| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
a Center for Cell and Gene Therapy,
b Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Integrated Microscopy Core, and
c Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
Key Words. Skeletal muscle • Autofluorescence • Stem cell plasticity
Margaret A. Goodell, Ph.D., Center for Cell and Gene Therapy and Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine, One Baylor Plaza, BCM N1050, Houston, Texas 77030, USA. Telephone: 713-798-1269; Fax: 713-798-1230; e-mail: goodell{at}bcm.tmc.edu
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
The concept of "transdifferentiation" of adult stem cells, particularly HSCs, into nonautochthonous cell types has received a great deal of interest recently due to the potential offered for cellular therapy [1]. Generation of skeletal muscle from HSCs was one of the first areas of interest, but reported efficiencies vary by two orders of magnitude from ~0.05% [2, 3], to ~3% [4–6]. Contribution of wild-type cells to dystrophic muscle could potentially be therapeutic in the range of 1%-10%. Considering the enormous disparities observed in engraftment levels, it is vital to identify the baseline engraftment potential of bone-marrow-derived cells into skeletal muscle in order to determine whether bone marrow transplantation may be useful for the treatment of skeletal muscle disorders in the near future.
Although engraftment levels vary from laboratory to laboratory, within a research group engraftment levels remain constant. This suggests that the differences observed in engraftment levels may be due to the techniques used to identify the transdifferentiation event. The presence of the Y chromosome [3], GFP expression [4–6], and nuclear-localized ß-galactosidase [2] expression have all been used to identify skeletal muscle fibers containing bone-marrow-derived cells. Thus far, experiments performed using bone marrow cells expressing GFP have resulted in the highest levels of muscle engraftment. It has been suggested that the lower engraftment levels observed in experiments using ß-galactosidase as a marker may be due to silencing of the lacZ gene. Here, while performing preliminary experiments to determine whether we could detect engraftment from GFP-positive cells in skeletal muscle, we observed a high level of fiber-type-specific green autofluorescence that could potentially be mistaken for GFP fluorescence.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Determination of Muscle Fiber Type
Serial sections of 10 µm each were made from unperfused unfixed tissue and were stained for myosin ATPase activity and NADH activity. NADH activity was determined by a 30-minute incubation at 37°C with 1.5 mM NADH (Sigma-Aldrich; St. Louis, MO; http://www.sigma-aldrich.com) and 1.5 mM Nitro blue tetrazolium (Sigma-Aldrich) in 0.2 M Tris (Sigma-Aldrich). Myosin ATPase staining was performed using the protocol of Guth and Samaha [7]. Briefly, frozen sections were air dried for 30 minutes followed by preincubation in alkaline and acidic solutions. Alkali preincubation was carried out for 15 minutes at pH 10.4 using 0.1 M 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (Sigma-Aldrich) containing 18 mM CaCl2, while acidic preincubation occurred at pH 4.0 in 0.1 M potassium acetate buffer for 10 minutes. Slides were rinsed with 0.1 M Tris-HCl and incubated for 30 minutes at 37°C in a buffer solution of 0.1 M 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (pH 9.4) containing 18 mM CaCl2 and 2.7 mM ATP (Sigma-Aldrich). ATPase activity was visualized by staining in 2% cobalt chloride (Sigma-Aldrich) followed by 1% ammonium sulfide (Sigma-Aldrich).
Myoblast Transplantation
The tibialis anterior (TA) muscles of C57Bl/6 mice were injured by a 20-µl injection of cardiotoxin (1 mg/ml, Sigma-Aldrich). Twenty-four hours later, 1 x 105 muscle cells isolated by type II collagenase digestion (0.2%; Worthington Biochemical Corporation; Lakewood, NJ; http://www.worthington-biochem.com) [8] from a GFP mouse were injected into the injured TA. Two weeks following injury, mice were perfused with 1.5% PFA/0.5% glutaraldehyde, as described above. TA muscles were snap frozen, sectioned, and visualized by microscopy.
Microscopy
Routine microscopy was performed on a Zeiss Axioplan 2 using a fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) filter set with an excitation of BP 450–490 and an emission of BP 515–565. Digital images were taken with a Photometrics CoolSnap CF (Roper Scientific; Trenton, NJ; http://www.roperscientific.com) camera using Metavue (Nikon) imaging software. Confocal microscopy was done on a Zeiss LSM510 equipped with the Meta spectral scanning unit. Excitation was done at 488 nm with an HFT UV/488/543/633 dichroic mirror, while 11 nm emission bandpass windows were collected from 494–580 nm. All images were collected with a Plan NeoFluar 40 x 1.30 NA objective.
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
). To test GFP fluorescence in regenerating muscles, we used a standard regeneration assay, wherein myogenic stem cells derived from GFP mice were injected into injured muscles of normal GFP-negative mice. The injury was induced by injection of cardiotoxin, derived from cobra venom, which destroys mature muscle fibers, allowing robust regeneration from myogenic stem cells to occur [8]. Mononuclear muscle cell preparations that contained myogenic stem cells were prepared from GFP mice and injected in this assay, resulting in a subset of bright green fibers, as shown in Figure 1B. Note the variety of fiber sizes in this panel and the wide spacing between them, compared with the uninjured muscle (Fig. 1A), indicating the ongoing regeneration. However, the negative controls, involving uninjured, uninjected muscles of normal GFP-negative mice that were prepared under identical conditions also displayed a distinct subset of muscle fibers that were similarly bright green, with the clear appearance of GFP expression (Fig. 1C and Fig. 1D). These fibers were consistently of a smaller diameter than adjacent non-fluorescent fibers. Since regenerating fibers tend to be smaller, this autofluorescence could suggest correlation with regeneration, even though no regeneration should be occurring in these negative-control mice, and no GFP-positive cells are present. Even in the sections from GFP mice (Fig. 1A), one can observe a subset of fibers that are a brighter green than others, and that also have a smaller diameter. The brighter green of these fibers presumably reflects the addition of GFP and autofluorescence.
|
Regarding fixation conditions, we had initially followed protocols in the literature that suggested perfusion fixation in 1.5% PFA/0.5% glutaraldehyde [4]. Muscles fixed under such conditions are shown in Figure 1
. Fixation of muscle tissue after sectioning rather than by perfusion resulted in an overall increase in nonspecific background autofluorescence, which abolished the ability to distinguish a specific subset of autofluorescent fibers (not shown). In unfixed tissue, the distinct autofluorescence in specific fibers was still readily detectable, but the fluorescence was generally more punctate and concentrated at the edges of the fibers (Fig. 2E), making it slightly more difficult to identify. Glutaraldehyde was the essential component, as perfusion fixation with PFA alone resulted in staining most similar to unfixed tissue (not shown). Since perfusion fixation enhances the ability to detect the autofluorescent fibers, variations in the effectiveness of perfusion resulted in some animals appearing to have a higher prevalence of autofluorescence.
|
shows adjacent sections from unfixed skeletal muscle tissues for autofluorescence (Fig. 2A) and NADH activity (Fig. 2B). The autofluorescence is associated with the fibers containing the highest levels of NADH dehydrogenase activity, indicating that the autofluorescent fibers are oxidative.
Oxidative fibers can be subdivided into type IIa fast and type I slow twitch, which can be distinguished by the sensitivity of the myosin ATPase contained within these fibers to alkaline or acidic pH [10]. Preincubation of skeletal muscle sections at an alkaline pH followed by staining for myosin ATPase activity results in a heavy staining of type IIa fibers, intermediate staining of type IIb fibers, and no staining of type I fibers. In contrast, preincubation at an acidic pH results in ATPase activity in only type I fibers. When TA muscle sections were preincubated at pH 10.4, the darkly stained type IIa fibers correlated with the green fluorescent fibers (compare Fig. 2A with 2C, and 2E with 2F). When sections were incubated at pH 4.0 (Fig. 2D and 2G), the dark-stained type I fibers were not autofluorescent (no type I fibers are present in Fig. 2D; compare Fig. 2E with 2G).
Strategies for Distinguishing GFP from Autofluorescence
Because autofluorescence closely resembles GFP fluorescence, as shown in Figure 1, we attempted to develop a standard method to distinguish autofluorescence from true GFP fluorescence. Variable levels of fluorescence between controls and GFP-expressing tissues were monitored during microscopy by recording the exposure times used for each photo as noted in the figure legends (pictures were not manipulated with image-editing software). As long as we utilized positive and negative controls, imaged alongside the experimental samples, this method of separating autofluorescence from GFP fluorescence was acceptable in experiments that used GFP-marked satellite cell incorporation into regenerating muscle fibers because satellite cells contribute numerous nuclei to the regenerating muscle fibers, thereby resulting in high levels of GFP expression. In contrast, it has been shown that bone marrow contributes many fewer nuclei to a single regenerating muscle fiber [2, 3], rendering this method of distinguishing background fluorescence from GFP expression less reliable where contribution of true GFP-positive nuclei is rare.
Since all fluorophores have unique absorption and emission spectra, we investigated whether we could use confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) to identify specific emission wavelengths with which to distinguish GFP fluorescence from autofluorescence. Our CLSM configuration excites a fluorophore using a 488-nm laser, and emissions are collected over a specified range in 11-nm increments. Thus, we scanned GFP+ and normal mouse TA muscle between 494 nm and 580 nm emission wavelengths. As shown in Figure 3A, the GFP fluorescence was brightest in a narrow range from 511 nm to 532 nm, whereas the autofluorescence appeared in this range, but also at higher wavelengths (Fig. 3B). This can be viewed graphically by measuring emission in a small area comprised of a single fiber and plotting the relative emission intensity versus wavelength, as shown in Figure 4. The overlay of the emission profiles of a bright GFP fiber and a bright autofluorescent fiber shows that both types of fluorescence are readily detected at around 520 nm, whereas the autofluorescence was much brighter above 560 nm. When this method was used to examine whether muscle fibers regenerated from GFP+ satellite cells (such as shown in Fig. 1B), we could readily distinguish GFP fluorescence from autofluorescence based on these typical profiles. These scans also demonstrate that judicious use of emission collection filters could at least reduce some background: a narrow bandpass filter optimized for GFP emission would reduce emissions coming from higher wavelengths derived from autofluorophores, whereas a longpass filter collecting a large range of wavelengths would be more prone to artifacts.
|
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Since bona fide GFP fluorescence is much brighter, religious use of positive and negative controls will allow the investigator to determine appropriate exposure times that will allow GFP fluorescence to be preferentially recorded. When total GFP contribution to a cell is low (particularly possible in large syncytial muscle fibers), this strategy may be insufficient. In this case, the emission spectra can be utilized.
On standard fluorescence microscopes, filters for GFP should be used that specifically exclude the highest autofluorescence wavelengths. As shown in Figure 3, a band-pass filter that passes wavelengths between 510 nm and 530 nm will allow the majority of GFP fluorescence to be detected while eliminating the large high wavelength autofluorescence peak. In conjunction, a longpass filter that enables detection of the higher autofluorescence wavelengths (~550 nm and above), will allow detection of autofluorescent fibers, allowing these to be disregarded in analysis.
To unequivocally distinguish low GFP contribution from autofluorescence, investigators could also use the latest generation of confocal microscopes, equipped with the capacity for spectral scanning. This method could, in principle, be applied to any of the new fluorochromes such as dsRed, yellow fluorescence protein (YFP), etc., where cellular autofluorescence may overlap in emission profiles. The available software is also capable of unmixing the fluorescent emission spectra from multiple fluorochromes. For example, if the spectra of the GFP-fluorescent as well as the autofluorescent signals are independently determined by scanning on control samples, the relative contributions of these two signals to fluorescence in any cell or fiber can be determined. This technique may be valuable not only for studying engraftment of stem cells, but also for modern cell biology experiments where fluorescently tagged intracellular proteins may be expressed at low levels and their intensities approach those of autofluorochromes.
What Accounts for Green Autofluorescence?
The phenomenon of green autofluorescence and the potential for confusion with GFP fluorescence has been noted previously [11]. There are three main autofluorophores that are prime candidates, namely NADH, lipofuscin, and flavin. Although fixation conditions change emission spectra to some degree, NADH has an emission peak between 440 nm and 470 nm, and is best excited with wavelengths in the UV range, so NADH is unlikely to be the culprit here. Lipofuscin is a poorly characterized substance containing lipids, carbohydrates, and proteins, thought to be more prevalent in older animals and in certain cell types, particularly in the brain. While this may be responsible for the autofluorescence observed in some reports [12–14], there is no evidence that lipofuscin is found in skeletal muscle. The most likely candidate here is flavin and flavin-containing proteins with an efficient absorption at 488 nm (thus excited by the blue light lasers used in flow cytometry and confocal microscopy) and a broad emission peak between 520 nm and 560 nm. Flavins, including flavin mononucleotide (FMN) and flavin adenine dinucleotide (FAD) are ubiquitous coenzymes involved in catabolism of pyruvate, fatty acids, and amino acids and, most importantly, in several enzymes of the electron transport pathway of mitochondria. FMN is, in fact, a prosthetic group of NADH dehydrogenase that catalyzes electron transfer from NADH to the next member of the electron transport chain. The type II oxidative fibers, as defined by the highest level of NADH dehydrogenase activity, showed the highest level of autofluorescence (Fig. 2), correlating with the presence of the flavoenzyme. Therefore, any cell type that is intensely using flavin-linked enzymes, particularly prevalent in mitochondrial respiration as in muscle, may exhibit similar green autofluorescence. Indeed, flavin-associated autofluorescence has been noted in many cell types including rat neurons and mouse macrophages [15]. We also note that, since type IIa fibers account for the autofluorescence, any treatment of the animals that would result in a relative increase in this fiber type would result in an increase in this apparent GFP fluorescence. Thus, conditions such as age, exercise, and muscle type that affect fiber composition would also change overall skeletal muscle fiber-type-specific autofluorescence.
The Use of GFP for Tracking Engraftment
With this in mind, it is worth considering the possibility that this distinct autofluorescence has been mistaken for GFP fluorescence in some reports, particularly when examining fluorescence in skeletal muscle [4–6]. During muscle regeneration, normally quiescent satellite cells become activated, divide, migrate, and fuse to generate mature muscle fibers, the fiber itself being a syncytium of hundreds of fused myoblasts. The nuclei of these myoblasts are centrally located shortly after fusion, but later migrate to the periphery of the muscle fiber where they are normally found. The cytoplasms of these fusing myoblasts are, thus, distributed within the regenerating fiber, resulting in diffusion of cytoplasmic proteins from a single myoblast within the muscle fiber. If only a small number of marked cells are involved in the fusion, as has been shown in early reports and confirmed by unpublished data from our laboratory [2, 3], a cytoplasmic marker protein would likely diffuse and become so diluted as to become undetectable. Therefore, at least in the muscle, nuclear markers such as Y-chromosome fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) or nuclear-localized lacZ (or nuclear-GFP) are likely to be more reliable, particularly for quantitative analysis of expression and engraftment. In order to study the discrepancy between muscle engraftment based on GFP versus lacZ, the most definitive experiment would be to cross the two mouse strains to create a donor with both markers. This would allow direct assessment of the correlation between these markers and also would reveal whether cytoplasmic GFP can be detected after diffusion throughout a syncitial muscle fiber.
Could this autofluorescence artifact also account for some of the other discrepancies in the field? Bone marrow engraftment into cardiac muscle has been reported, with a difference in reported prevalence of four orders of magnitude between studies [16–19], some of which have been based on GFP as a marker. In addition, frequencies of engraftment of bone-marrow-derived cells into the brain have varied according to the marker system used [14, 20, 21]. Since some of the corroborating studies also use the Y chromosome as a marker, autofluorescence cannot be the only explanation for these discrepancies, but bears consideration in interpreting these and other studies.
In summary, we have shown here that a specific subset of muscle fibers exhibits a strong autofluorescence that could easily be mistaken for bona fide GFP fluorescence. Certainly, the fluorescence from GFP is brighter and more intense. Thus, photographic exposure time can be a reliable indicator of autofluorescence, as long as GFP-negative and GFP-positive samples are imaged at the same time. In addition, judicious use of emission filters on standard epifluorescent microscopes, or confocal laser scanning microscopy, can be used to determine the identity of a fluorochrome in cases of doubt about the origin of green fluorescence. Where incorporation of GFP-positive cells into a tissue is expected to be rare, this method may be essential to distinguish autofluorescence from GFP positivity.
While GFP has been a revolutionary marker due to its ease of use, it has long been recognized that its fluorescence emission profile is close to that of some autofluorochromes and that this risks confounding interpretation in some types of experiments [11]. Here we exhibit one major drawback of GFP in some cell types. However, with careful use of controls, coupled with a minimalist approach to electronic processing of images both before and after photography, we believe GFP can continue to be an informative and powerful marker.
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENT |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. Rota, J. Kajstura, T. Hosoda, C. Bearzi, S. Vitale, G. Esposito, G. Iaffaldano, M. E. Padin-Iruegas, A. Gonzalez, R. Rizzi, et al. Bone marrow cells adopt the cardiomyogenic fate in vivo PNAS, November 6, 2007; 104(45): 17783 - 17788. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Nussbaum, E. Minami, M. A. Laflamme, J. A. I. Virag, C. B. Ware, A. Masino, V. Muskheli, L. Pabon, H. Reinecke, and C. E. Murry Transplantation of undifferentiated murine embryonic stem cells in the heart: teratoma formation and immune response FASEB J, May 1, 2007; 21(7): 1345 - 1357. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. Anversa, A. Leri, M. Rota, T. Hosoda, C. Bearzi, K. Urbanek, J. Kajstura, and R. Bolli Concise Review: Stem Cells, Myocardial Regeneration, and Methodological Artifacts Stem Cells, March 1, 2007; 25(3): 589 - 601. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. Anversa, A. Leri, and J. Kajstura Cardiac Regeneration J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., May 2, 2006; 47(9): 1769 - 1776. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Kashofer, E. K. Siapati, and D. Bonnet In Vivo Formation of Unstable Heterokaryons after Liver Damage and Hematopoietic Stem Cell/Progenitor Transplantation Stem Cells, April 1, 2006; 24(4): 1104 - 1112. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. Wang, Y. Liu, Z. Kalajzic, X. Jiang, and D. W. Rowe Heterogeneity of engrafted bone-lining cells after systemic and local transplantation Blood, November 15, 2005; 106(10): 3650 - 3657. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Leri, J. Kajstura, and P. Anversa Cardiac Stem Cells and Mechanisms of Myocardial Regeneration Physiol Rev, October 1, 2005; 85(4): 1373 - 1416. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. R. Brazelton and H. M. Blau Optimizing Techniques for Tracking Transplanted Stem Cells In Vivo Stem Cells, September 1, 2005; 23(9): 1251 - 1265. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. Chretien, P. A. Dreyfus, C. Christov, P. Caramelle, J.-L. Lagrange, B. Chazaud, and R. K. Gherardi In Vivo Fusion of Circulating Fluorescent Cells with Dystrophin-Deficient Myofibers Results in Extensive Sarcoplasmic Fluorescence Expression but Limited Dystrophin Sarcolemmal Expression Am. J. Pathol., June 1, 2005; 166(6): 1741 - 1748. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. A. Anderson, Y. Wu, S. Jiang, X. Zhang, P. R. Streeter, G. J. Spangrude, D. R. Archer, and W. H. Fleming Donor Marker Infidelity in Transgenic Hematopoietic Stem Cells Stem Cells, May 1, 2005; 23(5): 638 - 643. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. Hattan, H. Kawaguchi, K. Ando, E. Kuwabara, J. Fujita, M. Murata, M. Suematsu, H. Mori, and K. Fukuda Purified cardiomyocytes from bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells produce stable intracardiac grafts in mice Cardiovasc Res, February 1, 2005; 65(2): 334 - 344. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Kajstura, M. Rota, B. Whang, S. Cascapera, T. Hosoda, C. Bearzi, D. Nurzynska, H. Kasahara, E. Zias, M. Bonafe, et al. Bone Marrow Cells Differentiate in Cardiac Cell Lineages After Infarction Independently of Cell Fusion Circ. Res., January 7, 2005; 96(1): 127 - 137. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Kawada, J. Fujita, K. Kinjo, Y. Matsuzaki, M. Tsuma, H. Miyatake, Y. Muguruma, K. Tsuboi, Y. Itabashi, Y. Ikeda, et al. Nonhematopoietic mesenchymal stem cells can be mobilized and differentiate into cardiomyocytes after myocardial infarction Blood, December 1, 2004; 104(12): 3581 - 3587. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Jiang, L. Walker, M. Afentoulis, D. A. Anderson, L. Jauron-Mills, C. L. Corless, and W. H. Fleming Transplanted human bone marrow contributes to vascular endothelium PNAS, November 30, 2004; 101(48): 16891 - 16896. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. G. Harris, E. L. Herzog, E. M. Bruscia, J. E. Grove, J. S. Van Arnam, and D. S. Krause Lack of a Fusion Requirement for Development of Bone Marrow-Derived Epithelia Science, July 2, 2004; 305(5680): 90 - 93. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| STEM CELLS | THE ONCOLOGIST | CME | ALPHAMED PRESS JOURNALS |
