Mengyu Gao1,2, Xinglong Zhu2, Wanliu Peng2, Yuting He2, Yi Li3, Qiong Wu2, Yanyan Zhou2, Guangneng Liao4, Guang Yang4, Ji Bao2, Hong Bu1,2. 1. Department of Pathology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China. 2. Institute of Clinical Pathology, Key Laboratory of Transplant Engineering and Immunology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37, Guoxue Alley, Wuhou District, Chengdu 610041, China. 3. Precision Medicine Key Laboratory, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China. 4. Experimental Animal Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Abstract
One of the key steps of using CRISPR/Cas9 to obtain gene-edited cells used in generating gene-edited animals combined with somatic cell nuclear transplantation (SCNT) is to harvest monoclonal cells with genetic modifications. However, primary cells used as nuclear donors always grow slowly and fragile after a series of gene-editing operations. The extracellular matrix (ECM) formulated directly from different organs comprises complex proteins and growth factors that can improve and regulate the cellular functions of primary cells. Herein, sodium lauryl ether sulfate (SLES) detergent was first used to perfuse porcine kidney ECM, and the biological properties of the kidney ECM were optimized. Then, we used a porcine kidney ECM pregel to pattern the microarray and developed a novel strategy to shorten the time of obtaining gene-edited monoclonal cell spheroids with low damage in batches. Our results showed that the SLES-perfused porcine kidney ECM pregel displayed superior biological activities in releasing growth factors and promoting cell proliferation. Finally, combined with microarray technology, we quickly obtained monoclonal cells in good condition, and the cells used as nuclear donors to construct recombinant embryos showed a significantly higher success rate than those of the traditional method. We further successfully produced genetically edited pigs.
One of the key steps of using CRISPR/Cas9 to obtain gene-edited cells used in generating gene-edited animals combined with somatic cell nuclear transplantation (SCNT) is to harvest monoclonal cells with genetic modifications. However, primary cells used as nuclear donors always grow slowly and fragile after a series of gene-editing operations. The extracellular matrix (ECM) formulated directly from different organs comprises complex proteins and growth factors that can improve and regulate the cellular functions of primary cells. Herein, sodium lauryl ether sulfate (SLES) detergent was first used to perfuse porcine kidney ECM, and the biological properties of the kidney ECM were optimized. Then, we used a porcine kidney ECM pregel to pattern the microarray and developed a novel strategy to shorten the time of obtaining gene-edited monoclonal cell spheroids with low damage in batches. Our results showed that the SLES-perfused porcine kidney ECM pregel displayed superior biological activities in releasing growth factors and promoting cell proliferation. Finally, combined with microarray technology, we quickly obtained monoclonal cells in good condition, and the cells used as nuclear donors to construct recombinant embryos showed a significantly higher success rate than those of the traditional method. We further successfully produced genetically edited pigs.
Gene-edited pigs have been extensively used as research models
for human disease pathogenesis, xenotransplantation, and gene therapy
due to anatomical and physiological similarities to humans.[1]Tyrosinemia type I (HT1) is an autosomal-recessive
hereditary disease
caused by the deletion of the fumarylacetoacetate hydrolase (Fah) gene. Deletion of the Fah gene leads
to the accumulation of fumarylacetoacetate (FAA), a toxic metabolite,
resulting in severe liver damage and most frequently leading to death
if untreated. 2-(2-Nitro-4-trifluoromethylbenzoyl)-1,3 cyclohexanedione
(NTBC) is a commonly used treatment.[2] We
aimed to knock out the Fah gene in Bama miniature
pigs and provide a large animal model for the pathogenesis of HT1
disease and gene therapy. In addition, Fah/Rag2/Il2rg knockout mice
have been used to produce bioengineered mice with humanized liver
cells.[3] The liver injury gene knockout
pig model can also provide an ecological niche for heterogeneous liver
cell proliferation, and the gene-editing pig can be used as a bioreactor
to amplify human liver cells.At present, clustered regularly
interspaced short palindromic repeat
(CRISPR)/CRISPR-associated 9 (CRISPR/Cas9) technology has been widely
used to generate gene-editing animal models.[4] Edited somatic cells with CRISPR/Cas9 followed by somatic cell nuclear
transfer (SCNT) are one of the most common methods to produce gene-edited
pigs.[5] The process of SCNT involves editing
somatic cells using CRISPR/Cas9 and picking out the gene-editing monoclonal
cells and then using the edited somatic cells as nuclear donors to
construct recombinant embryos, which are then activated by electricity
and transplanted into surrogate sows to produce gene-edited pigs.
The advantage of SCNT is that researchers can precisely screen cells
with specific mutations in vitro and then use those cells as nuclear
donors to create a series of known and characterized offspring.[6] In the process of SCNT, obtaining gene-edited
nuclear donor cells in good condition is an important step in the
preparation of gene-edited pigs. The quality of the cells will directly
affect the development of recombinant embryos in the later stage,
so it is the key and prerequisite for the production of gene-edited
pigs.[7]Currently, the nuclear donor
cells used for SCNT are mainly porcine
embryonic fibroblasts or porcine renal fibroblasts (PKFSs).[8] After gene editing of somatic cells in vitro,
it is necessary to select and amplify the positive gene-editing monoclonal
cells, which can be used as nuclear donors to transplant into mature
oocytes without nucleation. At present, the commonly used methods
to obtain gene-edited monoclonal cells are the limit dilution method
or clone cycle digestion method. Single cells were sorted into Petri
dishes by limiting dilution or flow cytometry. Due to the lack of
a microenvironment for cell population growth, single cells proliferated
slowly, and some cells could not proliferate normally in a single-cell
environment. However, harvesting monoclonal cells with clone rings
still faces a long monoclonal growth cycle, and mechanical force damage
during harvesting monoclonal cells will significantly reduce cell
activity and nuclear reprogramming ability, affecting the development
of recombinant embryos.[9,10] Therefore, harvesting monoclonal
cells using the above two traditional methods is faced with the problems
of a long cycle and low efficiency and is a rate-limiting step in
the production of gene-edited pigs.[11]The patterned microarray was applied to the growth of cell spheres,
in which cells could be restrictively adhered to the microarray and
spontaneously assemble into spheroids.[12] Our preliminary study also showed that a conventional fibronectin-derived
microarray could be used to culture monoclonal cells of cell lines,
but after preliminary experiments, the microarray could not support
the primary cells to gather into a spheroid, which could be used as
a nuclear donor.Fibronectin, collagen I, collagen IV, and Matrigel
as substrates
are mainly used for traditional microarrays.[13] However, a single protein component is not enough to improve and
regulate the viability and functions of specific cells or primary
cells.[14]In some recent studies,
the extracellular matrix (ECM) derived
from a variety of soft tissues, such as the small intestine, bladder,
kidney, liver, and lung,[15−17] can provide an ideal microenvironment
for cells, with tissue specificity to mediate cell adhesion, proliferation,
differentiation, gene expression, migration, and assembly.[18] Due to its superior biosecurity and inherent
regulation and support for seeded cells, ECM pregel would be an ideal
substrate for microarrays to support the proliferation and growth
of gene-edited primary cells.[19]The
ideal detergent should be able to fully remove cells while
retaining the ECM protein to the maximum extent. Sodium dodecyl sulfate
(SDS) is an ionic detergent with a hydrophilic negative charge on
the head that can dissolve the cytoplasm, cell nucleus, and cell membrane,
and it is the most commonly used detergent in tissue engineering.
However, SDS causes collagen depletion and can damage tissue ultrastructure
and lead to excessive loss of extracellular matrix components such
as key growth factors.[20] Sodium lauryl
ether sulfate (SLES) is a novel anionic detergent. Recent studies
reported that SLES has been used to prepare the extracellular matrix
of rat heart,[21] liver,[22] kidney,[23] lung,[24] and porcine lung extracellular matrix,[17] and SLES showed milder chemical properties and higher biocompatibility
than SDS. In addition, SLES showed better preservation of proteoglycans,
cytokines (such as basic FGF), and ECM microstructures than SDS, which
indicated that SLES-treated decellularized scaffolds could be superior
to those treated with SDS as substrates for cell growth.[25] One of the reasons could be that SLES contains
an ethoxyl group, which makes the chemical properties milder than
those of SDS.In this study, we attempted to use the novel anionic
detergent,
SLES, to decellularize the porcine kidney to obtain a kidney ECM pregel
and firstly use it to pattern microarrays. This is the first time
that such ECM-based microarrays are used to rapidly obtain gene-edited
monoclonal primary cell spheres. The success rate of constructing
recombinant embryos from monoclonal cells obtained by this method
was significantly higher than that of the traditional cloning ring
method. It could shorten the amplification cycle of monoclonal cells
in vitro, maintain a good cell state, and provide high-quality nuclear
donors for somatic cell nuclear transplantation.
Materials
and Methods
Animals
The kidneys were harvested
from 12 to 15 kg Bama miniature pigs (Guangxi, China) for use as ECM
donors. Porcine kidney fibroblasts (PKFs) were isolated from newborn
Bama miniature pigs. All animal care and experiments complied with
the guidelines of the Animal Experiment Center of Sichuan University,
and this study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Sichuan University
for Animal Research.
Decellularization of Porcine
Kidney
Animals were anesthetized with Zoletil 50 (10 mg kg–1 body weight, Virbac, France) by intramuscular injection
and maintained
with propofol (6 mg kg–1 h–1,
Qingyuan Jiabo, China) through ear vein injection. The renal aorta
of the kidney was cannulated and perfused twice with phosphate-buffered
saline (PBS) to remove the blood and then frozen at −20 °C
for at least 24 h. Once the organs were thawed at room temperature,
distilled water was perfused at a flow rate of 15 mL min–1 for 3 h. To compare two different detergents of decellularization,
in the first group, 1% Triton (Sigma-Aldrich, #X100), 1% sodium dodecyl
sulfate (SDS, Sigma-Aldrich, #L3771), and 1% Triton (Sigma-Aldrich,
#X100) were perfused into the kidney at a flow rate of 15 mL min–1 for 3 h, 16 h, and 3 h, respectively. In the second
group, 1% Triton, 1% SLES, and 1% Triton were perfused at the same
rate. Finally, to remove the residual detergents, distilled water
was perfused into the scaffolds for 1 h. The decellularized kidneys
were stored at −80 °C or fixed with 4% formalin or 2.5%
glutaraldehyde until use.
Assessment of ECM
Histological Analysis of ECM
The
native and decellularized tissue samples were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde
and embedded in paraffin. The paraffin sections (4 μm thick)
were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) to visualize the
nuclei and tissues. Nuclear-specific 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole
(DAPI) staining was performed to detect the efficacy of cell removal.
We further examined the morphology of the ECM by scanning electron
microscopy (SEM). The native and decellularized tissues were fixed
in 2.5% glutaraldehyde (Sigma-Aldrich, #G5882) for at least 24 h.
Samples were then washed with distilled water and dehydrated in a
graded ethanol series. Dehydrated samples were subsequently dried
at the critical point (HCP2; Hitachi, Tokyo, Japan) and sputter-coated
with gold–palladium. Electron micrographs of kidney ECM were
obtained at 5.0 kV and 500× magnification by a Hitachi S-4800
SEM (Hitachi, Japan).To evaluate the retention of the crucial
proteins in the ECM, sections of native and decellularized tissues
were subjected to Masson’s trichrome and immunofluorescence
(IF) staining according to established protocols. The collagen content
was quantified using a colorimetric assay to detect hydroxyproline.[26] Primary antibodies against collagen I (ab6308,
1:500, Abcam, Massachusetts), collagen IV (ab6586, 1:500, Abcam),
fibronectin (ab6328, 1:200, Abcam), and laminin (ab11575, 1:200, Abcam)
were used. For immunofluorescence, the sections were incubated with
secondary antibodies and DAPI at room temperature in the dark for
1 h and 5 min, respectively. The images were captured using an N-SIM-S
super resolution microscope (Nikon, Japan).
DNA
Content Quantification
To evaluate
the effectiveness of DNA removal. The DNA of native and decellularized
tissues was isolated from samples with a TissueNeasy Kit (Tiangen
Biotech Corporation, Beijing, China) and detected by a NanoDrop spectrophotometer
(ND-2000c, Thermo).
Component Analysis of
ECM
Fourier
transform infrared spectrometry (FTIR, Nicolet 560) was used to detect
the functional groups of the ECM.Collagen content in the tissues
was quantified by a colorimetric assay to detect hydroxyproline, as
described previously. The freeze-dried natural kidney tissue and the
decellularized kidney tissue were weighed to the same weight and hydrolyzed
overnight with papain at a concentration of 140 μg mL–1 at 60 °C. After hydrolysis, neutralization, and oxidation,
p-dimethylaminobenzaldehyde was added, and the samples were quantified
by measuring the absorbance at 570 nm.The glycosaminoglycan
(GAG) content of the ECM was quantified using
the Blyscan GAG assay kit (Biocolor, U.K.). The samples were quantified
by measuring the absorbance at 650 nm.The content of growth
factors (bFGF, VEGF) in ECM was detected
by ELISA (RuiXin, RX500921P, China; RuiXin, RX500812P, China).To detect the protein composition of the SDS-treated ECM and SLES-treated
ECM, proteomics was performed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass
spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) analysis. The raw MS data for each
sample were analyzed using the “Wu Kong” platform (https://www.omicsolution.com/wkomics/main/).
Preparation of ECM Pregel from Kidney ECM
The ECM was lyophilized using a lyophilizer (EYELA, FDU-2110, Japan)
and powdered with a Wiley Mill (Retsch, MM400, Germany). Then, they
were dissolved in 10% (w/w) pepsin (Sigma-Aldrich) in 0.01 M HCl with
constant stirring for 48 h at room temperature. Subsequently, the
pH of the ECM solution was adjusted to 7.2–7.4 using 0.1 M
NaOH.[27] The final pregel solution was induced
to form a hydrogel after incubation for 30 min at 37 °C.
Biological Evaluation of ECM Pregel
The biological
evaluation of ECM pregel as a substrate was performed
using primary porcine kidney fibroblasts (PKFs). PKFs were isolated
from newborn Bama piglets, as previously described.[8] They were maintained in DMEM (Gibco, China) with 10% fetal
bovine serum (FBS) (Gibco, Australia) and 1% penicillin–streptomycin
solution (HyClone, China) in a 5% CO2 incubator at 37 °C.To determine whether the kidney ECM hydrogels could support cell
viability, adhesion, and proliferation, the kidney ECM solution (10
mg mL–1) was diluted with PBS to a final concentration
of 0.2 mg mL–1 and coated on 24-well plates and
96-well plates. The same concentration of Matrigel solution-treated
plates was used as a comparison group, and uncoated plates were used
as controls. The coated plates were incubated at 37 °C for 1
h and then washed three times with PBS. Then, the plates were exposed
to UV light (365 nm) for 1 h. The coated plates were stored at 4 °C.The cell adhesion percentage after 4 h of cell seeding was evaluated
by counting the nonadhered cells using Countess TM II FL (Invitrogen).
PKFs were seeded on the plates, and cell viability was examined by
FluoroQuench fluorescent stain (One Lambda; Thermo Fisher Scientific,
Inc., Waltham, MA) after 1, 3, and 5 days in culture. The images were
analyzed using a fluorescence microscope (OBSERVER D1/AX10 cam HRC,
Carl Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany). Cell Counting Kit-8 (CCK-8, Sigma-Aldrich)
and EdU (RIBOBio, C10310-1, China) assays were used to evaluate cell
proliferation. The concentration of growth factor in the cell culture
supernatant was detected by ELISA (RuiXin, RX500921P, China; RuiXin,
RX500812P, China).
Microarray Patterning
A poly (dimethylsiloxane)
(PDMS) seal was obtained by means of a laser etching characteristic
pattern on a silicon wafer. To screen for a size suitable for PKFs
to grow into spheres, microarrays with diameters of 50, 100, 200,
and 50 μm spacing between microarrays were used as templates.
Then, the cells were incubated with 0.2 mg mL–1 kidney
ECM substrates mixed with 2 μg fluorescein isothiocyanate isomer
for 20 min at room temperature, and the substrates on the microarray
surfaces were subsequently removed. The microarray was dried at 37
°C for 10 min.The seals were patterned into 35 mm diameter
nontreated cell culture dishes at 0.2 N force for 10 min. The shapes
of the microarray were observed by fluorescence microscopy (OBSERVER
D1/AX10 cam HRC, CARL ZEISS, Germany). Subsequently, the treated dishes
were coated with 10 g L–1 pluronic F-127 water solution
(Sigma-Aldrich) for 1 h to prevent nonspecific cellular adherence
and then sterilized through ultraviolet irradiation for 1 h.
Generation of Fah Gene Knockout
Cells
The sgRNA targeting Fah was used in
our previous research (5′-GCGATTGGTGACCAGATCC-3′). Then,
the oligonucleotides of sgRNA were ligated to the PX458 vectors. Targeting
plasmids for the Fah genes were cotransfected into
PKF cells with Lipofectamine 3000 (Lipofectamine TM3000, Invitrogen).
After 48 h of transfection, the GFP-positive cells were sorted by
flow cytometry (FACSAria SORP, BD). To detect the modifications, genomic
DNA was extracted from cells and subjected to polymerase chain reaction
(PCR) with TaKaRaTaq Hot Start Version (TaKaRa, Japan) and Sanger
sequencing using specific primers (Fw: 5′-GCTGTGAGCTGTGGTGTACATTG-3′;
Rv: 5′- GTAGCTCCGATTCACCTGCTAG-3′).
Harvesting the Gene-Edited Monoclonal Cells
by Microarray
The PKFs sorted by flow cytometry were plated
on a microarray with diameters of 50 μm (planted with 1 ×
103 cells). A single cell is confined to a point of the
microarray and grows into a sphere. The process of generating monoclonal
cells using microarrays is shown in Figure A. The morphology
of cellular spheres was observed by EVOS TM XL Core (Invitrogen) at
four consecutive days in culture. Cell spheres derived from single
cells were removed with a pipette gun. After 3–5 days of amplification
culture, 1/10 of the cells were used for genotyping, and the rest
were cryopreserved for SCNT. Then, immunofluorescence (IF) of the
gene-edited cells was performed with primary antibodies against Fah
(bs-16194R; Bioss, China). The IF slides of the cells were analyzed
by a fluorescence microscope (AX10 imager A2/AX10 cam HRC; Zeiss).
At the same time, monoclonal cells were obtained by the traditional
cloning ring method as a comparison group to compare the proliferation
time and growth state of cells. The sorted cells were seeded in a
6 cm Petri dish, and the monoclonal cells were selected by a glass
cloning ring combined with trypsin digestion.
Figure 1
Process of generation
of monoclonal cells using microarrays and
preparation of porcine kidney ECM and kidney ECM pregel. (A) The porcine
kidney ECM was lyophilized, powdered, and digested to prepare the
ECM pregel, and then the ECM pregel was used to pattern the microarray.
The gene-edited cells were seeded into the microarray and proliferated
to become monoclonal cell spheres. ECM: extracellular matrix. (B)
Perfusion process of porcine kidney ECM. (C) SDS/SLES kidney ECM was
lyophilized, powdered, and digested to prepare the ECM pregel.
Process of generation
of monoclonal cells using microarrays and
preparation of porcine kidney ECM and kidney ECM pregel. (A) The porcine
kidney ECM was lyophilized, powdered, and digested to prepare the
ECM pregel, and then the ECM pregel was used to pattern the microarray.
The gene-edited cells were seeded into the microarray and proliferated
to become monoclonal cell spheres. ECM: extracellular matrix. (B)
Perfusion process of porcine kidney ECM. (C) SDS/SLES kidney ECM was
lyophilized, powdered, and digested to prepare the ECM pregel.
Generation of Gene-Edited
Porcine Embryos
and Pigs by SCNT
After identifying the positive clones, SCNT
was conducted, as described previously.[6] First, fresh ovaries are collected from the slaughterhouse, and
oocytes are harvested and cultured in vitro until the second meiosis
(MII). Subsequently, the gene-edited somatic cells were used as nuclear
donors and injected into the enucleated oocytes under the embryo microinjection
apparatus, and the recombinant embryos were electrically fused/activated
using the cell fusion apparatus.To produce gene-edited pigs,
one surrogate sow received 250 embryos. The sow was fed NTBC daily.
Abdominal ultrasound was performed 1 month after SCNT to determine
pregnancy. Approximately 114 days later, piglets were delivered by
natural birth.For analysis of Fah genotypes
in the obtained
piglets, the genomic DNA of ear tissues was extracted. PCR and Sanger
sequencing were performed as described above. The liver morphology
of FahKO pigs was observed by H&E staining.
Statistical Analysis
All data were
analyzed using SPSS statistical software (version 17.0) and organized
using GraphPad Prism software (La Jolla, CA). Dunnett’s t-test was used to compare data sets between two groups. P < 0.05 was accepted as significant.
Results
Kidney Decellularization and ECM Content Detection
As shown in Figure B, kidney ECM was obtained by two reagents, and the kidney ECM was
powdered and digested to prepare the ECM pregel. Visual inspection
showed that SDS-treated kidneys were more transparent than SLES-treated
kidneys (Figure B).In comparison with the native kidney, both the 1% SDS and 1% SLES
decellularized solutions almost completely removed the nuclear material,
as shown by H&E or DAPI staining and DNA quantification (Figures A,B and 3A). H&E and DAPI staining confirmed that visible cell components
were removed by SDS and SLES. Remarkable differences in the ultrastructure
were observed via SEM in native and ECMs (Figure C). Furthermore, the SLES-treated ECM exhibited
a denser structure than SDS-treated ECM, which indicated that SLES
may be a milder detergent with better preservation of ultrastructure
integrity than SDS. Masson’s trichrome staining showed that
the protein composition was well preserved (Figure D).
Figure 2
Characteristics of porcine kidney ECM. (A) Hematoxylin
and eosin
(H&E) staining of native kidney and ECM. Scale bar = 50 μm.
(B) 4,6-Diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) staining (scale bar = 100
μm); (C) Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of native
kidney and ECMs (scale bar = 20 μm); (D) Masson’s trichrome
staining of native kidney and ECM scaffolds. Collagen is blue–purple,
the cytoplasm is pink, and the nucleus is dark blue or black. Scale
bar = 50 μm.
Figure 3
Detection of the kidney
ECM content. (A) Quantification of the
DNA content in native kidney and ECM scaffolds (n = 3, *p < 0.05 versus the native group). (B)
FTIR spectra of SDS-treated and SLES-treated ECMs. Evaluation of the
collagen content (C), GAG content (D), growth factors of bFGF (E)
and VEGF (F) in native and decellularized kidneys (n = 3). *p < 0.05 versus the native group; #p < 0.05 versus the SDS group. G: Protein
clustering analysis of SDS-treated and SLES-treated ECMs. H: KEGG
signal pathway analysis for the differentially expressed proteins
in SDS-treated and SLES-treated ECMs.
Characteristics of porcine kidney ECM. (A) Hematoxylin
and eosin
(H&E) staining of native kidney and ECM. Scale bar = 50 μm.
(B) 4,6-Diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) staining (scale bar = 100
μm); (C) Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of native
kidney and ECMs (scale bar = 20 μm); (D) Masson’s trichrome
staining of native kidney and ECM scaffolds. Collagen is blue–purple,
the cytoplasm is pink, and the nucleus is dark blue or black. Scale
bar = 50 μm.Detection of the kidney
ECM content. (A) Quantification of the
DNA content in native kidney and ECM scaffolds (n = 3, *p < 0.05 versus the native group). (B)
FTIR spectra of SDS-treated and SLES-treated ECMs. Evaluation of the
collagen content (C), GAG content (D), growth factors of bFGF (E)
and VEGF (F) in native and decellularized kidneys (n = 3). *p < 0.05 versus the native group; #p < 0.05 versus the SDS group. G: Protein
clustering analysis of SDS-treated and SLES-treated ECMs. H: KEGG
signal pathway analysis for the differentially expressed proteins
in SDS-treated and SLES-treated ECMs.For the chemical structure analysis, FTIR results showed that both
the SLES-treated ECM pregel and SDS-treated ECM pregel contained hydroxyl
groups, amide groups, sulfonic groups, and amino functional groups
(Figure B). The amide
group was assigned to the presence of collagen, while the hydroxyl
group signal was used to indicate proteoglycans.[28] Collagen and glycosaminoglycan (GAG) are the main components
of the ECM, so we then detected the content of collagen and GAG. The
results showed that collagen retention and GAG retention in the SLES
groups were significantly higher than those in the SDS group (Figure C,D).The ELISA
results (growth factors of bFGF and VEGF) indicated that
both SDS-treated and SLES-treated ECM could effectively retain cytokines
(Figure E,F). The
SLES-treated ECM retained a higher level of growth factors than the
SDS-treated ECM (*p < 0.05).To show the
components of ECMs more directly and compare the differences
between the SLES-treated ECM and SDS-treated ECM, we performed cluster
analysis on the proteins identified by proteomics (Figure G), which showed that there
was some homology and difference in protein composition between the
two groups. Furthermore, the differential proteins were analyzed for
KEGG functional pathway enrichment, and the results showed that the
differential proteins between the two groups were concentrated in
cell differentiation, cytoskeleton organization, cell migration, regulation
of cell adhesion, regulation of cellular response to growth factor
stimulus, and so on (Figure H).To further focus on the bioactive ingredients in
the ECMs, immunofluorescence
staining was performed on collagen I, collagen IV, fibronectin, and
laminin. The results showed that all of them were well preserved (Figure ).
Figure 4
Immunofluorescence staining for ECM protein components. Collagen
I, collagen IV, fibronectin, and laminin immunofluorescence staining
of native (A) kidneys, SDS-treated ECM (B), and SLES-treated ECM (C).
Scale bar = 100 μm.
Immunofluorescence staining for ECM protein components. Collagen
I, collagen IV, fibronectin, and laminin immunofluorescence staining
of native (A) kidneys, SDS-treated ECM (B), and SLES-treated ECM (C).
Scale bar = 100 μm.
In Vitro Biological Evaluation of Kidney ECM
Pregel
For biological evaluation, PKFs were cultured on SDL-,
SLES-, and Matrigel-coated plates and analyzed at 1, 3, and 5 days
by live/dead images to indicate cell viability (Figure A,C). In the ECM-treated group, the survival rate was close
to 100% (Figure C).
The EdU and CCK-8 results showed that the proliferation of PKFs cultured
on ECM-coated plates was significantly higher than that of PKFs cultured
on Matrigel-coated and uncoated plates (Figure B,D). The ECM-coated group also had a higher
number of adhered cells after 4 h of seeding than the other groups
(Figure E). All of
the results indicated that kidney ECM pregel could provide an adequate
substrate for cell adhesion and proliferation and maintain a higher
viability rate. The levels of bFGF and VEGF in the cell culture supernatant
also showed a higher concentration in the ECM-coated group than in
the Matrigel and uncoated groups (Figure F,G). Meanwhile, growth factor concentrations
in the SLES group were significantly higher than those in the SDS
group (Figure F,G, #P < 0.05). Based on the above results,
we chose an SLES-treated ECM pregel as a substrate to prepare the
microarray.
Figure 5
Biological evaluation of kidney ECM-coated plates. (A) Live/dead
images of PKFs (green-live, red-dead). Scale bar = 100 μm. (B)
Cell proliferation of PKFs after 24 h of culture in coated plates
by EdU detection. Scale bar = 100 μm. (C) The viability of PKFs
cultured on each substrate (n = 3). (D) Proliferation
of PKFs (cck-8) on day 1 after cell seeding (n =
3). (E) The percentage of PKF adhesion 4 h after cell seeding (n = 3). (F, G) bFGF and VEGF concentrations in the cell
culture supernatant at 24 h after cell seeding (n = 3). *p < 0.05 versus the native group; #p < 0.05 versus the SDS group. &p < 0.05 versus the Matrigel group.
Biological evaluation of kidney ECM-coated plates. (A) Live/dead
images of PKFs (green-live, red-dead). Scale bar = 100 μm. (B)
Cell proliferation of PKFs after 24 h of culture in coated plates
by EdU detection. Scale bar = 100 μm. (C) The viability of PKFs
cultured on each substrate (n = 3). (D) Proliferation
of PKFs (cck-8) on day 1 after cell seeding (n =
3). (E) The percentage of PKF adhesion 4 h after cell seeding (n = 3). (F, G) bFGF and VEGF concentrations in the cell
culture supernatant at 24 h after cell seeding (n = 3). *p < 0.05 versus the native group; #p < 0.05 versus the SDS group. &p < 0.05 versus the Matrigel group.
Rapid Generation of Gene-Edited Monoclonal
Cells Using an ECM-Based Microarray and Evaluation of the Efficiency
of Producing Recombinant Embryos
We explore whether using
the microarray to obtain gene-edited monoclonal cells can shorten
the harvest time of monoclonal cells and detect the effect of obtained
monoclonal cells as nuclear donors for somatic cell nuclear transplantation.
We chose the Fah gene to test the monoclonal harvesting
platform. We packaged the high-efficiency sgRNA targeting Fah, which was verified in our previous study, into PX458
plasmid vectors.[29] The vectors were transfected
into porcine kidney fibroblasts. Since PX458 carries green fluorescent
protein (GPF), we sorted the GFP-positive cells by flow cytometry;
that is, we enriched the gene-editing-positive cells as much as possible
to obtain the gene-editing cell population.We evaluated the
effectiveness of using the microarray to obtain gene-edited monoclonal
cells by comparing the efficiency of recombinant embryos. The sorted
cells were divided into three groups. The flow diagram is shown in Figure A. In the first group, the sorted cells that did not undergo
monoclonal selection and amplification were directly used as nuclear
donors to construct recombinant embryos. After the reconstituted embryos
were electrically activated, they were observed under a microscope.
This group served as the control group.
Figure 6
Evaluation of the effect
of producing recombinant embryos from
monoclones obtained by microarrays. (A) The flow chart for the comparison
study. Flow cytometry only enriched the cells positively transfected
with the PX458 plasmid. There were still gene-edited cells and unedited
cells, which required monoclonal selection and sequencing verification.
Green represents cells that were only transfected with the PX458 plasmid
but did not undergo gene editing; red represents cells with homozygous
mutations; yellow represents cells with heterozygous mutations. The
cells not subjected to monoclonal screening were used as controls
to construct recombinant embryos. (B) Monoclonal cells were obtained
by cloning rings and microarrays. (a) The cells sorted by flow cytometry
were cultured in a 6 cm dish, and monoclonal cell populations were
observed on day 7; scale bar = 100 μm. (b) The monoclonal clones
were morphologically changed during proliferation; scale bar = 100
μm. (c) Digestion of monoclonal cell populations using glass
cloning rings; scale bar = 200 μm. (d) The morphology of monoclonal
cells changed during the proliferation process in 24-well plates;
scale bar = 100 μm. (e and f) The cells were attached to the
microarray after 12 h and 96 h. (g) A harvested monoclonal sphere
from the microarray at 5 days. (h) Monoclonal cells were amplified
and cultured for 72 h. Scale bar of e–h = 50 μm. (C)
Construction and electrical activation of recombinant embryos. The
somatic nuclear donors, injected nuclear donors into mature oocytes,
and electrically activated embryos are shown from left to right. Scale
bar = 100 μm. (D) Embryo activation efficiency (n = 3). *p < 0.05 versus the control group; #p < 0.05 versus the micropattern group.
Evaluation of the effect
of producing recombinant embryos from
monoclones obtained by microarrays. (A) The flow chart for the comparison
study. Flow cytometry only enriched the cells positively transfected
with the PX458 plasmid. There were still gene-edited cells and unedited
cells, which required monoclonal selection and sequencing verification.
Green represents cells that were only transfected with the PX458 plasmid
but did not undergo gene editing; red represents cells with homozygous
mutations; yellow represents cells with heterozygous mutations. The
cells not subjected to monoclonal screening were used as controls
to construct recombinant embryos. (B) Monoclonal cells were obtained
by cloning rings and microarrays. (a) The cells sorted by flow cytometry
were cultured in a 6 cm dish, and monoclonal cell populations were
observed on day 7; scale bar = 100 μm. (b) The monoclonal clones
were morphologically changed during proliferation; scale bar = 100
μm. (c) Digestion of monoclonal cell populations using glass
cloning rings; scale bar = 200 μm. (d) The morphology of monoclonal
cells changed during the proliferation process in 24-well plates;
scale bar = 100 μm. (e and f) The cells were attached to the
microarray after 12 h and 96 h. (g) A harvested monoclonal sphere
from the microarray at 5 days. (h) Monoclonal cells were amplified
and cultured for 72 h. Scale bar of e–h = 50 μm. (C)
Construction and electrical activation of recombinant embryos. The
somatic nuclear donors, injected nuclear donors into mature oocytes,
and electrically activated embryos are shown from left to right. Scale
bar = 100 μm. (D) Embryo activation efficiency (n = 3). *p < 0.05 versus the control group; #p < 0.05 versus the micropattern group.In the second group, the sorted cells were plated into 6
cm dishes,
and the growth of monoclonal cells was observed continuously. After
the clone population grew to a certain size, the monoclonal cells
were selected by a glass cloning ring combined with trypsin digestion.
Monoclonal cells were used as nuclear donors to construct recombinant
embryos. The electrically activated embryos were also viewed under
a microscope. As shown in Figure B (cloning ring group), the cells proliferating from
a single cell could be observed on days 7–10 (Figure B-a). Cell growth was relatively
slow, and many monoclones changed their morphology due to long-term
clonal proliferation instead of showing a regular fibrous shape (Figure B-b). Subsequently,
the cells were digested by the clone ring (Figure B-c) and then cultured by continuous amplification
on 96-well plates to 24-well plates (Figure B-d). It took nearly a month to obtain enough
cells to serve as nuclear donors and freeze them. The morphology of
most cultured cells changed.In the third group, monoclonal
cells were harvested using microarrays
and used as nuclear donors to construct recombinant embryos and observe
the state of electrically activated embryos under a microscope. To
make a microarray suitable for the growth of PKF monoclonal cells,
we first sequenced microarrays with diameters of 50, 100, and 200
μm to choose a suitable size for PKF growth into cell spheres
(Figure S1). The cells could grow from
an adherent state to a cell sphere both on the microarray with diameters
of 50 and 100 μm (Figure S1A,B).
However, in the microarray with a diameter of 200 μm, the cells
did not demonstrate sphere formation trends (Figure S1C). As the 50 μm seal is more suitable for single-cell
landing and the cell sphere viability of 50 μm was higher than
that of 100 μm, the 50 μm diameter seal was selected for
PKF monoclonal culture.Figure B-e shows
that one cell could grow at one position by controlling the cell density.
After 24–48 h, the cells, planted in the microarray, began
to grow from an adherent state to a three-dimensional (3D) structure
and gradually formed a cell sphere. After 96 h, the cell spheres hardly
continued to grow and remained at 50 μm (Figure B-f). On the 5th day, the cell spheres fell
off after shaking or gently blowing with a pipette. After the spheres
proliferating from a single cell were removed and blown (Figure B-g), the cells in
good growth condition could be obtained quickly for 3–5 days
by amplification culture (Figure B-h).As shown in Figure C-a, after digestion, the cells without monoclonal
screening had
regular cell margins, and the recombinant embryos were constructed
with compact and uniform cytoplasm after electrical activation (Figure C-c). However, most
of the cells harvested using clone rings had irregular edges, such
as “tentacles” (Figure C-d). Most of the recombinant embryos constructed by
these cells as nuclear donors had loose cytoplasm and unclear cell
membranes after electrofusion (Figure C-f). As unqualified embryos cannot develop properly,
they will not be transferred to surrogate sows. As shown in Figure C-g, after digestion,
the monoclonal cell population obtained by the microarray method showed
smooth edges and regular circles. After electric activation, the recombinant
embryo showed a uniform cytoplasm and smooth cell membrane, and most
of them met the requirements for transplantation to surrogate sows
(Figure C-i). The
percentage of successfully activated embryos in the clone ring group
was significantly lower than that in the control group, and there
were no significant differences between the microarray group and the
control group (Figure D).
Generation of Fah Knockout
Minipigs by SCNT
The above results verified the high efficiency
of using a microarray to obtain monoclonal cells and construct recombinant
embryos. Then, three Fah colonies harvested from
the microarray were randomly selected for analysis. The cell genotypes
were analyzed by TA cloning and Sanger sequencing. The results demonstrated
that two clones of Fah were biallelic mutations.
The #1Fah colony showed a 1 bp deletion. A 1 bp insertion
occurred in the #2Fah colony. These were typical
indel mutations caused by CRISPR/Cas9. One colony of Fah was wild type (Figure A).
Figure 7
Generation of gene-edited pigs by SCNT using
gene-edited monoclonal
spheres from the microarray. (A) Sequencing analysis of gene-edited
colonies generated by the CRISPR/Cas9 system. 1 bp deletion occurred
in the #1Fah colony; 1 bp insertion occurred in the
#2Fah colony. (B) Detection of protein expression
in gene-edited cells by IF. Scale bar = 100 μm. (C) Fah gene-edited pig. (a) The FahKO pig.
(b, c) H&E showed the liver morphology of a wild-type pig and FahKO pig. FahKO: Fah knockout;
WT: wild type; scale bar = 50 μm.
Generation of gene-edited pigs by SCNT using
gene-edited monoclonal
spheres from the microarray. (A) Sequencing analysis of gene-edited
colonies generated by the CRISPR/Cas9 system. 1 bp deletion occurred
in the #1Fah colony; 1 bp insertion occurred in the
#2Fah colony. (B) Detection of protein expression
in gene-edited cells by IF. Scale bar = 100 μm. (C) Fah gene-edited pig. (a) The FahKO pig.
(b, c) H&E showed the liver morphology of a wild-type pig and FahKO pig. FahKO: Fah knockout;
WT: wild type; scale bar = 50 μm.The #1Fah colony was randomly selected as donor
cells for SCNT. We also evaluated the protein expression of Fah in
the cells by immunostaining (Figure B). Compared with WT cells, the knockout cells (KO)
did not express Fah protein, indicating that Fah mutant
cells were successfully obtained (Figure B).To test whether the monoclonal
cells obtained by this method could
be used as nuclear transfer donors to deliver gene-edited pigs, 250
embryos were transplanted into a surrogate sow, the sow was successfully
gestated, and two piglets were delivered. We then verified the genotype
by gene sequencing and demonstrated that the two cloned piglets described
above were all KO pigs. The H&E results showed edema and cytoplasmic
ballooning degeneration in the livers of the pigs, which is consistent
with the reported phenotype of FahKO pigs (Figure C-b,c).
Discussion
Genetically engineered pigs hold great promise
in xenotransplantation,
modeling human disease and regenerative medicine.[30] The advanced genome engineering tools of CRISPR/Cas9 accelerate
the construction of a large animal model.[31] At present, the generation of genetically modified animals is mostly
based on somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) combined with CRISPR/Cas9
technology.[32] Therefore, the generation
of gene-edited nuclear donors is crucial.[33] Currently, the nuclear donor cells used for SCNT are mainly porcine
embryonic fibroblasts or porcine renal fibroblasts (PKFs).[34]Nevertheless, these primary cells naturally
proliferate slowly
and are vulnerable. In addition, under normal circumstances, fibroblasts
are not resistant to long-term culture and easily senesce. Continuous
passage of more than 10 generations results in slow proliferation
and morphological changes, and their karyotypes tend to become disordered,
showing obvious characteristics of senescence.[9]However, the transgenic operation of pig cells requires complicated
procedures such as culture, transfection, resistance screening, and
re-expansion culture, which usually takes approximately 20 days and
passes for approximately five to seven generations.[35] The activity of somatic cells undergoing such an operation
is significantly reduced, and their nuclear reprogramming ability
is affected.[36] Furthermore, it will cause
the surrogate sow to miscarry and the fetus to be deformed. Therefore,
when preparing porcine-modified somatic cells, it is generally required
to use high-activity cells with early generation and short cumulative
culture times. Especially in the preparation of polygenic modified
pigs, this issue needs to be considered.In previous studies,
the results showed that knocking out multiple
copies of a gene or generating multigene-edited pigs requires continuous
gene-editing experiments on cells, which results in cell apoptosis
and poor conditions.[37] Researchers need
to add many factors, such as p53 inhibitors, pifithrin α (PFTa),
and basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), to maintain the cellular
state and increase the average targeting efficiency.[38]To overcome this problem, in this study, we innovatively
reported
that using kidney ECM pregel to pattern microarrays can quickly obtain
gene-edited monoclonal cells in good condition. The success rate of
constructing recombinant embryos using these monoclonal cells was
significantly higher than that of the traditional cloning ring method.Decellularized ECM derived from different organs provides an ideal
tissue-specific microenvironment for cells, and the retained full
biochemical complexity of the native tissue contributes to the regeneration
of tissue or cells. Therefore, they have been utilized as coatings
for cell culture.[39]The frequently
used decellularization method to prepare decellularized
ECM from multiple organs is arterial perfusion with decellularization
reagents.[40] In our previous studies, sequential
perfusion with Triton X-100–SDS–Triton X-100 was shown
to be effective in removing cellular components from porcine liver
and kidney.[16] However, the unduly detergence
of SDS can result in an excessive loss of ECM and crucial growth factors.[41] Recently, a novel anionic detergent, sodium
lauryl ether sulfate (SLES), was reported to decellularize the rat
heart and lung[21,24] and showed milder chemical properties
and high biocompatibility capacity. In this study, we compared the
properties of kidney ECM perfused with SDS and SLES and their biological
activity.The results of H&E staining and DAPI staining
showed that no
nuclear structure could be detected in the kidney after SDS and SLES
perfusion, indicating that both SDS and SLES could effectively remove
cell components in the tissue (Figure A,B).The chemical structure analysis results
of ECM showed that both
the SDS- and SLES-treated ECMs contained carboxyl groups, hydroxyl
groups, amino groups, and amide groups, which indicate the collagen
proteoglycan components (Figure B). Further quantitative analysis showed that collagen
and glycosaminoglycan components in the ECM were effectively retained,
and these components in the SLES group were significantly higher than
those in the SDS group (Figure C,D). Growth factors promote cell proliferation. The results
showed that bFGF and VEGF, two common growth factors, were well preserved
in ECMs, and the SLES group was significantly higher than the SDS
group (Figure E,F).
To more intuitively compare the differences between the two groups
of ECMs, proteomic analysis showed that there were many different
proteins in SDS-perfused ECM and SLES-perfused ECM, and the functions
of these different proteins focused on cell differentiation and cell
adhesion (Figure G,H).Fibronectin, collagen I, collagen IV, and laminin are thought to
be important ECM protein components for cell adhesion, proliferation,
and differentiation. Our results also showed the proteins collagen
I and IV and fibronectin laminin (Figure ).When using kidney ECM pregel as
the coating reagent to culture
PKFs, the results showed that kidney ECM pregel was more conducive
to viability, adhesion, and proliferation than the uncoated and Matrigel
coating groups (Figure ). In addition, compared with Matrigel, a product of a tumorigenic
cell line, there were no potential risks of ECM pregel coculture with
nuclear donor cells. Moreover, PKFs showed significantly higher proliferation
in the SLES coating group than in the SDS coating groups (Figure D,E).In previous
studies, cytokines were preserved in tissues or may
be released into the microenvironment, further promoting cell and
tissue growth.[42] Our results demonstrate
that when ECM coating dishes were used, more growth factors were detected
in cell supernatants, which explained why the cell proliferation rate
in the ECM group was significantly higher than that in the untreated
group and Matrigel group (Figure F,G). In addition, the SLSE group had a higher concentration
of growth factor in the cell culture supernatant than the SDS group
(Figure F,G). This
result indicated that SLES detergent retains more biological components
of tissues. The SLES-treated ECM is a more ideal coating substrate.The status of gene-editing monoclonal cells used for nuclear donors
directly affects the construction of recombinant embryos. The shorter
the culture time of nuclear donor cells in vitro, the better. To shorten
the operation generation of gene-edited cells as much as possible,
we need to solve how the acquisition of enough monoclonal cells used
to be the nuclear donor can be accelerated. Microarrays can limit
cells to a specific adhesion space and allow them to cluster into
spheres for a short time. To further optimize the chips and make them
more suitable for the growth of primary cell monoclonal cells, we
used SLES-treated ECM pregel to pattern the microarray to promote
sphere formation of monoclonal cells and reduce the generations of
cell reproduction.In this study, we explored an ECM-based microarray
to obtain high-quality
gene-edited cell spheres. The gene-edited cells formed a three-dimensional
dendritic (3D) structure after 96 h of culture in the 50 μm
microarrays and then formed 3D cell microspheres. Because the contact
surface between the microsphere and the culture bottom is narrow and
the adhesion is not firm, when the cell spheres grow to a certain
size, they will automatically fall off from the bottom by shaking
or gently blowing with a pipette gun. The detached cell spheres were
visible to the naked eye. These detached cell spheres were diluted,
and spheres proliferating from a single cell were blown away in the
pore plate and then cultured. In this way, gene-edited-positive cell
clones can be obtained quickly by one or two subcultures (Figure B-e-h). By comparison,
it takes approximately 1 month to obtain enough monoclonal cells by
the traditional cloning ring method, and most cells undergo morphological
changes (Figure B-a-d).Compared with the monoclonal cells obtained by the traditional
cloning ring method, the monoclonal cells obtained by the microarray
method can provide higher-quality nuclear donors, and the success
rate of recombinant embryos constructed by them is significantly higher
than that obtained by the traditional method (Figure C,D). Furthermore, we also successfully used
these monoclonal cells as nuclear donors to obtain gene-edited pigs.
Conclusions
In this study, a new descaling agent, SLES,
was used for the first
time to prepare a porcine kidney extracellular matrix pregel. Using
the pregel as a substrate to pattern microarrays, we can promote cell
proliferation and adhesion, maintain high cell viability, and enable
single primary kidney fibroblasts to grow at a restricted site and
spontaneously assemble into spherules within 4 days. Compared with
the traditional monoclonal method, the harvesting time of monoclonal
cells was reduced from 30–40 to 10 days, which greatly reduced
the passage cycle of primary gene-edited cells in vitro and could
provide high-quality nuclear donors for somatic cell nuclear transplantation
in a better and faster way. Finally, monoclonal cells prepared by
this method were used as nuclear donors to successfully produce Fah gene knockout pigs.These monoclonal microarrays
will have greater application potential
in the construction of multigene knockout/knockin cells and could
provide the conditions for fragile cells to proliferate after complex
and long-term operation studies. Moreover, this single-cell patterning
technology could also contribute to biological studies in vitro, such
as the understanding of basic cell functions, cell behaviors, cell
migration, and drug screening. In contrast to traditional population-based
cell experiments, single-cell patterning is an effective technology
for the in-depth study of fundamental cell characteristics and for
fully understanding cell heterogeneity. Moreover, given that microarrays
can promote cell clustering into spheres, microarrays can also be
used to grow organoids. In the next step, we will expand the application
of this microarray.
Authors: Yuanyuan Zhang; Yujiang He; Shantaram Bharadwaj; Nevin Hammam; Kristen Carnagey; Regina Myers; Anthony Atala; Mark Van Dyke Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2009-05-01 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Darcy E Wagner; Nicholas R Bonenfant; Dino Sokocevic; Michael J DeSarno; Zachary D Borg; Charles S Parsons; Elice M Brooks; Joseph J Platz; Zain I Khalpey; David M Hoganson; Bin Deng; Ying W Lam; Rachael A Oldinski; Takamaru Ashikaga; Daniel J Weiss Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2014-01-08 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: S Kubo; M Sun; M Miyahara; K Umeyama; K Urakami; T Yamamoto; C Jakobs; I Matsuda; F Endo Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 1998-08-04 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Nima Momtahan; Tayyebeh Panahi; Nafiseh Poornejad; Michael G Stewart; Brady R Vance; Jeremy A Struk; Arthur A Castleton; Beverly L Roeder; Sivaprasad Sukavaneshvar; Alonzo D Cook Journal: ASAIO J Date: 2016 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.872