry uses rare earth
metal-labeled affinity tags to quantitatively measure up to hundreds
of preselected antigens. The current throughput is ∼1 kHz and
data can be visualized with traditional cytometry plots or multivariate
analysis. Dissociated cells can also be attached to surfaces for MALDI-MS
profiling within (B) microarrays for MS or randomly seeded and targeted
by (C) optically guided profiling.
Analysis of dissociated or cultured cells provides the
highest
throughput of any SCMP-MS method. (A) Mass cytometry uses rare earth
metal-labeled affinity tags to quantitatively measure up to hundreds
of preselected antigens. The current throughput is ∼1 kHz and
data can be visualized with traditional cytometry plots or multivariate
analysis. Dissociated cells can also be attached to surfaces for MALDI-MS
profiling within (B) microarrays for MS or randomly seeded and targeted
by (C) optically guided profiling.Cell surface markers, the degree of expression, and PTM events
can be used to identify cellular phenotypes and distinguish cell populations.
For example, a single-cell mass cytometry study using 31 distinct
transition and rare earth metal isotopes to label two antibody staining
panels revealed 24 distinct immune cell populations in bone marrow
during hematopoiesis.[89] Currently, mass
cytometry surpasses other MS-based single-cell techniques in the total
number of analyzed cells per experiment. Newell et al.[93] combined mass cytometry with combinatorial peptide-major
histocompatibility complex staining to analyze samples of 84 million
T-cells for distinct phenotypes and their ability to recognize viral
epitopes.A technical inefficiency of mass cytometry lies in
the nebulization
of single cells, which stochastically loses approximately 70% of the
cells in the process of forming droplets.[81] Although this loss does not inherently introduce a significant sampling
bias, improvements in cell introduction efficiency would reduce cell
consumption. The sensitivity of mass cytometry is greatly affected
by the loading of metal atoms on each antibody. The metal chelating
chemistry facilitates a maximum of ∼100 metal reporter ions
per antibody molecule.[81] Mass cytometry
can seamlessly measure 58 or more different parameters simultaneously,
though this requires a priori knowledge about the
cells and well-defined molecular targets with specific antibodies.
The limited number of commercially available rare metal isotopes also
limits the number of antigens that can be measured simultaneously.
Currently, 37 stable lanthanide isotopes that are compatible with
metal chelating chemistry are available at sufficient purity.[82] While antibodies can recognize a wide range
of antigens, mass cytometry is less effective for smaller molecules,
such as metabolites and peptides, which may not be accessible to antibodies
or cross-linked by fixation. These molecules can be specific biomarkers
for disease-transformed cells.[94] Therefore,
the complexity of multidimensional single-cell analysis is another
area worth improving,[95] including new affinity
agents that can bind small-molecule metabolites.Mass cytometry
is poised to extend the capabilities of many immunofluorescence
methods beyond the limitation of fluorescence spectral overlap. In
a clinical setting, the rapid and accurate quantification of numerous
biomarkers can facilitate deeper subtyping of tissue sections or biopsy
samples. Though mass cytometry requires preselection of antigens,
it should continue to find application in targeted cell population
profiling. While mass cytometry can profile cellular states at given
points in time with high throughput and plexity, an important caveat
is that cells are destroyed by the ICP torch, preventing follow-up
characterization of selected cellular subtypes.A distinct non-targeted
approach involves dispersing cells onto
sample surfaces where they are analyzed with an MS microprobe. In
contrast to MSI, the contents of one cell are completely sampled during
a single analysis. Manual placement of cells is a low-throughput implementation
of this type of handling.[43] A higher throughput
method is to disperse cells sufficiently such that no neighbors are
within the microprobe region. With the correct choice of seeding density,
separated cells greatly relax instrumental sampling requirements and
allow more stringent extraction procedures, further increasing analyte
sensitivity. As described below, two methods of dispersed cell sampling
have been developed recently for MALDI-MS analysis of single cells,
one based on constrained cell positions and the other on randomly
seeding the cells.The first cell-dispersed approach involves
constraining the cell
positions. A variety of microfluidic constructs are available for
trapping single cells for subsequent high-throughput analysis. Microdroplet
arrays can systematically trap single cells in microwells, allowing
subsequent profiling by ESI-MS.[96] The sensitivity
of the trapping depends on the ratio of the diameters of the cell
and the microwell, limiting the sizes of analyzed cells. The current
implementation also requires manual sampling of each well. For high
throughput sampling, Zenobi and co-workers[97] developed an omniphobic, patterned surface specifically for constraining
microdroplets of MALDI matrix solution, called microarrays for MS
(MAMS) (Figure B).
By depositing cells into these microwells, their contents remain isolated
due to the omniphobic microarray walls. This isolation allows the
application of more rigorous extraction methods, such as shock freezing,[98] as analytes neither severely dilute nor become
contaminated by nearby cells. Cell deposition in MAMS is achieved
by a variety of methods, including piezoelectric printing of cellular
solutions[99] or submerging the surface in
a cell solution.[97,100] Each well contains a variable
number of cells described by a Poisson distribution.[98] As such, with a cell concentration generating the maximum
probability of wells containing one cell (average, λ = 1), approximately
37% of wells are occupied by one cell. Another 37% of the wells are
empty, with the remaining 26% containing two or more cells. Orthogonal
methods, such as optical microscopy, can enumerate the cell counts
in each well. Once cell number and positions are determined, cellular
analytes are extracted and samples are coated with MALDI matrix. The
contents are analyzed by simply collecting spectra at each predetermined
point in a regular array. Unlike subcellular MSI, the required positional
accuracy and laser spot size are easily achieved by most commercial
instruments.Using this methodology, the metabolic profiles
of several single-celled
microorganisms were investigated, showing quantities of nucleoside
di- and triphosphates, as well as lipids unique for each species,
with concentrations proportional to the number of cells within a given
well; Raman spectra were also obtained and correlated with a given
microwell.[97] Further experiments correlated
fluorescence and Raman microspectroscopy acquired from the freshwater
algae Haematococcus pluvialis and combined the images
with MS measurements to discriminate between encystment stages.[100] In addition, using Saccharomyces cerevisiae as a model organism, Zenobi and co-workers[98] investigated the metabolic consequences of environmental and genetic
perturbations on several metabolites, recapitulating population-level
changes and discriminating genotypic differences.Advantages
of MAMS include the capabilities to thoroughly extract
analytes from deposited cells and ensure each sample is isolated from
nearby cells, limiting cross contamination. However, the efficiency
for random seeding is low (only 37% of wells contain single cells)
and the spatial constraints of the microwells limit investigations
of long-range cellular outgrowth and changes related to cell-to-cell
signaling. Theoretically, MAMS could facilitate studies of interactions
between small cell populations. With conventional random seeding or
printing, the likelihood of two cells from each of two populations
occupying the same well is 0.372 = 14%; however, the cases
when a well is occupied by more than one cell of each type are also
interesting. This would allow investigations into the competition
between malignant and immune cells for small populations of each,
generating a large, random assortment of populations on a single device.
FACS could also be used as an enabling, selective cell deposition
technology coupled to MAMS. Precise seeding of specific, preselected
phenotypes could construct complex cell distributions to allow full
utilization of each MAMS device.An alternative method for high
throughput analysis of isolated,
individual cells involves randomly dispersing them on a surface, and
using optical microscopy to precisely locate the dispersed cells on
a transparent indium tin oxide-coated glass slide.[101] Suspensions of cells are deposited onto conductive surfaces
and the cells allowed to attach to the substrate. High-contrast, fluorescence
images of a nuclear stain deliver a simple data set to locate individual
cells. Registration of the microscopy image with the mass spectrometer
coordinate system provides the location of each selected cell. Once
MALDI matrix is applied, the laser is positioned over each cell in
turn and a spectrum acquired (Figure C). In this initial report, microscopy-guided single-cell
MALDI-MS was coupled to principal component analysis-based outlier
detection to perform an unsupervised analysis in a population of dispersed
pituitary cells. Several peptides were detected at high S/N from individual
pituitary cells, including arginine vasopressin, oxytocin, and α-melanocyte-stimulating
hormone. Additional MS profiling of cells from pancreatic islets of
Langerhans demonstrated single-cell sensitivity to canonical peptide
hormones, including intact insulin, glucagon, pancreatic polypeptide,
and somatostatin. In a follow-up study on single islet cells,[102] the levels of peptide hormones were used to
classify cells into traditional histological classes, showing good
agreement with previous reports. Furthermore, cell-type-specific peptide
heterogeneity was compared between the dorsal- and ventral-derived
islets, with results indicating an increased abundance of processed
pancreatic polypeptide within ventral-derived γ-cells. The peptides
were not previously observed endogenously, and the anatomical heterogeneity
in peptide processing would be difficult to detect with bulk measurements.Successful analyte profiling using microscopy-guided MALDI-MS largely
depends on accurate cell positioning under the laser probe, requiring
the ability to locate a 10-μm cell over a ∼20 cm2 microscope slide. Assuming a random seeding, the probability
of individual cells being sufficiently far apart is determined by
a spatial Poisson point process, which has the same form as a Poisson
distribution. Again, at ideal conditions, only 37% of the seeded cells
will be sufficiently spaced for analysis, but there is a relatively
large area available for seeding. As such, the total number of cells
analyzed in a given footprint will be larger than with reported examples
of MAMS. Furthermore, long-range interactions should be easier to
observe, as there is no physical barrier between cells. Coupling with
FACS may be more difficult, as the cells in droplets impacting the
surface could migrate without being confined in omniphobic wells.While both high throughput studies described above used MALDI-MS,
these methodologies could be adapted to work with other microprobe-based
MS analyses such as DESI and SIMS, and liquid microjunction probes.[103]An exciting aspect of dispersed-cell
methods is the ease with which
they can be coupled with complementary analytical methods, e.g., combining
with optical microscopy to count the number of cells in each MAMS
well or locate cell bodies. A clear extension of the methodology is
the use of exogenous or endogenous probes or reporters to provide
pre-MS subtyping of cells. For example, transfection of cells with
fluorescent probes could simplify rare cell detection within a population.
Any spatially localized analytical technique capable of sampling from
a surface is readily adapted to provide additional information on
analyzed cells. Vibrational microscopy, a non-destructive profiling
method, could be used to generate further information on cellular
contents. Additional MS experiments are also possible, if performed
in the correct order. Unlike MSI, the data sets are easily combined
based on the unique cell location, greatly simplifying data fusion.
For sample preparation, we expect to see FACS utilized in more powerful
and efficient seeding setups. Precise deflection of cell-containing
droplets would allow placement of suitable numbers of cells at evenly
spaced intervals. Combined with appropriate molecular biology and
pharmacology tools, interactions between different cell types could
be assayed, as described earlier.Finally, an intriguing aspect
of MALDI-MS is that only a small
fraction of the cell is consumed for analysis.[104] Material remaining on the substrate is available for subsequent,
follow up analysis by tandem MS or other methods on the same cell.
The prospects are especially exciting for the integration of MALDI-MS-based
profiling with orthogonal analytical and biochemical approaches. High-throughput
MALDI-MS could provide a non-targeted, label-free profile of thousands
of cells within a population. Utilizing multidimensional analysis
on such a data set would facilitate the selection of individual cells
that are representative of a given subclass. Focusing subsequent assays
on the characteristic cells would reduce the number of analyses required
to practically characterize an entire population. For instance, preselecting
cells with MALDI-MS would greatly enhance the effective throughput
of CE or single-cell transcriptomics by targeting cells that provide
the most information on the population composition.
Outlook and Concluding
Remarks
Mass spectrometry is an information-rich analytical
technology,
positioned at the forefront of single-cell metabolomics, peptidomics,
and proteomics. Progress thus far has been impressive. Current-generation
instruments display exquisite sensitivity for the multiplexed, label-free
measurement of hundreds of biomolecules from cellular samples. With
careful sample preparation, analyte separation, and/or labeling, relative
and absolute quantitative MS analysis of single cells becomes feasible.
Issues with single-cell investigations arise from sampling, during
the transition from organism to the instrument. Manual sample manipulation
is suitable for detailed analysis of a small subset of cells;[4,105] however, this sampling approach is less applicable for the characterization
of large-scale cellular heterogeneity in complex structures. Automatic
profiling of an entire tissue section by MSI can collect spectra from
thousands of cells, but has not solved issues related to matrix effects
and subdividing cell contents. In contrast, representative populations
of dispersed cells may be seeded on surfaces for microprobe-based
MS analysis. By physically separating cells, MALDI matrix application
can be optimized to improve analyte extraction and limit matrix effects
from nearby cells, allowing the identification of rare individuals
within a population. Sample throughput is enhanced over MSI, albeit
at the cost of locational context within the native tissue. Each method
offers a unique set of performance characteristics that are suitable
to approach a given biological question.Beyond more advanced
instrumentation, a key shortcoming to the
methods discussed herein is their limited utilization outside of MS
research groups. Mass cytometry is gaining momentum as an alternative
to flow cytometry by providing rapid, quantitative assessments of
hundreds of antigens at a rate of thousands of cells per hour. These
targeted methods, together with label-free MS analyses, greatly enhance
the capabilities of SCMP-MS for discovery and hypothesis-driven investigations.
Wider acceptance of single-cell MS technologies as practical analytical
methods will broaden the breadth of questions addressed by SCMP-MS
and facilitate its further integration with more routine genomics
and transcriptomics approaches. Streamlining the workflows and simplifying
data interpretation will encourage further acceptance by a wider multidisciplinary
user base.Willard Quine once said, “Physics investigates
the essential
nature of the world, and biology describes a local bump.”[106] The advent of single-cell MS created an opportunity
to explore changes in “local bumps” at a finer resolution
than ever before. Through interdisciplinary investigations, we are
beginning to discover the low-abundance cellular minorities in homogeneously
bulk populations of cells that may cause drastic phenotypic changes.
Sampling techniques that provide high throughput, high spatial and/or
temporal resolution, and broad molecular coverage enable the determination
of individual cellular properties while discriminating between unusual
cell profiles and statistical noise. The body of work produced in
SCMP, aligned with results gathered by transcriptomics and genomics,
allows detailed understanding of changes occurring in individual cells
during normal and pathological states, with promising applications
in medicine.
Authors: Michael Angelo; Sean C Bendall; Rachel Finck; Matthew B Hale; Chuck Hitzman; Alexander D Borowsky; Richard M Levenson; John B Lowe; Scot D Liu; Shuchun Zhao; Yasodha Natkunam; Garry P Nolan Journal: Nat Med Date: 2014-03-02 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Radu Popa; Peter K Weber; Jennifer Pett-Ridge; Juliette A Finzi; Stewart J Fallon; Ian D Hutcheon; Kenneth H Nealson; Douglas G Capone Journal: ISME J Date: 2007-07-05 Impact factor: 10.302
Authors: Nicholas D Schmitt; Catherine M Rawlins; Elizabeth C Randall; Xianzhe Wang; Antonius Koller; Jared R Auclair; Jane-Marie Kowalski; Paul J Kowalski; Ed Luther; Alexander R Ivanov; Nathalie Y R Agar; Jeffrey N Agar Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2019-03-06 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Elizabeth K Neumann; Joseph F Ellis; Amelia E Triplett; Stanislav S Rubakhin; Jonathan V Sweedler Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2019-06-07 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Thanh D Do; Joseph F Ellis; Elizabeth K Neumann; Troy J Comi; Emily G Tillmaand; Ashley E Lenhart; Stanislav S Rubakhin; Jonathan V Sweedler Journal: Chemphyschem Date: 2018-04-17 Impact factor: 3.102
Authors: Tom M J Evers; Mazène Hochane; Sander J Tans; Ron M A Heeren; Stefan Semrau; Peter Nemes; Alireza Mashaghi Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2019-10-08 Impact factor: 6.986