A microfluidic device to acquire high-magnification microphotographs of yeast cells
© Ohnuki et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009
Received: 24 December 2008
Accepted: 24 March 2009
Published: 24 March 2009
Yeast cell morphology was investigated to reveal the molecular mechanisms of cell morphogenesis and to identify key factors of other processes such as cell cycle progression. We recently developed a semi-automatic image processing program called CalMorph, which allows us to quantitatively analyze yeast cell morphology with the 501 parameters as biological traits and uncover statistical relationships between cell morphological phenotypes and genotypes. However, the current semi-automatic method is not suitable for morphological analysis of large-scale yeast mutants for the reliable prediction of gene functions because of its low-throughput especially at the manual image-acquiring process.
In this study, we developed a microfluidic chip designed to acquire successive microscopic images of yeast cells suitable for CalMorph image analysis. With the microfluidic chip, the morphology of living cells and morphological changes that occur during the cell cycle were successfully characterized.
The microfluidic chip enabled us to acquire the images faster than the conventional method. We speculate that the use of microfluidic chip is effective in acquiring images of large-scale for automated analysis of yeast strains.
Studies on cellular morphology have contributed to the discovery of factors involved in cell cycle control for various model organisms. In the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, for example, many important findings related to cell cycle control have been reported, as yeast cell cycle progression is easily monitored via changes in cell morphology [1–3]. For growing yeasts, characteristic periodic morphological changes and structural rearrangements are observed morphologically such as bud emergence, bud formation, polarized actin localization, nuclear migration, karyokinesis, and cytokinesis [4–8]. During the G1 phase, yeast cell shape is a simple ellipsoid, and at the end of the G1 phase, the actin patches are localized at the presumed bud site . When cells enter the S phase, DNA synthesis starts, and a bud emerges at the presumed bud site. During the S phase, the bud apically grows from the bud tip where actin patches are kept localized [4, 5]. When the bud size becomes about two-thirds of that of mother, DNA synthesis ends and the bud is switched to isotropic growth with randomly redistributed actin patches in the bud [4, 6, 7]. Once the nucleus is localized at the neck and the actin patches are delocalized in the whole cell, the cell enters the M phase. During the M phase, the nucleus is divided to two nuclei and at the late M phase, the actin patches are localized again at the bud neck for cytokinesis [4, 8]. A genetic approach for isolating and characterizing yeast temperature-sensitive mutants which accumulate at specific cell cycle stages upon temperature shifts (cdc mutants, originally reported in  and more than 60 genes are now annotated as cdc mutants on the Saccharomyces Genome Database ), led to the discovery of many key factors involved in cell cycle control . In addition, cell morphology can be employed as the output of cell signaling because the accumulation of specific cell morphology is observed in response to extracellular stimuli such as mating pheromone . However, the classification of cells of the comprehensive deletion mutant collection based on morphology was often subjective and time-consuming or was focused on limited information [12–15]. Conventional methods for classification are therefore unsuitable for conducting a detailed systematic comparative analysis using genomic tools including the yeast comprehensive deletion mutant collection.
We recently developed a high-throughput image processing program called CalMorph that lets us acquire high-resolution, quantitative information on cell morphology from fluorescent microscopic images of triple-stained (cell wall, actin and nuclear DNA) yeast cells . We demonstrated that CalMorph is a powerful tool for studying cell cycle control, cell polarity, functional genomics, and comparative genomics [16–19]. We also demonstrated that the quantified morphological responses of mutants to stimuli let us characterize and predict gene functions .
Real-time observation of a living cell is required for studying the dynamics of cellular responses to extracellular stimuli. However, the current protocol for CalMorph image analysis is not suitable for characterizing the morphology of large-scale samples of living cells because the yeast cells must be fixed before staining. Thus, more high-throughput techniques for quantifying cell morphology at desired time points must be developed.
The aim of the present study is to develop the core device of a high-throughput system for acquiring images of living cells for CalMorph image analysis. We employed microfluidics using polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS), an optically transparent, soft elastomer suitable for observation with microscope and control of cells in channels [20–22]. Although many microfluidic devices have been developed for fluorescent microscopic imaging designed to measure the gene expression levels and the concentration of intracellular molecules, the device which was designed to quantify and analyze the cell morphology has never been reported [23–25]. We developed a microfluidic chip that holds cells in a desired orientation, which allows us to observe yeast cell morphology under high-magnification microscopy and acquire images of living yeast cells rapidly. Because the microfluidic chip is assumed to facilitate genome-wide phenotypic surveys through a combination with other microfluidic components, our device contributes not only to genomics and phenomics but also to the framework of the Micro Total Analysis System (μTAS) [26, 27].
Comparison of microfluidic chip method with conventional method
First, we compared the orientation of the cells. Because clear bud images are required for proper imaging, cells must be placed in the proper orientation so that the mother-bud cell axis is parallel to the X-Y imaging plane and the axes of each cell are in the same focal plane. Thus we calculated the proportion of the number of the budded cells placed in the proper orientation to the number of the budded cells and compared the results of two methods. To judge the orientation of bud, we employed a standard approach, serial section images of the same field, which is a standard approach but not suitable for high-throughput imaging. The cells were stained with Alexa488-ConA and five serial-section images (1 μm increment) of more than 200 cells were acquired. We then calculated the proportion of budded cells judged from the middle image of five focal planes to the budded cells judged from the all serial-section images by eye. Of 148 budded cells judged using all serial section images acquired by conventional glass slide method, 126 cells were correctly judged as budded cells from the middle image of five focal planes, indicating 85.1% of cells (95% confidence interval; 78.3%–90.4%) were in the desired orientation (bud and mother on the same focal plane). When we used the microfluidic chip, 139 of 154 cells (90.3%, 95% confidence interval; 84.4%–94.4%) were in the desired orientation, suggesting the assertion that the microfluidic chip can hold cells in a suitable orientation as well as the glass slide.
We investigated whether the cell shape in the microfluidic chip was undesirably changed. Because cells were pushed up by the PDMS membrane with air pressure from the control channel while acquiring images, the cells were possibly flattened by the mechanical force of the microfluidic chip. To exclude this possibility, we acquired images of the triple-stained cells on the microfluidic chip and the glass slide, quantified the morphology of the cell images with 501 parameters based on the cell shape, the nuclear shape and the position of actin patches by CalMorph, and statistically compared the results of two conditions. Of the 501 parameters, only 2 (DCV14-1_C, the coefficient of variation of nuclear size in mother: and DCV176_C, the coefficient of variation of nuclear long axis length in mother) were found to have values that were different between the two conditions by Mann-Whitney U-test at P < 0.01 (n = 5), but the false discovery rate (FDR) estimated that these two detections were expected to be false positives . Therefore, no significant morphological differences between the microfluidic chip and conventional glass slide were found, supporting the compatibility of the two methods for quantitative analysis of yeast cell morphology.
We compared the image acquisition speed. The phase-contrast images were used for comparison because of the simplicity of the experimental condition. With the microfluidic chip, the average image acquisition speed of the phase contrast images for over 200 cells was 7.68 ± 1.02 images/min (n = 3); this was 2.62 times faster than the conventional method, which was 2.92 ± 0.04 images/min (n = 3) for more than 200 cells.
Characterization of living cell morphology
We took advantage of the new microfluidic chip which had the capability to directly observe living cells in the medium. In order to quantify the living cell morphology with the phase-contrast image, the images were required to be processed to extract the cell outline before CalMorph image analysis because CalMorph was designed to process the fluorescent images. To characterize the cell shape of non-stained living cells, we developed a java-based program to preprocess the phase-contrast image before applying CalMorph (see Methods section). To validate the preprocessing program, we acquired both the phase-contrast images and FITC-ConA-stained image of fixed wild-type cells on the glass slide, calculated the values of 31 parameters out of 33 parameters by analyzing these images with CalMorph (33 parameters were a set of output from CalMorph if cell shape images were the only input, see Methods), and compared 31 parameter values between the two results. We detected no significant differences among the 31 parameters based on the Mann-Whitney U-test at P < 0.05 (n = 5), suggesting that the preprocessing did not significantly alter the output of CalMorph image analysis.
Cell cycle-dependent morphological change
We developed a microfluidic chip that holds yeast cells in a desirable orientation on a single focal plane to continually acquire microscopic images for characterization of the cell morphology. Using the microfluidic chip, we could acquire images faster than the use of conventional glass slide. With the microfluidic chip, preprocessing program, and CalMorph, we successfully characterized live cell morphology and monitored cell cycle progression.
When we used the conventional glass-slide method, we had to be careful in selecting a visual field and adjusting focus, otherwise the images were not properly analyzed by CalMorph because of the undesirable orientation of cells. In contrary, with the microfluidic chip method, the clear images can be acquired without careful selection and focus adjustment because the microfluidic chip enables us to hold the cells into a single focal plane with the desirable orientation. We think that this contributes to accelerate the acquisition speed.
The microfluidic chip can be applied to the high-throughput microphotography system by automation. For the automation, the microfluidic chip control system is required. Since the fluid operation for the image acquisition is based on air-pressure, it is easy to develop a fluid control system driven by air-pump that is controlled by a computer [21–23]. If the microfluidic chip, microscope and image processing software programs are interconnected with each other, we can acquire images until desired number of cells has been analyzed without manual control.
The throughput of the system might be improved because the microscope is idle during three (injection, release and outflow) of four steps to acquire images. To minimize the idle time of microscope, fabricating the several sets of the microfluidic channels in parallel on a chip might be effective . In addition, the redundancy of the parallel fabrication would be robust toward the accidents (ex. channel blocking). The parallelization promises the continuous running of the microscopic chip-scanning for long time, which would provide the genome-wide survey of the morphological phenotypes on various conditions in short period .
In large-scale experiments, the system combined with microplate to stock the input samples would be useful. Moreover, by combining other components such as microchemostat which is a miniaturized growth chamber on a chip , development of the micro total analysis system (μTAS: the system capable from the sampling to the detection on a chip ) which is capable from the cell culture to the phenotyping might be possible.
We developed a microfluidic chip that can hold yeast cells in a desirable orientation so that we can continually acquire microscopic images of the cells to characterize the cell morphology. The advantage of the microfluidic chip is to facilitate fast image acquisition without careful image acquisition steps. We successfully characterized live cell morphology and monitored cell cycle progression with the microfluidic chip, preprocessing program, and CalMorph. Air pressure-based cell control and a small scale of microfluidic channels will be advantageous for automation and parallelization, accelerating genome-wide phenotypic surveys under various conditions.
Chip design, fabrication, and manipulation
The microfluidic chip has three kinds of microchannels: an observation channel for injecting the cell suspension and observing the cells, a control channel for controlling the depth of the observation channel, and a cleaning channel for cleaning the observation channel (Figure 1A). The microfluidic chip has a two-layer structure with the liquid-filled observation channel (upper layer) and the air-filled control channel (lower layer). From the top side, the two channels appear to cross at the observation area, but are actually separated by 100 μm of PDMS at the observation area. The depth of the observation channel at the observation area was manually controlled by the air pressure of the control channel supplied by a syringe . We purchased the custom-designed chip (Fluidware Technologies Inc., Saitama, Japan) (Figure 1B).
The microfluidic chip was designed to run with four cycle steps (Figure 1C). Initially, distilled water (DW) flowed through from the inlet (port A) to the outlet (port D) using a micropump (SDMP302; Star Micronics, Shizuoka, Japan) with the micropump controller (MPC-200; Star Micronics) to wash the inside of the microchannel. Before injecting samples, ports B and C were closed, and ports D and F were opened (Figure 1A).
Step 1 (injection): To inject the cell suspension, the connecting tube was detached at the inlet side. A 30-μl sample of cell suspension (1 × 108 cells/ml) was then directly injected into the silicon tube connected to the inlet using a 200-μl micropipette and loaded to the observation channel of the inlet side. After closing port F and attaching the connecting tube to the inlet, the sample was gently loaded to the observation area by a micropump without any (positive and negative) pressure of the control channel.
Step 2 (hold): The inner air of the control channel was pressed by the syringe, and the cells in the observation channel were held by PDMS pushed up by the air pressure. During this step, the microscopic images were continually acquired by surveying the 2 × 2 mm observation area.
Step 3 (release): After image acquisition, port B was opened, and the syringe was returned to the initial state. The cells were released from the surface of the coverslip.
Step 4 (outflow): Port F was opened, and cells in the observation channel of the inlet side were flushed out by DW using the micropump. Port F was then closed, and the cells on the observation area were flushed out by DW.
When many cells were left in the observation channel, the cells were removed by ultrasonic treatment using a bath-type sonicator (model 2510J-MT; Branson Ultrasonic, CT, USA), filling the channels with the cleaning solution containing 0.1 M Tris-HCl (Sigma-Aldrich, MO, USA) at pH 7.5, 50 μg/ml Zymolyase 100T (Seikagaku Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), 2 μl/ml mercaptoethanol (Nacalai Tesque Inc., Kyoto, Japan), and 1% (v/v) Nonidet P-40 (Nacalai Tesque Inc.). After observation, the microfluidic chip was filled with 20% ethanol (Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd., Osaka, Japan) and stored at 4°C.
Yeast strain and image acquisition
Wild-type S. cerevisiae strain BY4743 was purchased from the European Saccharomyces cerevisiae Archive for Functional Analysis (EUROSCARF: http://web.uni-frankfurt.de/fb15/mikro/euroscarf/) and used in this study. The rich medium for growing S. cerevisiae was YPD medium that contained 1% (w/v) Bacto yeast extract (BD Biosciences, CA, USA), 2% (w/v) Bacto peptone (BD Biosciences), and 2% (w/v) glucose.
For live cell imaging, cells (8 × 106 cells) at the log phase in the rich media at 25°C were collected and resuspended to 1 × 108 cells/ml with the rich media. For conventional CalMorph imaging, cells were fixed in the rich media by adding 37% formaldehyde (Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd.) and 1 M potassium phosphate buffer (pH 6.5) at a final concentration of 3.7% and 0.1 M, respectively. Conventional triple-staining of the yeast cells on the glass slide were performed as described previously . In some experiments, Alexa Fluor 488-conjugated concanavalin A (Alexa488-ConA; Invitrogen, CA, USA) was used for fluorescent staining of mannoprotein (localized in the cell wall) instead of fluorescein isothiocyanate-conjugated ConA (FITC-ConA; Sigma-Aldrich) because Alexa488-ConA was brighter and more photostable than the FITC-ConA, preferable for observation on microfluidic device. For the fluorescent observation using Alexa488-ConA on the microfluidic chip, the cells were suspended into PBS buffer (Takara Bio Inc., Shiga, Japan) instead of the mounting solution containing 1 mg/ml p-phenylenediamine (Sigma-Aldrich), 9.975% (v/v) phosphate-buffered saline (PBS, Takara Bio Inc.), 0.025% (v/v) 0.1 N NaOH (Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd.), and 90% (v/v) glycerol (Merck MGaA, Darmstadt, Germany).
Quantification of cell morphology and statistical tests
Image analysis with CalMorph was performed as described previously . CalMorph used in this study was version 1.3, which was an improved version of the originally described CalMorph (ver. 1.1) and was designed to characterize the diploid morphology. To use phase-contrast images as cell wall images for CalMorph analysis, we developed another java-based program. The program was a preprocessing program designed to extract the outline of cells and convert the phase contrast images to the CalMorph analyzable images. Thirty-three parameters from cell wall-stained images and 501 parameters from triple-stained images were available using CalMorph. We discarded parameters reflecting fluorescent intensity of cell wall staining for analysis of phase-contrast images. As the result, thirty-one parameters from phase-contrast images and 489 parameters from double-stained [4',6-diamidino-2-2-phenylindole (DAPI, Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd.) and rhodamine-phalloidin (Rh-ph, Invitrogen)] images in addition to phase-contrast images were available. The software is available on request from the authors.
Statistical analysis of the quantified morphological data was performed using R http://www.r-project.org/. The differences in cell morphology under each condition were tested using the Mann-Whitney U-test with the false discovery rate (FDR) [28, 31, 32].
Synchronized cell culture
Yeast cells were grown in the 60 ml rich media at 30°C using a 300-ml shaking flask. At the log-phase of 8 × 106 cells/ml, 600 μl of 15 mg/ml nocodazole (Sigma-Aldrich) in DMSO (Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Ltd.) was added (final 0.15 mg/ml of nocodazole), and cells were cultured for 3 h. M-phase arrested cells were washed twice with the rich media, resuspended with 60 ml of the fresh rich media, cultured at 30°C, sampled (1 ml) every 20 min, and fixed by adding 125 μl of 1 M potassium phosphate buffer (K-Pi buffer, pH 6.5) and 125 μl of 37% formaldehyde.
We thank Toshio Yoshida, Tomoyasu Nagata, Kenichi Tayama, and Michio Taira for the fruitful discussion and fabrication of the microfluidic chip, Gael Yvert PhD for providing advice, Takahiro Negishi for reading the manuscript, and the community of R developers for their work. SO was a Research Fellow of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. This work was supported by a grant for Scientific Research from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and Culture of Japan and by New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO).
- Hartwell LH: Saccharomyces cerevisiae cell cycle. Bacteriol Rev 1974, 38: 164–198.PubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Moseley JB, Goode BL: The yeast actin cytoskeleton: from cellular function to biochemical mechanism. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 2006, 70: 605–645.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Pruyne D, Bretscher A: Polarization of cell growth in yeast. J Cell Sci 2000, 113(Pt 4):571–585.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Adams AE, Pringle JR: Relationship of actin and tubulin distribution to bud growth in wild-type and morphogenetic-mutant Saccharomyces cerevisiae . J Cell Biol 1984, 98: 934–945.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Williamson DH: The timing of deoxyribonucleic acid synthesis in the cell cycle of Saccharomyces cerevisiae . J Cell Biol 1965, 25: 517–528.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Farkas V, Kovarik J, Kosinova A, Bauer S: Autoradiographic study of mannan incorporation into the growing cell walls of Saccharomyces cerevisiae . J Bacteriol 1974, 117: 265–269.PubMed CentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Robinow CF, Marak J: A fiber apparatus in the nucleus of the yeast cell. J Cell Biol 1966, 29: 129–151.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Davis LI, Fink GR: The NUP1 gene encodes an essential component of the yeast nuclear pore complex. Cell 1990, 61: 965–978.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hartwell LH, Culotti J, Reid B: Genetic control of the cell-division cycle in yeast. I. Detection of mutants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1970, 66: 352–359.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cherry JM, Adler C, Ball C, Chervitz SA, Dwight SS, Hester ET, Jia Y, Juvik G, Roe T, Schroeder M, et al.: SGD: Saccharomyces Genome Database. Nucleic Acids Res 1998, 26: 73–79.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Levi JD: Mating Reaction in Yeast. Nature 1956, 177: 753–754.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Giaever G, Chu AM, Ni L, Connelly C, Riles L, Veronneau S, Dow S, Lucau-Danila A, Anderson K, Andre B, et al.: Functional profiling of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome. Nature 2002, 418: 387–391.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Jorgensen P, Nishikawa JL, Breitkreutz BJ, Tyers M: Systematic identification of pathways that couple cell growth and division in yeast. Science 2002, 297: 395–400.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ni L, Snyder M: A genomic study of the bipolar bud site selection pattern in Saccharomyces cerevisiae . Mol Biol Cell 2001, 12: 2147–2170.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zhang J, Schneider C, Ottmers L, Rodriguez R, Day A, Markwardt J, Schneider BL: Genomic scale mutant hunt identifies cell size homeostasis genes in S. cerevisiae . Curr Biol 2002, 12: 1992–2001.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ohya Y, Sese J, Yukawa M, Sano F, Nakatani Y, Saito TL, Saka A, Fukuda T, Ishihara S, Oka S, et al.: High-dimensional and large-scale phenotyping of yeast mutants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005, 102: 19015–19020.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Nogami S, Ohya Y, Yvert G: Genetic complexity and quantitative trait loci mapping of yeast morphological traits. PLoS Genet 2007, 3: e31.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kikuchi Y, Mizuuchi E, Nogami S, Morishita S, Ohya Y: Involvement of Rho-type GTPase in control of cell size in Saccharomyces cerevisiae . FEMS Yeast Res 2007, 7: 569–578.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ohnuki S, Nogami S, Kanai H, Hirata D, Nakatani Y, Morishita S, Ohya Y: Diversity of Ca2+-induced morphology revealed by morphological phenotyping of Ca2+-sensitive mutants of Saccharomyces cerevisiae . Eukaryot Cell 2007, 6: 817–830.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Dittrich PS, Manz A: Lab-on-a-chip: microfluidics in drug discovery. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2006, 5: 210–218.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Whitesides GM: The origins and the future of microfluidics. Nature 2006, 442: 368–373.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- El-Ali J, Sorger PK, Jensen KF: Cells on chips. Nature 2006, 442: 403–411.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lee PJ, Helman NC, Lim WA, Hung PJ: A microfluidic system for dynamic yeast cell imaging. Biotechniques 2008, 44: 91–95.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Chung K, Crane MM, Lu H: Automated on-chip rapid microscopy, phenotyping and sorting of C. elegans. Nat Methods 2008, 5: 637–643.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Rocheleau JV, Piston DW: Chapter 4: Combining microfluidics and quantitative fluorescence microscopy to examine pancreatic islet molecular physiology. Methods Cell Biol 2008, 89: 71–92.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Gerlai R: Phenomics: fiction or the future? Trends Neurosci 2002, 25: 506–509.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lee SJ, Lee SY: Micro total analysis system (micro-TAS) in biotechnology. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2004, 64: 289–299.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Storey JD, Taylor JE, Siegmund D: Strong control, conservative point estimation and simultaneous conservative consistency of false discovery rates: a unified approach. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B-Statistical Methodology 2004, 66: 187–205.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Balagadde FK, You L, Hansen CL, Arnold FH, Quake SR: Long-term monitoring of bacteria undergoing programmed population control in a microchemostat. Science 2005, 309: 137–140.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Unger MA, Chou HP, Thorsen T, Scherer A, Quake SR: Monolithic microfabricated valves and pumps by multilayer soft lithography. Science 2000, 288: 113–116.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Mann HB, Whitney DR: On a Test of Whether One of 2 Random Variables Is Stochastically Larger Than the Other. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 1947, 18: 50–60.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y: Controlling the False Discovery Rate – a Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B-Methodological 1995, 57: 289–300.Google Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.