Dimitris Missirlis1, Miguel Baños1, Felix Lussier1, Joachim P Spatz1,2. 1. Department of Cellular Biophysics, Max-Planck-Institute for Medical Research, Jahnstr. 29, Heidelberg 69120, Germany. 2. Department of Biophysical Chemistry, Physical Chemistry Institute, Heidelberg University, INF-253, Heidelberg 69120, Germany.
Abstract
We here present a micropatterning strategy to introduce small molecules and ligands on patterns of arbitrary shapes on the surface of poly(acrylamide)-based hydrogels. The main advantages of the presented approach are the ease of use, the lack of need to prefabricate photomasks, the use of mild UV light and biocompatible bioconjugation chemistries, and the capacity to pattern low-molecular-weight ligands, such as peptides, peptidomimetics, or DNA fragments. To achieve the above, a monomer containing a caged amine (NVOC group) was co-polymerized in the hydrogel network; upon UV light illumination using a commercially available setup, primary amines were locally deprotected and served as reactive groups for further functionalization. Cell patterning on various cell adhesive ligands was demonstrated, with cells responding to a combination of pattern shape and substrate elasticity. The approach is compatible with standard traction force microscopy (TFM) experimentation and can further be extended to reference-free TFM.
We here present a micropatterning strategy to introduce small molecules and ligands on patterns of arbitrary shapes on the surface of poly(acrylamide)-based hydrogels. The main advantages of the presented approach are the ease of use, the lack of need to prefabricate photomasks, the use of mild UV light and biocompatible bioconjugation chemistries, and the capacity to pattern low-molecular-weight ligands, such as peptides, peptidomimetics, or DNA fragments. To achieve the above, a monomer containing a caged amine (NVOC group) was co-polymerized in the hydrogel network; upon UV light illumination using a commercially available setup, primary amines were locally deprotected and served as reactive groups for further functionalization. Cell patterning on various cell adhesive ligands was demonstrated, with cells responding to a combination of pattern shape and substrate elasticity. The approach is compatible with standard traction force microscopy (TFM) experimentation and can further be extended to reference-free TFM.
Entities:
Keywords:
cell−material interactions; integrin ligands; mechanotransduction; photopatterning; traction force microscopy
Understanding
how cells sense and respond to the physical and mechanical
properties of their insoluble microenvironment, i.e., their extracellular
matrix (ECM), is a major challenge of mechanobiology research. Among
different approaches, the ex vivo interrogation of cells on artificial
substrates with controlled biophysical and biochemical properties
has proven to be a powerful tool to test hypotheses and gain mechanistic
insight into mechanosensing and mechanotransduction of living cells.
Upon adhesion on a compliant substrate, cells exert traction forces
at the sites of attachment, where multiprotein complexes, termed focal
adhesions (FAs), assemble.[1,2] Cell-surface receptors
of the integrin family at FAs transmit intracellularly generated forces
produced by actomyosin contractility to substrate-immobilized extracellular
ligands.[3] The amplitude and dynamics of
these forces depend on substrate viscoelasticity, and in turn determine
the tension and force loading rate experienced by mechanosensing proteins
present at FAs.[1] At the same time, cell
shape and size additionally control the magnitude and orientation
of traction forces, through control of adhesion geometry and actin
cytoskeleton organization.[4,5] Efforts to control cell
morphology have revealed how cell confinement affects cell growth,[6] gene transcription,[7] and differentiation.[8] Overall, both cell
shape and substrate mechanics control cell physiology, and hence the
need to control independently these parameters when designing cell
culture substrates. An attractive approach to achieve this goal is
to pattern adhesive ligands on viscoelastic substrates so that cells
conform to the designed patterns.[9,10]Hydrogels
based on synthetic or natural non-ECM polymers offer
the advantage of decoupling ligand presentation from mechanical properties,
due to their tunable stiffness and biologically inert background,
on which adhesive ligands can be incorporated.[11−15] Various systems and cross-linking chemistries have
been developed to this end, including but not limited to poly(ethylene
glycol), alginate, hyaluronan, poly(N-isopropylacrylamide),
and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) hydrogels.[13−15] To spatially
pattern adhesive ligands on the hydrogel surface,[16,17] light has proven an excellent means due to a range of developed
photocleavable groups and the precision photopatterning allows.[18,19] Current methodologies for hydrogels photopatterning rely primarily
on soft lithography and can be classified into two main categories.
The first, most common strategy is based on localized activation of
reactive groups or exposure of protein-adsorbing surfaces on the gel
surface and subsequent, selective attachment of ligands.[20−28] Within this category, additionally falls the spatially controlled
uncaging of adhesive ligands, which does not require a second reaction
step, but prior synthesis and incorporation of caged ligands.[29,30] The second strategy is based on hydrogel formation on a substrate
prepatterned with the ECM protein of choice.[4,31,32]Among the developed hydrogel systems,
polyacrylamide (pAAm) gels
remain the most popular choice for cell mechanobiology studies due
to their ease of fabrication and established use in traction force
microscopy (TFM) studies following decoration with fiducial markers.[22,33−35] Despite inherent limitations, such as lack of physiological
structure and viscoelastic character, pAAm hydrogels offer a reproducible,
robust, and stable system that can be readily functionalized with
high-molecular-weight adhesive ligands.[35,36] To pattern
such ligands, a variety of micropatterning techniques were developed,
or adapted for pAAm,[20−22,31,32] published protocols for the spatial patterning of this material
still suffer from a few drawbacks: (i) a new pattern requires the
design and fabrication of a new mask, an expensive and time-consuming
process; (ii) current approaches do not allow efficient patterning
of small (1–3 kDa) peptide ligands, (iii) aligning multiple,
sequential patterns is difficult; and (iv) flexibility and control
over ligand presentation remains limited. Consequently, there is room
for improved techniques that are more versatile, easy-to-perform,
and accessible.Here, we introduce a facile and versatile method
to pattern pAAm
hydrogels using UV light, through the co-polymerization of monomers
containing light-sensitive caged amine groups. The generated primary
amines can be subsequently used to immobilize cell ligands throughout
various conjugation methodologies. The presented technique takes advantage
of a commercially available micropatterning system on an optical microscope
but should be applicable on most standard laser-based microscopy systems
of a typical research lab.
Results and Discussion
Incorporation and Patterning
of Primary Amine Groups in pAAm
Hydrogels
Poly(acrylamide) (pAAm) hydrogels were prepared
via radical cross-linking polymerization of acrylamide (Am) and bis-acrylamide
(Bis) (Figure S1). The Am and Bis concentrations
determine the cross-linking extent, and hence the stiffness of the
resulting pAAm hydrogels.[35] Hydrogels with
Young’s moduli between 0.5 and 10 kPa were obtained for the
different formulations prepared, a range that corresponds to most
soft tissues found in the body (Figure A). To include reactive groups in the polymer network,
the introduction of appropriate comonomers in the polymerization mixture
has been proposed.[4,20,37,38] Initial attempts to employ 2-aminoethyl
methacrylate as previously reported[39] were
not successful due to monomer insolubility—or fast degradation—of
the commercially available chemical in buffered solutions or dimethylformamide
(DMF). On the other hand, the incorporation of 2-aminoethylmethacrylamide
(AEMA) at concentrations between 0.5 and 3 mM was effective. The presence
of nucleophilic primary amines in AEMA-containing hydrogels was quantified
using fluorescamine, and the amount of incorporated comonomer increased
linearly with precursor concentration, providing control over the
number of incorporated reactive groups (Figure B). Of note, AEMA incorporation did not affect
hydrogel stiffness (Figure A).
Figure 1
Incorporation of reactive amines in poly(acrylamide) hydrogels.
(A) Young’s moduli calculated from atomic force microscopy
(AFM) indentation measurements of pAAm hydrogels with indicated nominal
concentrations of comonomers. Each data point (open circles) corresponds
to a different hydrogel. The bar is the mean from n = 2–5 independent batches, and the error bars represent the
standard deviation. (B) Incorporation of AEMA in pAAm hydrogels (5%
Am/0.1% Bis) calculated using a fluorescamine assay showed quantitative
incorporation of AEMA. Each data point corresponds to an independent
experiment (n = 3 gels/experiment). (C) Incorporation
of caged AEMA in pAAm hydrogels (5% Am/0.1% Bis) calculated using
UV measurements of precursor solutions and hydrogels following formation
and extensive washing. Each data point corresponds to an independent
experiment (n = 3 gels/experiment).
Incorporation of reactive amines in poly(acrylamide) hydrogels.
(A) Young’s moduli calculated from atomic force microscopy
(AFM) indentation measurements of pAAm hydrogels with indicated nominal
concentrations of comonomers. Each data point (open circles) corresponds
to a different hydrogel. The bar is the mean from n = 2–5 independent batches, and the error bars represent the
standard deviation. (B) Incorporation of AEMA in pAAm hydrogels (5%
Am/0.1% Bis) calculated using a fluorescamine assay showed quantitative
incorporation of AEMA. Each data point corresponds to an independent
experiment (n = 3 gels/experiment). (C) Incorporation
of caged AEMA in pAAm hydrogels (5% Am/0.1% Bis) calculated using
UV measurements of precursor solutions and hydrogels following formation
and extensive washing. Each data point corresponds to an independent
experiment (n = 3 gels/experiment).To introduce amines in a spatially controlled manner, a light-sensitive
comonomer was synthesized and incorporated in the hydrogels. The commonly
used nitrophenyl-containing group (NVOC)[16,40] was linked to AEMA, thus protecting the primary amine (caged AEMA; Figure A). Due to low aqueous
solubility, caged AEMA was dissolved in DMF instead of water. Moreover,
preliminary studies showed that a higher amount of radical initiation
was required for polymerization due to the radical scavenging properties
of the nitro group.[41] The nitrophenyl group
absorbs light in the UV range; quantification of comonomer incorporation
through absorbance measurements following extensive washing of the
gel revealed a monotonic increase in caged AEMA incorporation (Figure C). The caged comonomer
was quantitatively incorporated, except for the highest concentration
tested (3 mM), where approximately 70% of the initial caged AEMA was
present in the final hydrogel (Figure C). The mechanical properties of the resulting hydrogels
were influenced by the presence of the caged comonomer, depending
on the cross-linking ratio: for the stiffer hydrogels (0.3% Bis),
the obtained Young’s moduli were similar to controls, whereas
for hydrogels with lower cross-linking, a reduction in stiffness was
observed. For the lower cross-linking concentration (0.03% Bis), the
hydrogels obtained were too soft to handle and measure with the AFM
setup used.
Figure 2
Hydrogel patterning with fluorescent dyes. (A) Schematic representation
of the strategy used to pattern poly(acrylamide) hydrogels containing
caged AEMA comonomers. A changeable virtual mask is used by the PRIMO
patterning system to illuminate selected regions of the hydrogel with
UV light and locally deprotect amine groups. (B) Confocal microscopy
images of N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS)-AF568 dye coupled
to different-sized circular patterns on hydrogels using different
light doses. The intensities of the images are normalized. (C) Quantification
of mean fluorescence intensity inside patterned circles of different
sizes as a function of UV light dose. The dashed line corresponds
to the fluorescence intensity of a hydrogel containing the same concentration
of AEMA (1 mM) as the caged AEMA in the patterned sample and reacted
with the same amount of dye. The dotted line corresponds to a hydrogel
without any AEMA and reacted with the same amount of dye. Each data
point corresponds to an independent experiment (n = 2). (D) Confocal microscopy image of hydrogel patterned with a
custom design (inset: binary image) and reacted with NHS-AF568 dye.
(E) Confocal microscopy image of hydrogel patterned with a virtual
mask exhibiting a linear gradient in gray values and reacted with
NHS-AF568 dye; the inset shows the fluorescence intensity profile
along the white dahsed line. (F) Confocal microscopy image of a hydrogel
initially patterned and reacted with an NHS-AF568 dye (green), washed,
patterned again, and reacted with an NHS-Atto647N dye (magenta). (G)
Young’s moduli values obtained at different locations on the
surface of a hydrogel (5% Am/0.1% Bis; 1 mM caged AEMA), patterned
with 250 mJ/mm2 UV light and reacted with NHS-AF568 dye.
The inset shows the locations of each point overlaid on an epifluorescence
image of the hydrogel surface. The values obtained for points 6–10,
which are within the pattern, show no difference compared to the ones
outside the pattern. Scale bar: 50 μm.
Hydrogel patterning with fluorescent dyes. (A) Schematic representation
of the strategy used to pattern poly(acrylamide) hydrogels containing
caged AEMA comonomers. A changeable virtual mask is used by the PRIMO
patterning system to illuminate selected regions of the hydrogel with
UV light and locally deprotect amine groups. (B) Confocal microscopy
images of N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS)-AF568 dye coupled
to different-sized circular patterns on hydrogels using different
light doses. The intensities of the images are normalized. (C) Quantification
of mean fluorescence intensity inside patterned circles of different
sizes as a function of UV light dose. The dashed line corresponds
to the fluorescence intensity of a hydrogel containing the same concentration
of AEMA (1 mM) as the caged AEMA in the patterned sample and reacted
with the same amount of dye. The dotted line corresponds to a hydrogel
without any AEMA and reacted with the same amount of dye. Each data
point corresponds to an independent experiment (n = 2). (D) Confocal microscopy image of hydrogel patterned with a
custom design (inset: binary image) and reacted with NHS-AF568 dye.
(E) Confocal microscopy image of hydrogel patterned with a virtual
mask exhibiting a linear gradient in gray values and reacted with
NHS-AF568 dye; the inset shows the fluorescence intensity profile
along the white dahsed line. (F) Confocal microscopy image of a hydrogel
initially patterned and reacted with an NHS-AF568 dye (green), washed,
patterned again, and reacted with an NHS-Atto647N dye (magenta). (G)
Young’s moduli values obtained at different locations on the
surface of a hydrogel (5% Am/0.1% Bis; 1 mM caged AEMA), patterned
with 250 mJ/mm2 UV light and reacted with NHS-AF568 dye.
The inset shows the locations of each point overlaid on an epifluorescence
image of the hydrogel surface. The values obtained for points 6–10,
which are within the pattern, show no difference compared to the ones
outside the pattern. Scale bar: 50 μm.
Light-Induced Uncaging Enables Spatial Patterning
The
caged comonomer was designed such that the cleavage of the carbamate
group upon UV irradiation would expose primary amines for further
functionalization as schematically shown in Figure A. To determine the light exposure required
to deprotect the amines of gel-incorporated caged AEMA, circular patterns
of 10–50 μm in diameter on the hydrogel surface were
exposed to UV light (375 nm) for varying times using a PRIMO micropatterning
system. Deprotected amines were then reacted with an NHS-coupled fluorescent
dye (AlexaFluor 568). A linear increase in fluorescence intensity
within patterned areas was observed up to a laser dose of 250 mJ/mm2, followed by a plateau (Figure B,C). The plateau value was the same as the
one for hydrogels containing AEMA at the same concentration, indicating
complete uncaging of caged AEMA at illuminated regions. Nonpatterned
areas exhibited similar fluorescence to the negative controls (no
AEMA incorporated), demonstrating a lack of uncaging from ambient
light in nonilluminated regions. Based on these results, a dose of
500 mJ/mm2 was selected for further experiments.The PRIMO micropatterning system with its associated software also
enabled the facile preparation of virtual masks, and thus the patterning
of custom designs (Figure D), as well as the formation of gradients of immobilized fluorescent
labels, through the use of virtual masks with a gradient in gray value
(Figure E). Patterning
of two different dyes in complex, predesigned patterns was also achieved
with sequential light exposure, fluorescent labeling, and alignment
using the fluorescence of the first pattern (Figure F).Exposure to UV light and deprotection
of caged AEMA did not affect
the stiffness of the hydrogel surface layer, as determined by AFM
indentation measurements. The Young’s modulus was the same
within and around patterns, as these were identified by fluorescent
labeling with NHS-AF568 (Figure G). Of note, reaction with NHS-AF568 labeled the deprotected
amines throughout the hydrogel bulk following the UV light path used
during patterning (Figure S2). In principle,
localized patterning with the hydrogels presented here is also feasible
in the z-direction using two-photon microscopy.[42,43]
Hydrogel Functionalization
Having validated the presence
of reactive amines on patterned regions (Figure ), three different chemistries were examined
with the aim of introducing spatially patterned functional molecules
on the surface of poly(acrylamide) hydrogels (Figure ). First, deprotected amines in hydrogels
were reacted with a heterobifunctional NHS-biotin linker to exploit
the robust biotin–streptavidin interaction to immobilize ligands
on surfaces. Subsequent incubation with fluorescently labeled streptavidin
(100 μg/mL) verified the applicability of this approach to surface
pattern hydrogels (Figure A). In this case, Atto565-Streptavidin was only present on
the hydrogel surface, due to the size-dependent exclusion of the protein
from diffusion inside the hydrogel (Figure S2). Second, click chemistry was performed following reaction of patterned
hydrogels with a heterobifunctional NHS-PEG5-Alkyne linker:
an azide-functionalized fluorophore (AlexaFluor488) was used to validate
this approach (Figure B). Inversely, the azide was immobilized on the patterned hydrogel
using a heterobifunctional NHS-PEG4-azide linker and patterned
regions were labeled with alkyne-functionalized AlexaFluor 555 (Figure C). Third, a bifunctional
NHS-PEG2-maleimide linker was first introduced to react
the NHS esters with the amines, followed by coupling to maleimides
of a short thiol-containing DNA fragment, labeled with fluorescein
(Figure D). Due to
maleimide degradation in aqueous solutions, these two steps should
be performed in quick succession. The above results highlight the
versatility of patterning this type of hydrogels with commonly used
bioconjugation chemical strategies.
Figure 3
Pattern functionalization on hydrogels
via different chemistries.
Confocal microscopy images of pAAm hydrogels (5% Am/0.1% Bis) patterned
with UV light to uncage locally primary amines and reacted with: (A)
first an NHS-biotin linker, followed by incubation with Atto565-labeled
streptavidin; (B) first an NHS-PEG-Alkyne linker, followed by a click
reaction with an azide coupled to AlexaFluor488; (C) first an NHS-PEG-Azide
linker, followed by a click reaction with an alkyne coupled to AlexaFluor
555; and (D) first an NHS-PEG-Maleimide linker, followed by a second
reaction with a thiol-containing, fluorescein-labeled DNA fragment.
Scale bar (A–C): 50 μm, D: 100 μm.
Pattern functionalization on hydrogels
via different chemistries.
Confocal microscopy images of pAAm hydrogels (5% Am/0.1% Bis) patterned
with UV light to uncage locally primary amines and reacted with: (A)
first an NHS-biotin linker, followed by incubation with Atto565-labeled
streptavidin; (B) first an NHS-PEG-Alkyne linker, followed by a click
reaction with an azide coupled to AlexaFluor488; (C) first an NHS-PEG-Azide
linker, followed by a click reaction with an alkyne coupled to AlexaFluor
555; and (D) first an NHS-PEG-Maleimide linker, followed by a second
reaction with a thiol-containing, fluorescein-labeled DNA fragment.
Scale bar (A–C): 50 μm, D: 100 μm.
Cell Patterning on Hydrogels
An unmet challenge for
the majority of existing patterning methods for pAAm hydrogels is
the patterned immobilization of short peptide or peptidomimetic ligands.
Techniques to pattern such low-molecular-weight ligands have been
reported for other hydrogel systems;[23,44,45] here, we demonstrated as a proof of principle, the
patterning in lines of integrin peptide or peptidomimetic ligands
on pAAm hydrogels, and visualized cell adhesion using optical microscopy.
Primary human dermal fibroblasts (pHDF) adhered selectively to patterned
hydrogels functionalized using click chemistry with cyclic peptides
containing the RGD peptide motif (cyclic RGDfK; Figure A). pHDF elongated and migrated along the
lines, often exhibiting high aspect ratios of >10 (Movie S1). Small peptidomimetic integrin-selective
ligands[46,47] were also immobilized using the maleimide-thiol
coupling strategy.
pHDF adhered selectively to patterned areas with α5β1-selective integrin ligands (Figure B), while Chinese hamster ovary
cells overexpressing the αIIbβ3 integrin
(CHO-A5) recognized αIIbβ3-selective
integrin ligands patterned in lines (Figure C). Immobilization of larger ECM proteins,
such as fibronectin (FN), was also successful using the biotin-avidin
linkage to confine cells in defined patterns (Figure D). The above results demonstrate the versatility
of the presented system to pattern various ligands and the generality
in application through the use of different cell types.
Figure 4
Cell patterning
on poly(acrylamide) hydrogels. Line patterns were
prepared on 5% Am/0.1% Bis pAAm hydrogels incorporating 3 mM caged
AEMA. Patterns were functionalized with indicated integrin ligands.
Primary human dermal fibroblast adhered selectively to patterns of
immobilized cyclic RGDfK peptides (A) and α5β1 integrin-selective integrin peptidomimetics (B). (A) Confocal
microscopy image of fixed and phalloidin-stained pHDF cells. Phalloidin
stains filamentous actin; nuclei are stained in blue. (B) Phase contrast
microscopy image of live pHDF cells on hydrogel patterned with α5β1 integrin-selective peptidomimetics. (C)
CHO-A5 cells adhered to patterned αIIbβ3 integrin-selective ligands as exemplified with the epifluorescence
microscopy image of phalloidin-stained cells presented (nuclei stained
in blue). (D) Phase contrast microscopy image of live pHDF recognizing
line patterns of fibronectin immobilized through biotin–streptavidin
chemistry. Scale bar (A,D): 100 μm, B: 75 μm, (C): 50
μm.
Cell patterning
on poly(acrylamide) hydrogels. Line patterns were
prepared on 5% Am/0.1% Bis pAAm hydrogels incorporating 3 mM caged
AEMA. Patterns were functionalized with indicated integrin ligands.
Primary human dermal fibroblast adhered selectively to patterns of
immobilized cyclic RGDfK peptides (A) and α5β1 integrin-selective integrin peptidomimetics (B). (A) Confocal
microscopy image of fixed and phalloidin-stained pHDF cells. Phalloidin
stains filamentous actin; nuclei are stained in blue. (B) Phase contrast
microscopy image of live pHDF cells on hydrogel patterned with α5β1 integrin-selective peptidomimetics. (C)
CHO-A5 cells adhered to patterned αIIbβ3 integrin-selective ligands as exemplified with the epifluorescence
microscopy image of phalloidin-stained cells presented (nuclei stained
in blue). (D) Phase contrast microscopy image of live pHDF recognizing
line patterns of fibronectin immobilized through biotin–streptavidin
chemistry. Scale bar (A,D): 100 μm, B: 75 μm, (C): 50
μm.
Effects of Pattern Shape
on Cell Behavior
We next examined
how the shape of micropatterned ligands affects cell mechanosensing.
pHDF fibroblasts were seeded on 7 kPa hydrogels exhibiting crossbow
patterns of two different sizes functionalized with cyclic RGDfK-containing
peptides using click chemistry, or the same hydrogels homogeneously
coated with fibronectin and the commonly used sulfo-SANPAH cross-linker.
pHDF fibroblasts adhered selectively to patterns, adopting a polarized
shape (Figure A,B).
Notably, the cell size distribution was narrower on patterned substrates
compared to the homogeneously coated hydrogel, demonstrating an advantage
of cell patterning (Figure B). On the larger crossbows (50 μm in height and width),
fibroblasts assembled distinct focal adhesions at their periphery
as well as discernable actin stress fibers (Figure A). In contrast, on the smaller-sized crossbows
(30 μm in height and width), fibroblasts assembled much smaller
adhesions and did not exhibit an organized actin cytoskeleton (Figure A). Fibroblast height
was also determined by pattern/cell shape; cells on the larger patterns
were flatter compared to those confined to a smaller area (Figure S3).
Figure 5
Size of cell adhesive patterns on hydrogels
affects cell mechanosensing.
(A) Confocal microscopy images of pHDF cells on hydrogels patterned
with cyclic RGDfK peptides (small and large crossbows) or homogeneously
coated FN. pHDF were fixed 4 h after seeding and stained with tetramethylrhodamine
(TRITC) phalloidin, which stains filamentous actin (F-actin), and
against pY, which stains focal adhesions. (B) Quantification of cell
area of pHDF adhering to patterned, or FN-coated hydrogels. Each data
point corresponds to a single cell, from two independent experiments.
(C) Confocal microscopy images of yes-associated protein 1 (YAP) immunostained
pHDF cells 4 h after seeding. (D) Quantification of nuclear-to-cytoplasmic
ratio of YAP in pHDF adhering to patterned, or FN-coated hydrogels.
Each data point corresponds to a single cell, from two independent
experiments. Data in (B) and (D) were compared using one-way analysis
of variance (ANOVA) (n = 9, 10, and 20 for small
xbows, large xbows, and Gel FN, respectively); P values
are shown. Scale bars 20 μm.
Size of cell adhesive patterns on hydrogels
affects cell mechanosensing.
(A) Confocal microscopy images of pHDF cells on hydrogels patterned
with cyclic RGDfK peptides (small and large crossbows) or homogeneously
coated FN. pHDF were fixed 4 h after seeding and stained with tetramethylrhodamine
(TRITC) phalloidin, which stains filamentous actin (F-actin), and
against pY, which stains focal adhesions. (B) Quantification of cell
area of pHDF adhering to patterned, or FN-coated hydrogels. Each data
point corresponds to a single cell, from two independent experiments.
(C) Confocal microscopy images of yes-associated protein 1 (YAP) immunostained
pHDF cells 4 h after seeding. (D) Quantification of nuclear-to-cytoplasmic
ratio of YAP in pHDF adhering to patterned, or FN-coated hydrogels.
Each data point corresponds to a single cell, from two independent
experiments. Data in (B) and (D) were compared using one-way analysis
of variance (ANOVA) (n = 9, 10, and 20 for small
xbows, large xbows, and Gel FN, respectively); P values
are shown. Scale bars 20 μm.Next, the localization of yes-associated protein 1 (YAP), a mechanosensitive
transcriptional regulator that shuttles between the nucleus and cytoplasm
depending on cell shape and actomyosin contractility,[48] was examined. Previous work has demonstrated that confinement
of cell size by reducing accessible adhesive area on rigid glass,
or culturing of cells on soft substrates, leads to YAP nuclear export.[7] In particular, the transition from cytosolic
to nuclear YAP in isolated cells occurs in the 1–10 kPa range,
with mostly nuclear YAP present on FN- or collagen-coated pAAm hydrogels
with a Young’s modulus of 10 kPa.[49,50] However, the actual threshold for nuclear accumulation/export of
YAP depends not only on stiffness but also on other parameters such
as ligand density.[39,51] Here, we examined how YAP localization
is influenced by the spread area on 10 kPa hydrogels. The nuclear/cytoplasmic
YAP ratio was significantly higher for fibroblasts seeded on the larger
patterns (Figure C,D).
Fibroblasts adhering to homogeneously FN-coated hydrogels of the same
stiffness showed mostly nuclear YAP localization as expected[49,50] (Figure C,D), highlighting
the effect of pattern shape on mechanotransduction. In sum, the above
results demonstrate how control over the size of adhesive patterns
on soft elastic hydrogels can be used to study cell behavior and open
the way for studying the combinatorial effects of substrate stiffness,
cell shape, and ligand type. Of particular interest is the investigation
of the relative contributions of substrate stiffness and cell area
on YAP mechanotransduction to test recently developed models.[52] Moreover, while the effect of ligand density
was not investigated here, the possibility to control the concentration
of caged comonomer (Figure ) and light dose (Figure B) can be employed to independently control the number
of adhesive ligands as well.
Traction Force Microscopy on Patterned Hydrogels
One
major application of pAAm hydrogels remains traction force microscopy
(TFM) for the estimation of cell-generated forces,[34] despite the development of more physiologically relevant
viscoelastic substrates or three-dimensional (3D) culture systems.
In TFM, fluorescent beads embedded in the elastic substrate serve
as fiducial markers that report on substrate deformations induced
by cells. The confinement of cells within adhesive patterns on top
of TFM substrates allows the estimation of traction forces as a function
of cell shape, as well as the averaging over many cells to obtain
more reliable conclusions.[4,53] Existing protocols
however rely on immobilization of large ECM proteins. To test if our
patterning approach with small molecular ligands was compatible with
TFM, beads were encapsulated in 2 kPa pAAm hydrogels containing caged
AEMA, patterned, and functionalized with α5β1 integrin-selective peptidomimetics. The photopatterning process
did not cause bleaching of the beads and pHDF fibroblasts spread and
migrated along the patterned lines (Figure A). Importantly, standard protocols could
be used to determine substrate deformations through particle image
velocimetry (PIV) analysis (Figure B). Time lapse imaging of cells moving on patterns
showed how deformations are spatially confined in the axis of the
patterned lines and can be used for future calculations of exerted
traction forces (Movie S2).
Figure 6
Applicability of patterned
poly(acrylamide) hydrogels for traction
force microscopy applications. (A) Confocal microscopy image of fluorescent
beads on the upper layer of the hydrogel, merged with the transmission
image showing a live pHDF fibroblast adhering on a line pattern (schematically
overlaid in gray). The hydrogel used had a Young’s modulus
of 2 kPa and was functionalized with α5β1 integrin-selective peptidomimetics. (B) Particle image velocimetry
(PIV) analysis results from bead displacements observed before and
after the removal of the cell shown in (A). The magnitude of the color-coded
vectors is given in pixels. (C) Confocal microscopy image of a patterned
and AlexaFluor 568-labeled hydrogel. A square grid pattern of 1 μm
circles spaced 3 μm apart was used as the virtual mask. (D)
Merged confocal microscopy image of a live REFYFP-PAX cell with a fluorescent pattern on a 7 kPa hydrogel. (E) Substrate
deformation field calculated from PIV analysis of panel (D). Cell
outlines (white) in (D, E) are a guide to the eye. Scale bar: 20 μm;
inset: 5 μm.
Applicability of patterned
poly(acrylamide) hydrogels for traction
force microscopy applications. (A) Confocal microscopy image of fluorescent
beads on the upper layer of the hydrogel, merged with the transmission
image showing a live pHDF fibroblast adhering on a line pattern (schematically
overlaid in gray). The hydrogel used had a Young’s modulus
of 2 kPa and was functionalized with α5β1 integrin-selective peptidomimetics. (B) Particle image velocimetry
(PIV) analysis results from bead displacements observed before and
after the removal of the cell shown in (A). The magnitude of the color-coded
vectors is given in pixels. (C) Confocal microscopy image of a patterned
and AlexaFluor 568-labeled hydrogel. A square grid pattern of 1 μm
circles spaced 3 μm apart was used as the virtual mask. (D)
Merged confocal microscopy image of a live REFYFP-PAX cell with a fluorescent pattern on a 7 kPa hydrogel. (E) Substrate
deformation field calculated from PIV analysis of panel (D). Cell
outlines (white) in (D, E) are a guide to the eye. Scale bar: 20 μm;
inset: 5 μm.Traction force determination
requires the reference (relaxed) state
of the hydrogel, which is typically achieved following cell detachment.
An alternative approach is to perform reference-free traction force
microscopy using a regular pattern, which upon deformation, and hence
deviation from the ideal mesh, can inform on the forces exerted on
the substrate.[54] As a proof of principle,
we patterned a regular, square grid pattern of the highest resolution
possible. The technical limitations of the current setup (PRIMO system
with 20× objective) allowed patterning of 1 μm circular
patterns, with an interspot distance of 3 μm (Figures C and S4). These gels were functionalized with fibronectin and sulfo-SANPAH
prior to seeding a rat embryonic fibroblast cell line (REF52) that
stably express paxillin-coupled to yellow fluorescent protein (REFYFP-PAX). Paxillin is a marker of focal adhesions in
cells. An analogous analysis as for the standard TFM substrates was
performed (Figure D,E and Movie S3), demonstrating the applicability
of this approach to measure substrate deformations.
Conclusions
The micropatterning strategy introduced here provides a versatile
method to introduce cell adhesive ligands on demand, without the need
to create photomasks or use harsh reaction conditions. The approach
uses mild UV light to uncage reactive groups within the cross-linked
polymer network; subsequent functionalization with established chemistries
was demonstrated here for commonly used bioconjugation methods but
can be expanded to other chemistries. Importantly, this methodology
allows the patterning of low-molecular-weight ligands, a challenge
with existing methods, which mostly relied on nonspecific reaction
with amino acid side chains of ECM proteins. The applicability of
the patterned substrates was exemplified by demonstrating the regulation
of YAP activity as a function of pattern size on physiologically stiff
substrates. The presented hydrogels are compatible with standard TFM
protocols and could potentially be adapted for use in reference-free
TFM.
Experimental Section
Materials
A list
of commercially available reagents
and antibodies used in this study are presented in the Supporting
Information (Tables S1 and S2). Integrin-selective
peptidomimetic ligands against integrins α5β1 and αIIbβ3 containing a
thiol group have been previously described.[46,47] A short DNA sequence (5′-TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT-3′)
coupled to a thiol at the 5′ end and fluorescein to the 3′
end was purchased from biomers.net. The cyclic peptide RGDfK functionalized
with an azide at the ε-amine of lysine was purchased from PSL
laboratories (Heidelberg, Germany).NVOC-protected aminoethylmethacrylamide
(Caged AEMA) was prepared using a previously described protocol.[55,56] Briefly, 2-aminoethylmethacrylamide hydrochloride (100 mg, 0.6 mmol,
1 equiv) was mixed with Na2CO3 (63.58 mg, 0.6
mmol, 1 equiv) in 16 mL of H2O. Then, an equimolar amount
of 4,5-dimethoxy-2-nitrobenzyl chloroformate (165.38 mg, 0.6 mmol,
1 equiv) was dissolved in 16 mL of dioxane and was slowly added to
the aqueous solution with vigorous stirring. After stirring at room
temperature for a period of 1 h, the reaction was diluted with 15
mL of dichloromethane, followed by the addition of 10 mL of a 1 M
KHSO4 for acidification. The organic phase was collected,
and the aqueous phase was extracted with dichloromethane (3 ×
15 mL). The combined organic extracts were dried over anhydrous MgSO4, and concentrated in vacuo to give 142 mg
(66%) of a yellowish solid, which was used without further purification.
The product was conserved, at −20 °C, protected from light.1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3) δ 7.68 (s,
1H), 6.98 (s, 1H), 6.49 (br, 1H), 5.69 (s, 1H), 5.48 (s, 2H), 5.30
(s, 1H), 3.95 (s, 3H), 3.94 (s, 3H), 3.69 (s, 1H), 3.46 (t, J = 6 Hz, 2H), 3.40 (t, J = 6 Hz, 2H),
1.91 (s, 3H). 13C NMR (101 MHz, CDCl3) δ
169.18, 156.90, 153.58, 148.13, 139.75, 139.41, 127.99, 120.18, 110.07,
108.14, 67.09, 63.73, 56.43, 41.14, 40.66, 18.55. HRMS (ESI) m/z [M + H]+, calculated = 368.1452
(calculated for C16H21N3O7), observed = 368.1447, 1.36 ppm.
Hydrogel Preparation
Poly(acrylamide) hydrogels were
prepared using radical polymerization according to a published protocol.[35] The weight percent of acrylamide monomer was
kept constant at 5%, while the weight percent of the cross-linker
bis-acrylamide was varied between 0.03 and 0.3%. Comonomers were introduced
in the precursor solution at defined concentrations. 2-Aminoethylmethacrylamide
(AEMA) was introduced as an aqueous solution, while caged AEMA was
introduced in DMF. Fluorescent beads, 200 nm in diameter, were added
(1:100 stock solution) to the precursor mixture prior to gelation.
After mixing, 1 μL of tetramethylethylenediamine (TEMED) and
15 μL of freshly prepared solution of ammonium persulfate (APS;
100 mg/mL) were added and the precursor solution was vortexed and
pipetted between a hydrophobic glass coverslip, treated with Rain-X
for 10 min, and a glass coverslip treated with (3-aminopropyl)triethoxysilane
(APTES). For silanization, the coverslips were immersed for 1 h in
100 mL of an APTES solution in ethanol (10% v/v), in which 10 μL
of water and 10 μL of triethylamine were added. Then, the coverslips
were rinsed with ethanol, then water, dried, and placed in an oven
at 120 °C for 1 h. The hydrogel thickness was controlled using
spacers between the two coverslips. Gelation was left to proceed for
at least 30 min at room temperature. Gels attached to the APTES-treated
coverslips were recovered after removing the hydrophobic coverslip
and were washed in excess of water five times to remove unreacted
monomers and initiators.
Mechanical Characterization
Hydrogels
were mechanically
characterized by indentation measurements using a Nano-Wizard III
atomic force microscope (AFM; JPK Instruments AG, Germany), mounted
on an optical microscope (Zeiss Axiovert200). Cantilevers with a spherical,
borosilicate glass probe 5 μm in diameter (sQube) and a spring
constant between 0.45 and 0.60 N/m were used. The exact value of the
spring constant was determined using the thermal noise calibration
method prior to measurements. Force–distance (F–d) curves
were obtained from immobilized gels with a cantilever speed of 1.0
μm/s in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) at room temperature.
Young’s moduli were calculated by fitting the F–d curves
using the software provided by JPK and the Hertz model for a spherical
indenter: , where E stands for Young’s
modulus, ν for the Poisson’s ratio of the sample, R is the radius of the indenting sphere, δ is the
indentation depth, and δ0 is its zero position. A
Poisson ratio of 0.5 was used. At least 30 curves from at least three
different positions were analyzed per hydrogel.
Comonomer Incorporation
The amount of incorporated
AEMA was determined using the amine-reactive dye fluorescamine. Hydrogels
with different AEMA concentrations were formed in 96-well plates (50
μL/gel) for 30 min and then extensively washed with water. Water
(100 μL) was added on top of each gel, and 5 μL of a fluorescamine
solution in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) (3.0 mg/mL) was added. The well
plate was shaken for 10 min, and fluorescence intensity was measured
using a TECAN well plate reader (excitation wavelength: 390 nm; emission
wavelength: 470 nm). AEMA concentrations were calculated using a calibration
curve obtained from aqueous comonomer solutions.The amount
of incorporated caged AEMA in hydrogels formed in 96-well plates was
determined by UV absorption measurements at a wavelength of 350 nm,
using a TECAN well plate reader. Precursor solutions without the comonomer
were used as blanks.
Micropatterning
Hydrogels were patterned
using the
PRIMO system (Alveole) on an inverted Nikon Eclipse Ti2-E equipped
with a 20×/0.5 NA objective. Patterns (virtual masks) were designed
using the software Inkscape and were saved as 8-bit Tiff files (256
levels of gray value). The designed patterns were then loaded on the
Leonardo software, the objective was focused on the hydrogel surface,
and the UV dose was selected. After illumination, hydrogels were washed
five times for 5 min with water prior to functionalization and were
protected from light.Micropatterned
hydrogels
were equilibrated in 10 mM PBS prior to the reaction of deprotected
primary amines with heterobifunctional linkers. Four strategies to
functionalize the hydrogels were performed.Hydrogels were first reacted with
1 mM sulfosuccinimidobiotin (NHS-biotin) for 30 min at room temperature,
washed three times for 5 min with water and two times for 5 min with
PBS, and incubated with 100 μg/mL streptavidin or Atto565-labeled
streptavidin for 1 h at room temperature. Unbound streptavidin molecules
were removed by washing four times for 5 min with PBS and hydrogels
were incubated with 40 μg/mL biotinylated FN overnight at 4
°C. Hydrogels were washed three times for 5 min with PBS prior
to cell seeding.Hydrogels
were first reacted with
4.7 mM succinimidyl-[(N-maleimidopropionamido)-diethyleneglycol]
ester (NHS-PEG2-maleimide) for 10 min at room temperature,
washed five times for 10 s with PBS, and incubated with thiol-containing
integrin peptidomimetics (100 μM) or thiolated DNA (10 μM)
for 1 h at room temperature. Hydrogels were washed five times for
5 min with water prior to imaging, or three times for 5 min with water
and two times for 5 min with PBS prior to cell seeding.Hydrogels were first reacted with
2 mM Azide-PEG4-N-hydroxysuccinimidyl
ester (Azide-PEG4-NHS) for 30 min at room temperature and
washed three times for 5 min with water and two times for 5 min with
PBS. Then, a click reaction with an alkyne-coupled AlexaFluor 555
dye (0.5 mM) was performed in 4-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-piperazineethanesulfonic
acid (HEPES) buffer (100 mM) containing 2 mM Cu2SO4 and 5 mM sodium ascorbate. Hydrogels were washed five times
for 5 min with water prior to imaging.Hydrogels were first reacted with
2.5 mM Alkyne-PEG5-N-hydroxysuccinimidyl
ester for 30 min at room temperature and washed three times for 5
min with water and two times for 5 min with PBS. Then, a click reaction
with 100 μM cyclic RGDfK peptide containing an azide group,
or 100 μM azide-coupled AlexaFluor488, was performed in HEPES
buffer (100 mM) containing 2 mM Cu2SO4 and 5
mM sodium ascorbate. Hydrogels were washed five times for 5 min with
water prior to imaging, or three times for 5 min with water and two
times for 5 min with PBS prior to cell seeding.Hydrogels were alternatively functionalized using the
standard approach with sulfosuccinimidyl-6-[4′-azido-2′-nitrophenylamino]hexanoate
(suflo(SANPAH)). Briefly, hydrogels were washed with PBS before applying
a 1 mg/mL sulfo(SANPAH) solution in HEPES buffer (100 mM, pH 7.4).
The hydrogel was then irradiated with a portable UV light lamp for
5 min and rinsed first with water and then with PBS. Finally, a fibronectin
solution in PBS (40 μg/mL) was placed on top of the hydrogel
and incubated overnight at 4 °C. Hydrogels were washed three
times with PBS prior to cell seeding.
Cell Culture
Primary
human dermal fibroblasts (pHDF)
were purchased from ATCC (Cat #PCS-201-010). Chinese hamster ovary
cells overexpressing the αIIbβ3 integrin
(CHO-A5) were a kind gift from the lab of Prof. M. Ginsberg (UCSD).[57] REF52 stably transfected with paxillin fused
to a yellow fluorescent protein (REFYFP-PAX) was
a gift from Prof. B. Geiger (Weizmann Institute). All cells were cultured
as sub-confluent monolayers at 37 °C and 5% CO2, in
Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM; Life Technologies;
Prod. #10938), supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) and
1% penicillin/streptomycin (P/S). pHDF cultures were used until passage
15. Cell cultures were checked regularly for the absence of mycoplasma.
Immunofluorescence and Microscopy Imaging
Cells were
fixed on hydrogels after washing once with PBS and incubating with
a 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) PBS solution for 20 min at room temperature.
After washing with PBS, the cells were permeabilized with 0.1% Triton
X-100 for 5 min, followed by blocking with 1% bovine serum albumin
(BSA) in PBS for 1 h. The cells were incubated with primary antibodies
(diluted in 1% BSA) for 1 h at room temperature, washed four times
with PBS, and incubated with corresponding secondary antibodies for
another 1 h at room temperature. 4′,6-Diamidino-2-phenylindole
(DAPI) and TRITC-phalloidin were used to stain nuclei and filamentous
actin (F-actin), respectively.Laser scanning confocal microscopy
was performed on a Zeiss LSM880 microscope equipped with a 20×/0.8
NA air objective and a 40×/1.1 NA water immersion objective.
Epifluorescence and phase contrast microscopy experiments were performed
on a Leica DMi8. Live cell microscopy was performed at 37 °C
and 5% CO2 using environmental chambers.
Hydrogel Deformations
Confocal microscopy images of
patterned hydrogels with embedded beads or with fluorescent square
grid patterns (AlexaFluor 568-labeled) were acquired in the presence
of cells and after cell death induced by the addition of 100 μL
of 1 N NaOH solution in 5–6 mL of cell culture medium. Cell
death/removal was verified by visual inspection. The two images (before–after)
were aligned using the StackReg plugin of ImageJ (http://bigwww.epfl.ch/thevenaz/stackreg/). Then, particle image velocimetry (PIV) analysis was performed
using the PIV plugin (https://sites.google.com/site/qingzongtseng/piv).
Authors: Daniel Aydin; Ilia Louban; Nadine Perschmann; Jacques Blümmel; Theobald Lohmüller; Elisabetta Ada Cavalcanti-Adam; Tobias L Haas; Henning Walczak; Horst Kessler; Roberto Fiammengo; Joachim P Spatz Journal: Langmuir Date: 2010-10-05 Impact factor: 3.882
Authors: Florian Rechenmacher; Stefanie Neubauer; Julien Polleux; Carlos Mas-Moruno; Mariarosaria De Simone; Elisabetta Ada Cavalcanti-Adam; Joachim P Spatz; Reinhard Fässler; Horst Kessler Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2012-12-12 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Brandon V Slaughter; Shahana S Khurshid; Omar Z Fisher; Ali Khademhosseini; Nicholas A Peppas Journal: Adv Mater Date: 2009-09-04 Impact factor: 30.849
Authors: Steven R Caliari; Maryna Perepelyuk; Brian D Cosgrove; Shannon J Tsai; Gi Yun Lee; Robert L Mauck; Rebecca G Wells; Jason A Burdick Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2016-02-24 Impact factor: 4.379