Esther Tanumihardja1, Rolf H Slaats2, Andries D van der Meer2, Robert Passier2, Wouter Olthuis1, Albert van den Berg1. 1. BIOS Lab on a Chip group, MESA+ Institute for Nanotechnology, Max Planck Centre for Complex Fluid Dynamics and Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede 7500 AE, The Netherlands. 2. Applied Stem Cell Technologies Group, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede 7500 AE, The Netherlands.
Abstract
In vitro studies which focus on cellular metabolism can benefit from time-resolved readouts from the living cells. pH and O2 concentration are fundamental parameters upon which cellular metabolism is often inferred. This work demonstrates a novel use of a ruthenium oxide (RuOx) electrode for in vitro studies. The RuOx electrode was characterized to measure both pH and O2 using two different modes. When operated potentiometrically, continuous pH reading can be obtained, and O2 concentration can be measured chronoamperometrically. In this work, we demonstrate the use of the RuOx electrodes in inferring two different types of metabolism of human pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes. We also show and discuss the interpretation of the measurements into meaningful extracellular acidification rates and oxygen consumption rates of the cells. Overall, we present the RuOx electrode as a versatile and powerful tool in in vitro cell metabolism studies, especially in comparative settings.
In vitro studies which focus on cellular metabolism can benefit from time-resolved readouts from the living cells. pH and O2 concentration are fundamental parameters upon which cellular metabolism is often inferred. This work demonstrates a novel use of a ruthenium oxide (RuOx) electrode for in vitro studies. The RuOx electrode was characterized to measure both pH and O2 using two different modes. When operated potentiometrically, continuous pH reading can be obtained, and O2 concentration can be measured chronoamperometrically. In this work, we demonstrate the use of the RuOx electrodes in inferring two different types of metabolism of human pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes. We also show and discuss the interpretation of the measurements into meaningful extracellular acidification rates and oxygen consumption rates of the cells. Overall, we present the RuOx electrode as a versatile and powerful tool in in vitro cell metabolism studies, especially in comparative settings.
In vitro cell culture models
are essential tools
in current biomedical research. Many classes of in vitro models have been developed in addressing research questions at practically
any biological complexity. From single-cell models which have successfully
elucidated single-cell physiologies,[1−3] up to organ- and body-level in vitro models are currently being developed, aspiring
to replace animal models.[4,5] More often than not,
cell biochemical pathways and cellular metabolism are at the center
of these biomedical studies (e.g., disease model studies, drug response).
These studies can thus highly benefit from time-resolved (chemical)
readouts from living cells. A class of microsensors (often called
microphysiometry), explicitly developed for such purposes, have been
expanding over the years.[6,7] Such microsensors could
be placed in close vicinity of the cells to monitor metabolic parameters
from the cells’ immediate surroundings, from which cellular
metabolism or signaling pathways could be inferred.Some of
the most prevalent readouts involve the fundamental parameters
of cell metabolism, i.e., the extracellular acidification rates (ECARs—determined
from measured pH) and oxygen consumption rates (OCRs—determined
from measured O2 level). The ECARs are often used as a
measure of glycolytic metabolism, while the OCRs are used as a measure
of oxidative phosphorylation.[6,8,9] In this work, we present a novel, on-chip ruthenium oxide (RuO) electrode that can be operated using different
electrochemical techniques to sense both pH and O2 of a
cell culture environment. Our electrode offers a versatile and low-cost
alternative to the commercially available microphysiometry dedicated
systems (e.g., Seahorse XF analyzers by Seahorse Bioscience, Oroboros
O2K system by Bioblast[10,11]). While these systems are an
excellent means to study cellular metabolism, they can only cater
for a limited range of models/system designs. As pointed out, many
different classes of in vitro models/devices have
been developed that encompass different levels of biological complexity.
For instance, currently, no commercially available system can be applied
in the rapidly growing class of microfluidic organ-on-chips devices.
Our on-chip electrode can be implemented in such microfluidic devices,
as well as in a static cell reactor setup (shown in this work).We demonstrate the working of our RuO electrode in studying the metabolism of human pluripotent stem cell-derived
cardiomyocytes (hPSC-CMs). hPSC-CMs are a very effective tool in studying
many prevalent diseases and the treatment thereof. However, the differentiated
cells tend to be immature and different maturation methods are being
investigated to achieve hPSC-CMs that can accurately model adult cardiomyocytes
for in vitro studies.[12−14] One of the characteristics
of mature cardiomyocytes is the ability to switch their energetic
metabolism based on the available carbon substrates.[10,15] Mature cardiomyocytes cultured in an abundance of glucose have been
reported to undergo glycolysis. However, they are also capable of
switching to oxidative phosphorylation when exposed to low-glucose
level and an abundance of galactose instead.[14,15] hPSC-CMs, on the other hand, rely for the most part on aerobic glycolysis
and exhibit little oxidative phosphorylation activity. Readouts of
hPSC-CMs metabolism are therefore directly useful in studying their
maturity. While cells undergoing different energetic metabolisms cannot
be discerned optically (in a label-free manner), they are discernible
by their ECARs and OCRs.[15]Here,
we show the use of the RuO electrode
to extract both the ECARs and OCRs of hPSC-CMs in culture. The ECARs
were calculated from the cell media pH, recorded potentiometrically,[16] and the OCRs from the cell media O2 level, sampled using a chronoamperometric technique. The use of
a single electrode for both parameters offers many advantages. It
unquestionably simplifies the fabrication and integration of the sensor,
leaving smaller footprints overall. More importantly, it allows for
higher and more precise spatial resolution of the sensor. Monitoring
both parameters from a targeted cluster or different parts of cell
cultures would then be possible, which might prove highly advantageous
for nonuniform cell cultures. A device capable of measuring both parameters
has only been previously reported using a single ion-sensitive field-effect
transistor (ISFET).[17] The device operation
involved an indirect O2 measurement by measuring the OH– as byproducts of O2 reduction. A palladium
electrode was included around the ISFET gate to drive the O2 reduction electrochemically. The ISFET sensing gate could then monitor
and differentiate pH changes from cell-induced acidification as well
as the pH increase from the O2 reduction reaction. However,
the device operation requires regeneration of the palladium electrode
surface (by applying highly positive potential bias). It has therefore
been reported that the device is prone to crosstalk from other (electro-oxidative)
processes. Also, the device sensitivity is compromised by the linear
OH– generation and the detection of pH change in
the logarithmic scale. Better O2 sensitivity can then be
achieved from the linear scaling of the amperometric signal to O2 concentration. To our knowledge, there have been no further
reports on a single device capable of direct O2 sensing
as well as potentiometric pH sensing. In this study, we present the
characterization of the RuO electrode
in sensing both pH and O2 levels. We also explore techniques
in applying the same sensor to extract meaningful ECAR and OCR values
to infer the cell metabolism of hPSC-CMs cell culture.
Materials and Methods
Electrodes and Setup
The RuO modification was done on a sputtered Pt
electrode (circular,
2.4 mm in diameter, 200 nm thick) on glass chips, as previously reported.[16] The glass chips were first cleaned by 5 min
sonication in isopropanol. The Pt electrode was then electrochemically
cleaned by applying cyclic voltammetry (CV, five cycles with a scan
rate (SR) of 200 mV/s in 0.5 M H2SO4 between
−1 and 2 V (vs Ag/AgCl), ending in 2 V; followed by 20 cycles
with SR 100 mV/s in 0.5 M H2SO4 between −0.2
and 1.2 V, ending in 1.2 V). The potential sweeps were performed using
a Bio-Logic SP300 bipotentiostat. The chip was then rinsed with deionized
(DI) water, blown dry with N2, and used as an RuO substrate, as previously described.[16,18] In short, the Ru(OH)3 precursor was precipitated from
5 mM RuCl3 (Sigma-Aldrich) solution, by adding 5 mM NaOH
(Sigma-Aldrich) solution dropwise. The precursor was then rinsed and
resuspended in DI water. The resuspension was dropped on the clean
Pt substrate and left to dry at room temperature. The chips with Ru(OH)3 precursor were baked in a preheated oven at 350 °C for
4 h and left in the oven to cool to room temperature (usually overnight).
The resulting RuO2 nanorods were confirmed by scanning
electron microscopy (SEM) imaging (FEI Sirion HR-SEM).The characterization
experiments were performed using a liquid junction Ag/AgCl (saturated
KCl) reference electrode (CH Instruments). The measurements conducted
in an incubator used a Ag/AgCl electrode as an on-chip quasi-reference
electrode. This Ag/AgCl electrode was fabricated by anodic chloridization
of a sputtered Ag electrode in 1 M KCl solution for 1 h (at 13 μA/mm2) or until measured potential exceeded 0.5 V. The glass chip
was used with an in-house fabricated Teflon chip holder equipped with
pogo pins for connection. The setup was placed inside a Faraday cage
during all characterization measurements.To minimize biofouling,
the electrodes were covered with Nafion
117 solution (Sigma-Aldrich) for characterization tests and cell measurements.
The Nafion solution (30 μL) was dropped on the electrode (in
the Teflon setup) and was left to dry in air at room temperature for
at least 15 min. The covered electrodes were then rinsed thoroughly
with DI water.
pH and O2 Sensing Characterization
The pH
sensing performance of the RuO electrodes
has been reported elsewhere.[16] The electrodes
used in this study were tested for their sensitivity with the Nafion
coating following the same protocol and pH buffers. Their pH sensing
performance in biological cell medium was also tested, by performing
calibration in fresh CM-TDI medium. The medium pH was changed by adding
different amounts of 1 mM lactic acid.Characterization of O2 sensing was done by performing CV (SR = 100 mV/s) and chronoamperometry
(with −0.400 V applied bias) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS)
with different aeration. The solution’s aeration was controlled
by bubbling the PBS for 15 min with a different mixture ratio of instrumental
air and argon gas (altogether 200 sccm); the flow of both gases was
controlled independently by a Brooks mass flow meter type 5850TR,
with a homemade controller. A calibration experiment using biological
cell medium with 0.25% bovine serum albumin (BSA) was done the same
way, only with a lower gas flow (altogether 100 sccm) bubbling for
5 min, followed by flowing the gas mixture on top of the cell medium
for 10 min. Bubbling time longer than 5 min was not possible due to
the high protein content, as it resulted in rigid bubbles that poured
out of the vial after 5 min. Less accurate control of O2 concentration was achieved in this experiment. All measurements
were carried out using the same Bio-Logic SP300 bipotentiostat at
21 ± 1 °C. All potentials were measured against liquid junction
Ag/AgCl (saturated KCl).
Cell Culture and Measurement
The
hPSC-CMs used were
derived from the double-reporter mRubyII α-actinin/green fluorescence
protein NKX2.5 (DRRAGN) cell line, as reported by Ribeiro et al.[19] Differentiation to cardiomyocytes was done as
described previously.[20] Briefly, hPSCs
were seeded at a density of 25 000 cells/cm2 on
Matrigel-coated six-well plates in Essential 8 medium (Thermo Fisher)
(as described in ref (21)) on day −1. On day 0, mesodermal differentiation was initiated
by addition of a Wnt activator CHIR99021 (1.5 μmol/L, Axon Medchem
1386), Activin-A (20 ng/mL, Miltenyi 130-115-010), and BMP4 (20 ng/mL,
R&D systems 314-BP/CF) in BPEL medium. On day 3, the Wnt was inactivated
by adding XAV939 (5 μmol/L, R&D Systems 3748) in BPEL. In
addition, Matrigel (Corning, 1:200) was added to promote adhesion
of cells. Cell cultures were refreshed on days 7 and 10 with BPEL
after the start of differentiation until differentiation was completed
(day 13). From there, hPSC-CMs were maintained in CM-TDI maturation
medium with 5 μM T3 hormone, 1 μM dexamethasone, 100 ng/mL
IGF-I (TDI), and 15 mM glucose[20] throughout
the experiment. This differentiation protocol typically yields 70–80%
cardiomyocytes,[19] and the unpurified mix
population of the cells was used. The cells were then dissociated
using 10× TrypLE Select (Thermo Fisher). The released cells were
counted in a hemocytometer and resuspended in CM-TDI medium.The Transwell inserts (Corning Transwell, 12 mm diameter, polyester
membranes with 0.4 μm pores) were coated with Matrigel (Corning,
at 8.3 μg/cm2) before seeding. The hPSC-CMs were
seeded on the Transwell inserts at cell densities of 300 000
and 600 000 cells/well. During measurement, glycolytic group
cells were incubated in CM-TDI medium (refreshed at the start of measurement).
The oxidative group was incubated in CM-TDI medium, however, with
10 mM galactose and 4.5 mM glucose instead.The glass chip and
Teflon chip holder were autoclaved and kept
under sterile conditions before the experiments. After the sterile
setup was built (Figure a), the electrodes were coated with Nafion, followed by a quick rinse
with 70% ethanol and three rinses with PBS. CM-TDI medium (700 μL)
was added to the setup and left to equilibrate in the incubator for
at least 1 h. Blank measurements in the absence of the cells were
then performed. O2 concentration was probed by performing
chronoamperometry at −0.650 V vs quasi-Ag/AgCl for 2 s. More
negative bias was applied than the tested onset potential of O2 reduction in pH 7.4 (of −0.400 V). This was done to
make sure that the measurement was mass-transport-limited, even with
the peak shift in the eventually acidified media. This way, the current
from O2 reduction measured at the different points in time
(and therefore different pH) can be fairly compared.
Figure 1
Images of the setup used.
(a) Photograph of the setup (glass chip,
Teflon chip holder, pogo pins connector, and Transwell insert). (b)
Cross-sectional drawing of the setup. Teflon holder (II) was made
to suspend the membrane of Transwell insert (III) 3 mm above the glass
chip (I), with O-ring (IV) to seal the electrochemical cell. The cells
were cultured on the top (apical) side of the membrane.
Images of the setup used.
(a) Photograph of the setup (glass chip,
Teflon chip holder, pogo pins connector, and Transwell insert). (b)
Cross-sectional drawing of the setup. Teflon holder (II) was made
to suspend the membrane of Transwell insert (III) 3 mm above the glass
chip (I), with O-ring (IV) to seal the electrochemical cell. The cells
were cultured on the top (apical) side of the membrane.Right before the tests, a visual check of the hPSC-CMs culture
in the Transwell insert was performed using an EVOS (EVOS M5000 Imaging
System) to make sure the cells were contracting. The Transwell insert
(with 200 μL CM-TDI medium) was then introduced into the setup.
It was made sure that no air bubble was trapped between the membrane
and the chip (see the cross section of the full setup in Figure b). The setup was
covered with Parafilm and put into the incubator to start the measurement.
Electrochemical techniques were performed using a portable EmStatMUX8.
Chronoamperometry of the two setups was performed one after the other,
while the open-circuit potential of the two setups was measured sequentially
using a multiplexer. The cells were inspected visually every 12 h.
If no beating activity was seen, the measurement was terminated or
restarted with fresh medium. A notable pH change was usually observed
after 1 day of incubating the cells in the setup. Therefore pH measurements
from day 2 are presented in this paper.OCR was calculated from
the difference in O2 reduction
current (at t = 2 s) at each measurement point from
the respective blank measurement measured before the cells were introduced.
Change in O2 concentration was calculated back from each
electrode’s calibration curve performed in the CM-TDI medium
before the cell experiment. ECAR was calculated every 5 min. The change
in pH value in this time frame was calculated from each electrode’s
calibration curve. pH values as measured by the RuO sensors were calculated back from the pH value measured using
a Mettler-Toledo SevenMulti pH meter at the end of the experiment,
and slopes were obtained from calibration of the same electrode before
the experiment.
Results and Discussion
Fabrication Results
Figure shows the
typical SEM image of the annealed
RuO nanorods on a platinum electrode.
The amorphous Ru(OH)3 precursor grew into rods of 15–25
nm width and 115–150 nm length. The SEM image shows that the
rods grew mostly on the precursor, leaving patches of platinum uncovered
by nanorods. Typically, more than 75% of the electrode’s geometric
area is covered by RuO2 nanorods. Considering the elevated
pH sensitivity (−59 mV/pH) of the electrode[16] compared with the pH sensitivity of a bare Pt electrode
of −34 mV/pH (Figure S1), it can
be assumed that there is sufficient coverage of RuO2 nanorods
on the electrode.
Figure 2
SEM image of the annealed RuO nanorods.
SEM image of the annealed RuO nanorods.
pH Sensing Characteristics
As mentioned, the general
pH sensing characteristics of the RuO electrode have been reported elsewhere.[16] Its applicability in this specific setting was further studied by
testing the effect of exposure to a complex cell medium. Figure a shows that the
application of Nafion did not change the sensitivity of the RuO electrode. The same electrode was then exposed
to the used CM-TDI medium for 65 h in an incubator. Its calibration
afterward showed a slight decrease in sensitivity; however, its response
remained highly linear.
Figure 3
(a) Nafion-coated RuO showing nearly
identical pH response to that of bare RuO. Prolonged exposure to (used) cardiomyocyte medium (CM-TDI) decreased
the pH sensitivity by about 5 mV/pH, however, still with high linearity.
(b) pH calibration of Nafion-coated RuO performed in fresh CM-TDI medium showing similar pH sensitivity,
with excellent linearity.
(a) Nafion-coated RuO showing nearly
identical pH response to that of bare RuO. Prolonged exposure to (used) cardiomyocyte medium (CM-TDI) decreased
the pH sensitivity by about 5 mV/pH, however, still with high linearity.
(b) pH calibration of Nafion-coated RuO performed in fresh CM-TDI medium showing similar pH sensitivity,
with excellent linearity.Figure b shows
the calibration curve (N = 3) of the same electrode
performed in fresh CM-TDI medium. The pH value was changed by adding
different amounts of 10 mM lactic acid, and the solution’s
actual pH was read by a pH meter. All three calibration curves showed
a highly linear response (R2 > 0.99),
with a narrow range in its slopes (Table S1). These findings suggest that the RuO electrodes are suitable to use in prolonged measurements in complex
cell medium. Particularly, its sensitivity is not expected to drift
significantly. However, greater variability was observed in the intercept
values of the calibration curves, as was the case for the AgCl electrodes
(Figure S2). Therefore, while the change
in pH values could be extracted rather accurately from the open-circuit
potential, end-point readouts of the actual pH values were necessary
to ensure accurate pH determination.
O2 Sensing Characteristics
Dissolved O2 can be readily reduced on an electrode
surface, following
the reaction given in eq .[22] In a mass-transport-limited system,
the resulting reductive current is therefore linearly correlated to
the O2 concentration in the solution.CVs recorded on the RuO electrode in
PBS showed a reductive current that
grew linearly with the O2 concentration with an onset potential
of around −0.400 V vs liquid junction Ag/AgCl (Figure a). The relatively high variation
between four tested electrodes (Figure a, inset) implied the necessity to calibrate the electrodes
individually. The more straightforward chronoamperometry technique
could also capture the same current. When −0.400 V potential
bias was applied on the RuO electrode,
a reductive current was recorded. The amplitude of this current was
linearly correlated (R2 > 0.99) to
the
O2 concentration in the electrolyte (Figure b) from 2 s on. This linearity implies that
a potential bias as short as 2 s would be sufficient to perform the
O2 measurement. Short measurement time (combined with low
bias potential) might prove necessary to minimize the measurement
effect on cells that can be altered by electric fields, e.g., cardiomyocytes.[23,24]
Figure 4
(a)
CV (SR = 100 mV/s) recorded on RuO electrode
in PBS with different aeration. The gray arrows denote
the scan direction. The inset plots the reductive current measured
at −0.400 V normalized to the electrode’s geometric
surface area against O2 concentration, which shows a highly
linear correlation. The error bars show one standard deviation among
four different electrodes. (b) Recorded current from chronoamperometry
measurements recorded on RuO electrode
at −0.400 V in PBS with different aeration. The inset plots
current at a different point in time normalized to the electrode’s
geometric surface area against O2 concentration.
(a)
CV (SR = 100 mV/s) recorded on RuO electrode
in PBS with different aeration. The gray arrows denote
the scan direction. The inset plots the reductive current measured
at −0.400 V normalized to the electrode’s geometric
surface area against O2 concentration, which shows a highly
linear correlation. The error bars show one standard deviation among
four different electrodes. (b) Recorded current from chronoamperometry
measurements recorded on RuO electrode
at −0.400 V in PBS with different aeration. The inset plots
current at a different point in time normalized to the electrode’s
geometric surface area against O2 concentration.Similar CV measurements were also performed in
CM-TDI medium (Figure S3). While a similar
reductive current
was observed, its onset occurred at a more negative potential of −0.450
V. This can be explained by the higher pH of the CM-TDI medium. Under
atmospheric air, the pH of the said medium can reach up to 8.4. A
potential shift of −50 mV could then be explained by this difference
of up to 1 pH unit. The RuO’s
O2 sensitivity also showed a slight reduction when measuring
in complex cell medium (−3.3 nA/(μM mm2) instead
of −5.4 nA/(μM mm2) in PBS).All in
all, the RuO electrode showed
excellent O2 sensing characteristics that are suitable
for cell metabolism studies. On top of minimizing the effect of the
applied electric field on the cells, the shorter measurement time
also leads to less O2 consumed during sensing. At 18.4%
O2 concentration, 2 s of amperometry delivered 20 μC
of charge. This is equivalent to 52 pmol of O2 being consumed
during the measurement, leading to a decrease by ∼52 nM O2 concentration in the 900 μL medium. While it may seem
negligible compared to the expected total O2 concentration
in the cell medium (up to 200 μM[6,25]), the O2 measurement should not be performed too often to avoid significant
depletion of the medium’s O2 compared to the metabolism
of the cells under study.
Measurements with hPSC-CMs
As proof
of concept, RuO electrodes were used
in experiments to capture
the metabolism of cardiomyocytes. The hPSC-CMs, differentiated in
high-glucose medium, were cultured in the medium with different glucose
levels with the intention to obtain cultures with different types
of metabolism. A colony of hPSC-CMs was cultured in the glucose-rich
medium (leading to glycolytic hPSC-CMs), and the other was cultured
in the low-glucose, galactose-rich medium (leading to hPSC-CMs with
an oxidative metabolic phenotype).[15] The
glycolytic hPSC-CMs were expected to mainly perform glycolysis and
produce lactate, acidifying its surroundings with little O2 consumption. The oxidative hPSC-CMs were expected to increase their
oxidative phosphorylation activity, thus showing an increase in O2 consumption and a reduction in lactate release.Figure S4 shows no significant difference in
cell morphology between the two hPSC-CMs groups after 2 days of incubation
in the different cell media. However, maturation and the ability of
these hPSC-CMs to switch metabolisms have yet to be studied and confirmed
by other means than visual observation. Therefore, in this study,
the pH value was measured independently at the end of the experiment
with a pH meter and the pH indicator (phenol red) color was documented
to capture the real difference in acidification rate. Regrettably,
no independent means was available to confirm the difference in O2 uptake. Therefore, no absolute O2 concentration
can be determined. Instead, OCR was calculated from the change in
O2 concentration, calculated from the respective RuO sensor’s O2 calibration
slope.The metabolism study of hPSC-CMs was performed using
two sensor
chips in two different setups. A colony of hPSC-CMs was added to a
setup with glucose-rich CM-TDI medium, and a colony was added to galactose-rich
CM-TDI medium. The RuO electrode was
employed to study both O2 consumption rate and medium acidification.
O2 concentration was measured every 9 ± 3 h, and the
pH was continuously measured between O2 measurements. The
results are presented and discussed separately below.
pH Sensing
The pH of the cell medium was measured continuously
for around 6 h at a time and was only stopped for brief O2 measurements and microscopy check of the hPSC-CMs activity. Throughout
the study, two different cell seeding densities (268 000 and
535 000 cells/cm2) were studied. It was found that
only with higher cell densities a notable change in pH indicator color
was observed at the end of day 2 (see Figures S6 and S7). For this reason, measurements of wells with higher
seeding cell densities are reported and discussed below.
Measurement
in Buffering Media
Figure a shows the calculated pH values, measured
during day 2 of the experiment, of the two hPSC-CMs groups. It can
be seen that apart from the initial slope, the pH of both groups stabilized
and followed a similar trend. Every measurement was started after
an optical check of the cells, performed outside of the incubator.
The initial slope (the first ∼150 min) seemed to be heavily
influenced by the change in temperature/air composition taking place
during the optical check. This slope varied between the channels and
from measurement to measurement. While there is possibly information
regarding real acidification contained in these initial slopes, accurate
interpretation is precarious. Therefore, acidification analyses were
focused on the latter part of each measurement (at t > 150 min).
Figure 5
(a) Calculated pH change throughout day 2 in the presence
of hPSC-CMs
(535 000 cells/cm2) undergoing different metabolisms.
(b) The same data calculated into ECAR of the different hPSC-CMs groups.
The ECAR was calculated in 5 min interval; the error bars plot one
standard deviation of the 5 min measurement window.
(a) Calculated pH change throughout day 2 in the presence
of hPSC-CMs
(535 000 cells/cm2) undergoing different metabolisms.
(b) The same data calculated into ECAR of the different hPSC-CMs groups.
The ECAR was calculated in 5 min interval; the error bars plot one
standard deviation of the 5 min measurement window.When the pH change is plotted over time (Figure b), it is apparent that barely
any change
was picked up by either sensor after 150 min. Nonetheless, a slight
but discernible pH change was apparent from the measurement using
the pH meter as well as the color of pH indicator (Figure S7). This suggests that while the extracellular acidification
took place at different rates in the two groups, the difference was
too small for the sensors to pick up. The slight difference in open-circuit
potential measured over time could have been obscured by the sensor’s
drift or other parameter changes (e.g., temperature drift). Given
that the resulting media pH change is an interplay between the released
protons from the cell metabolism and the number of protons taken up
by the pH buffer (in this case, the carbonate buffer), the pH change
rate can be exaggerated by lowering the buffering capacity of the
media.
Measurement in Low-Buffering Media
While it is common
practice to perform ECAR measurement in low- or non-buffering cell
media,[7,15] a fair comparison of ECARs among reported
works is hard to achieve. First, the different works used different
(variations of) media with different buffering capacities that are
often not specified. Furthermore, ECAR measurements are often performed
under atmospheric air for a shorter period (up to 150 min).[7] Since our study took 48 h, it was critical to
preserve the viability of the cells for this period by retaining some
of the buffering bicarbonate in the media. After some experimentations,
half of the original buffering capacity (∼3.5 mmol/L) was found
to be the minimum capacity to keep the cells viable and active for
48 h. Since there are no reports on ECARs of hPSC-CMs measured using
comparable media to our knowledge, the results are discussed only
in comparison to other results in this study.Overall, the calculated
pH change in this low-buffering media (Figure a) showed a more significant difference between
the two groups than that in Figure a. This implies more prominent acidification, which
is also confirmed by the measured final pH as well as the color of
the pH indicator (Figure S8). However,
the calculated ECARs themselves (Figure b) showed a dissimilarity only for a part
of the measured period (60 min < t < 220 min).
For around 3 h of the 6 h measurement, the ECARs of the glycolytic
cells showed significantly lower values, indicating a faster acidification
rate, before leveling off back to the same values as the oxidative
group. While these results might be convincing together with the calculated
pH values and the visual confirmation, on its own, such results are
not conclusive. Different measurements often showed that the calculated
ECARs of the two groups only differed significantly from each other
for a fraction of the measurement time, even in low-buffering media.
This outcome could be explained by the findings of Mookerjee et al.[9] in studying contributions of the different cell
metabolisms in proton production. The study showed that oxidative
respiration could result in proton release up to the same order as
that released from glycolysis. Therefore, without prior knowledge
of the cells’ metabolism makeup in the different substrates,
it would be unreliable to quantify cells’ metabolism rate (glycolytic
rate as well as respiration rate) from ECAR data alone.
Figure 6
(a) pH change
throughout day 2 in the presence of hPSC-CMs (535 000
cells/cm2) in low-buffering CM-TDI medium. (b) Calculated
ECARs of the hPSC-CMs. The ECARs were calculated in 5 min interval;
the error bars plot one standard deviation of the 5 min measurement.
(a) pH change
throughout day 2 in the presence of hPSC-CMs (535 000
cells/cm2) in low-buffering CM-TDI medium. (b) Calculated
ECARs of the hPSC-CMs. The ECARs were calculated in 5 min interval;
the error bars plot one standard deviation of the 5 min measurement.
O2 Sensing
The chronoamperometry
currents
measured in the presence of the oxidative hPSC-CMs showed more significant
deviation from its blank, compared to the measurements of the glycolytic
hPSC-CMs. From these currents, the OCRs of the two different cell
colonies were calculated (Figure a,b). Taking into account the setup geometry, it was
expected that O2 diffusion (coming mostly from the top
opening) was sufficient to replenish the O2 concentration
in the medium around the cells. It was calculated that the O2 flux at the bottom of a medium column of height 2 mm under typical
incubator condition[26] is still higher than
the expected OCR of cardiomyocytes[14,25] at our cell
density. In our study, the 200 μL CM-TDI medium formed an ∼1.7
mm high column on top of our cells. Assuming the OCR stays constant,
the system can be expected to reach some form of equilibrium. Therefore,
each measurement point can be regarded as an independent measurement
point, where the change in O2 concentration (with respect
to the blank measurement) reflects the cells’ OCR at the given
point in time.
Figure 7
OCRs of hPSC-CMs (535 000 cells/cm2)
calculated
from O2 measurements (a) in galactose-rich medium and (b)
in glucose-rich medium. Solid points (●) show OCRs calculated
from measurements in the presence of hPSC-CMs, and the blanks (⊗)
in empty setups. (c) Overall, the OCRs of the two different hPSC-CMs
groups are significantly different from each other, with the average
OCR of the oxidative hPSC-CMs being 2.3 times higher than that of
the glycolytic hPSC-CMs. The boxplots whiskers show the ranges within
1.5 of the interquartile range; the lines inside the box denote the
medians, and the solid boxes (■) inside the boxplots denote
the means of the OCR values.
OCRs of hPSC-CMs (535 000 cells/cm2)
calculated
from O2 measurements (a) in galactose-rich medium and (b)
in glucose-rich medium. Solid points (●) show OCRs calculated
from measurements in the presence of hPSC-CMs, and the blanks (⊗)
in empty setups. (c) Overall, the OCRs of the two different hPSC-CMs
groups are significantly different from each other, with the average
OCR of the oxidative hPSC-CMs being 2.3 times higher than that of
the glycolytic hPSC-CMs. The boxplots whiskers show the ranges within
1.5 of the interquartile range; the lines inside the box denote the
medians, and the solid boxes (■) inside the boxplots denote
the means of the OCR values.The calculated OCR values (Figure c) show that the oxidative hPSC-CMs significantly took
up more O2 than their glycolytic counterpart. Over the
tested 48 h, the glycolytic hPSC-CMs took up 77.3 pmol of O2 per minute on average and the oxidative 179.3 pmol of O2 per minute. When normalized to the seeding density, the glycolytic
hPSC-CMs were calculated to consume 2.1 ± 1.2 amol O2/(cell s), which was less than half of that of the oxidative hPSC-CMs
(4.8 ± 0.7 amol O2/(cell s)). Figure a also shows a trend of decreasing OCR of
the oxidative hPSC-CMs. This can be correlated with the observed reduced
hPSC-CMs’ activity observed visually at the end of the 48 h
experiment. The hPSC-CMs activity usually increased again once the
cell media was refreshed, implying that cell waste buildup or depletion
of cell nutrients might cause this gradual reduction in activity.A similar explanation might apply to the measurement at t = 48 h of the glycolytic cell group (Figure b). The measured O2 concentration
showed an apparent decrease in O2 concentration
at that point, suggesting an unexpected increase in the cells’
OCR. A depleted glucose level (together with cell stress) after 2
days of incubation can theoretically cause a switch in metabolism.
The O2 levels in the empty setups were still sampled after
the hPSC-CMs were removed. The measured O2 levels recovered
relatively close to that of the initial blank level.This observation
implied that the RuO sensors were still
operating as expected; nonetheless, further studies
on the experiments’ reproducibility and repeatability are necessary.
The calculated OCR values are also about 10-fold lower than other
reports of hPSC-CMs’ OCRs.[14] Since
cell counts and viability were not monitored/quantified throughout
the experiment, further studies are also necessary to confirm the
OCR trend as well as its cell-normalized value.Overall, this
experiment showcased the potential usage of the RuO electrode as an O2 sensor in
a study of cell metabolism. We show that the RuO electrode can be used to compare the OCRs of two cell colonies
in identical setups. Together with the cells’ ECARs, captured
from monitoring the pH of the cell media, the data recorded using
the RuO electrode can be used to infer
the cell colony’s main metabolism.
Conclusions
In
this work, we present an on-chip RuO electrode,
capable of performing both pH and O2 sensing.
The techniques and considerations in applying said electrode to study
cell metabolism are also presented. We showed OCRs and ECARs calculated
from data collected using the RuO electrode
over 48 h of two hPSC-CM colonies in different substrates. The hPSC-CM
colony cultured in glucose-rich medium showed higher ECARs compared
to that of the hPSC-CM colony cultured in galactose-rich medium. The
opposite applied to the OCRs, hPSC-CM colony cultured in glucose-rich
medium showed lower OCRs than that of the hPSC-CM colony cultured
in galactose-rich medium. Observations of both parameters implied
that the hPSC-CMs cultured in glucose-rich medium underwent mainly
glycolysis and those cultured in a low glucose concentration underwent
mainly oxidative phosphorylation.At the current sensor size,
the amperometric O2 sensing
should not be performed more frequently than once every hour. Considering
the lowest OCRs we measured, performing the amperometric O2 sensing once every hour would contribute to as much as 1% of the
cells’ OCR. The miniaturization of the electrode would enable
better time resolution of the O2 sampling. Smaller volumes
would also result in stronger and quicker medium acidification. Nonetheless,
we have shown that the RuO electrode
can be used for cell metabolism study even in its current format.
Considering its low cost and robust quality, the electrode can serve
as a versatile and powerful tool in in vitro cell
metabolism studies, especially in comparative settings.
Authors: M Lehmann; W Baumann; M Brischwein; H Gahle; I Freund; R Ehret; S Drechsler; H Palzer; M Kleintges; U Sieben; B Wolf Journal: Biosens Bioelectron Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 10.618
Authors: Min Wu; Andy Neilson; Amy L Swift; Rebecca Moran; James Tamagnine; Diane Parslow; Suzanne Armistead; Kristie Lemire; Jim Orrell; Jay Teich; Steve Chomicz; David A Ferrick Journal: Am J Physiol Cell Physiol Date: 2006-09-13 Impact factor: 4.249
Authors: Jong Hwan Sung; Ying I Wang; Narasimhan Narasimhan Sriram; Max Jackson; Christopher Long; James J Hickman; Michael L Shuler Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2018-12-11 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Bärbel M Ulmer; Andrea Stoehr; Mirja L Schulze; Sajni Patel; Marjan Gucek; Ingra Mannhardt; Sandra Funcke; Elizabeth Murphy; Thomas Eschenhagen; Arne Hansen Journal: Stem Cell Reports Date: 2018-03-01 Impact factor: 7.765
Authors: Chris Denning; Viola Borgdorff; James Crutchley; Karl S A Firth; Vinoj George; Spandan Kalra; Alexander Kondrashov; Minh Duc Hoang; Diogo Mosqueira; Asha Patel; Ljupcho Prodanov; Divya Rajamohan; William C Skarnes; James G W Smith; Lorraine E Young Journal: Biochim Biophys Acta Date: 2015-10-31
Authors: Anna S E Cuomo; Daniel D Seaton; Davis J McCarthy; Mariya Chhatriwala; Oliver Stegle; Iker Martinez; Marc Jan Bonder; Jose Garcia-Bernardo; Shradha Amatya; Pedro Madrigal; Abigail Isaacson; Florian Buettner; Andrew Knights; Kedar Nath Natarajan; Ludovic Vallier; John C Marioni Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2020-02-10 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Ulgu Arslan; Alessia Moruzzi; Joanna Nowacka; Christine L Mummery; Dominik Eckardt; Peter Loskill; Valeria V Orlova Journal: Mater Today Bio Date: 2022-04-14
Authors: Elsbeth G B M Bossink; Mariia Zakharova; Douwe S de Bruijn; Mathieu Odijk; Loes I Segerink Journal: Lab Chip Date: 2021-05-18 Impact factor: 6.799
Authors: Samuel H Kann; Erin M Shaughnessey; Jonathan R Coppeta; Hesham Azizgolshani; Brett C Isenberg; Else M Vedula; Xin Zhang; Joseph L Charest Journal: Microsyst Nanoeng Date: 2022-09-29 Impact factor: 8.006