| Literature DB >> 30963305 |
Valentina Onesto1,2, William B Barrell3, Mary Okesola3, Francesco Amato1, Francesco Gentile4, Karen J Liu3, Ciro Chiappini5.
Abstract
In embryogenesis, mesenchymal condensation is a critical event during the formation of many organ systems, including cartilage and bone. During organ formation, mesenchymal cells aggregate and undergo compaction while activating developmental programmes. The final three-dimensional form of the organ, as well as cell fates, can be influenced by the size and shape of the forming condensation. This process is hypothesized to result from multiscale cell interactions within mesenchymal microenvironments; however, these are complex to investigate in vivo. Three-dimensional in vitro models that recapitulate key phenotypes can contribute to our understanding of the microenvironment interactions regulating this fundamental developmental process. Here we devise such models by using image analysis to guide the design of polydimethylsiloxane 3D microstructures as cell culture substrates. These microstructures establish geometrically constrained micromass cultures of mouse embryonic skeletal progenitor cells which influence the development of condensations. We first identify key phenotypes differentiating face and limb bud micromass cultures by linear discriminant analysis of the shape descriptors for condensation morphology, which are used to guide the rational design of a micropatterned polydimethylsiloxane substrate. High-content imaging analysis highlights that the geometry of the microenvironment affects the establishment and growth of condensations. Further, cells commit to establish condensations within the first 5 h; condensations reach their full size within 17 h; following which they increase cell density while maintaining size for at least 7 days. These findings elucidate the value of our model in dissecting key aspects of mesenchymal condensation development.Entities:
Keywords: 3D in vitro models; Embryogenesis; High-content imaging; Mesenchymal condensation; Microtopography; Stem cells
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30963305 PMCID: PMC6453869 DOI: 10.1007/s10544-019-0390-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Microdevices ISSN: 1387-2176 Impact factor: 2.838
Fig. 1Identification of morphological features discriminating between limb buds and face condensations. (a) Brightfield stereoscopic images of condensations are (b) converted to grayscale, (c) binarized and (d) watershed segmented to identify individual objects. (e) Weighting coefficients for morphological descriptors of individual condensation arising from linear discriminant analysis between face and limb condensations. Higher absolute values indicate most significant descriptors
List of shape descriptors and their definition
| Property name | Description |
|---|---|
| Area | Actual number of pixels in the region |
| Perimeter | Distance around the boundary of the region |
| Eccentricity | Eccentricity of the ellipse that has the same second-moments as the region, returned as a scalar. The eccentricity is the ratio of the distance between the foci of the ellipse and its major axis length. The value is between 0 and 1. An ellipse whose eccentricity is 0 is actually a circle, while an ellipse whose eccentricity is 1 is a line segment |
| Minor axis | Length of the minor axis of the ellipse that has the same normalized second central moments as the region |
| Major axis | Length of the major axis of the ellipse that has the same normalized second central moments as the region. |
| Aspect Ratio | Major axis/minor axis ratio. |
| Roundness | |
| Number of condensations | Number of regions in the image. |
| Roughness | |
| Distance | Average of the 4 nearest-neighbor distance (calculated as centroid to centroid distance) |
| Occupancy | A circular region having as extremes of the diameter the most distant pixels belonging to the condensation is first selected. In this region the occupancy is given by the ratio between the area of the pixel belonging to the condensations and the total area. |
Fig. 2Establishment of microgroove culture system for ESPCs. a The PDMS substrates are functionalised with different coating strategies. b-c Phase-contrast images of ESPCs cultured on substrates with different coating strategies at (b) 1 DIV and (c) 4 DIV. Cell detachment and aggregation is visible at day 4 except for the APTES+fibronectin strategy. d Volumetric reconstruction of a confocal stack shows the 3D shape of the condensations in the microgrooves
Fig. 3Strategy for the analysis of condensation morphology by high content live imaging. a Individual grooves are extracted from the image. b Plot of the fluorescence intensity along the minor axis of the groove for the highlighted condensation. Fluorescence intensity is averaged over the major axis of the groove within the blue box. c Plot of the fluorescence intensity along the major axis of the groove. Fluorescence intensity is averaged over the minor axis of the groove. The light and dark bands in the fluorescence image correspond to peaks and valley in the graph, respectively. Individual condensations are identified by peaks in the plot. Their length is defined by the FWHM of the peak
Fig. 4High content live imaging analysis of mesenchymal condensations. Evolution of (a) length, (b) width and (c) number of condensations measured over the 36 h of the live imaging for different groove sizes (25–300 μm). (d) Snapshot of individual grooves at representative time points
Fig. 5Long-term analysis of mesenchymal condensations. a Mesenchymal condensation width, (b) length, (c) aspect ratio and (d) peak prominence of limb buds (blue) and face (red) ESPCs at 2, 5, 7 days. e Confocal images of condensations at 2, 5 and 7 days
Fig. 6Lineage commitment of mesenchymal condensations. a Hoechst and Sox9 co-staining of ESPCs after 2 days in culture, for different groove sizes (25–300 μm). b Ratio of Sox9 + ve nuclei to total nuclei within mesenchymal condensations