Advertisement

Static pressure-driven microfluidic gradient generator for long-term cell culture and adaptive cytoprotection analysis

  • Xing Zhao
  • Xinghua Yan
  • Yiwei LiEmail author
  • Bi-Feng Liu
Research Paper
  • 87 Downloads

Abstract

Microfluidic gradient generators have largely benefitted high-throughput analysis of cellular responses, but are required to more precisely control culture parameters such as flow-induced shear stress. Here, a novel pump-free microfluidic gradient generator was proposed to generate a shear-free microenvironment for long-term cell culture and adaptive cytoprotection analysis. The microfluidic microchip was designed with a tunable network to generate pre-defined biochemical gradients. This device employed a static pressure to drive the flow at a low flow rate of 0.2 nL s−1, which further benefited long-term cell culturing and stimulation by providing a shear-free (7.1 × 10−7 Pa) microenvironment. With the merits of pump free and shear free, this device was further used for the application used to analyze the adaptive cytoprotection behaviors of cells in response to reactive oxygen species. Our study showed that pretreatment of a sublethal dose of hydrogen peroxide significantly enhanced the tolerance of NIH 3T3 cells to lethal dose oxidative stress. Conclusively, the results confirmed that our novel microfluidic device was a highly efficient way to analyze adaptive cytoprotection behaviors of cells with advantages of high throughput, flexibility, stability, portable and low sample consumption, by providing shear-free and biochemistry well-defined cell microenvironments even without the requirement of external setups.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

Microfluidics Long-term cell culture Cytoprotection Single-cell analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial supports from National Natural Science Foundation of China (21475049, 31471257, 41430860 and 21275060) and National Key R&D Program of China (2016YFF0100801).

References

  1. Abhyankar VV, Lokuta MA, Huttenlocher A, Beebe DJ (2006) Characterization of a membrane-based gradient generator for use in cell-signaling studies. Lab Chip 6(3):389–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abhyankar VV, Toepke MW, Cortesio CL, Lokuta MA, Huttenlocher A, Beebe DJ (2008) A platform for assessing chemotactic migration within a spatiotemporally defined 3D microenvironment. Lab Chip 8(9):1507–1515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atencia J, Morrow J, Locascio LE (2009) The microfluidic palette: a diffusive gradient generator with spatiotemporal control. Lab Chip 9(18):2707–2714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Batchelor CK, Batchelor GK (1967) An introduction to fluid dynamics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyden S (1962) The chemotactic effect of mixtures of antibody and antigen on polymorphonuclear leucocytes. J Exp Med 115:453–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown AF (1982) Neutrophil granulocytes: adhesion and locomotion on collagen substrata and in collagen matrices. J Cell Sci 58:455–467Google Scholar
  7. Cate DM, Sip CG, Folch A (2010) A microfluidic platform for generation of sharp gradients in open-access culture. Biomicrofluidics 4(4):44105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen ZH, Yoshida Y, Saito Y, Niki E (2005) Adaptation to hydrogen peroxide enhances PC12 cell tolerance against oxidative damage. Neurosci Lett 383(3):256–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen P, Chen P, Feng XJ, Du W, Liu BF (2013) Analysis of intercellular communication by flexible hydrodynamic gating on a microfluidic chip. Anal Bioanal Chem 405(1):307–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cimetta E, Cannizzaro C, James R, Biechele T, Moon RT, Elvassore N, Vunjak-Novakovic G (2010) Microfluidic device generating stable concentration gradients for long term cell culture: application to Wnt3a regulation of β-catenin signaling. Lab Chip 10(23):3277–3283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. de Almeida LMV, Pineiro CC, Leite MC, Brolese G, Leal RB, Gottfried C, Goncalves CA (2008) Protective effects of resveratrol on hydrogen peroxide induced toxicity in primary cortical astrocyte cultures. Neurochem Res 33(1):8–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. de Jong J, Lammertink RGH, Wessling M (2006) Membranes and microfluidics: a review. Lab Chip 6(9):1125–1139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hosokawa M, Hayashi T, Mori T, Yoshino T, Nakasono S, Matsunaga T (2011) Microfluidic device with chemical gradient for single-cell cytotoxicity assays. Anal Chem 83(10):3648–3654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ismagilov RF, Stroock AD, Kenis PJA et al (2000) Experimental and theoretical scaling laws for transverse diffusive broadening in two-phase laminar flows in microchannels. Appl Phys Lett 76(17):2376–2378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jang JH, Surh YJ (2001) Protective effects of resveratrol on hydrogen peroxide-induced apoptosis in rat pheochromocytoma (PC12) cells. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen 496(1–2):181–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kamholz AE, Yager P (2001) Theoretical analysis of molecular diffusion in pressure-driven laminar flow in microfluidic channels. Biophys J 80(1):155–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Keenan TM, Hsu CH, Folch A (2006) Microfluidic “jets” for generating steady-state gradients of soluble molecules on open surfaces. Appl Phys Lett 89(11):114103.  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2345914 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Keller HU, Wilkinson PC, Abercrombie M, Becker EL, Hirsch JG, Miller ME, Ramsey WS, Zigmond SH (1977) A proposal for the definition of terms related to locomotion of leucocytes and other cells. Cell Biol Int Rep 1(5):391–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kim T, Pinelis M, Maharbiz MM (2009) Generating steep, shear-free gradients of small molecules for cell culture. Biomed Microdevices 11(1):65–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lee BR, Um HD (1999) Hydrogen peroxide suppresses U937 cell death by two different mechanisms depending on its concentration. Exp Cell Res 248(2):430–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Levitan I, Helmke BP, Davis PF (2000) A chamber to permit invasive manipulation of adherent cells in laminar flow with minimal disturbance of the flow field. Ann Biomed Eng 28(10):1184–1193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Li CW, Chen RS, Yang MS (2007) Generation of linear and non-linear concentration gradients along microfluidic channel by microtunnel controlled stepwise addition of sample solution. Lab Chip 7(10):1371–1373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Li YW, Feng XJ, Du W, Li Y, Liu BF (2013) Ultrahigh-throughput approach for analyzing single-cell genomic damage with an agarose-based microfluidic comet array. Anal Chem 85(8):4066–4073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li YW, Yan XH, Feng XJ, Wang J, Du W, Wang YC, Chen P, Xiong L, Liu BF (2014) Agarose-based microfluidic device for point-of-care concentration and detection of pathogen. Anal Chem 86:10653–10659.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac5026623 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Li Y, Feng X, Wang Y, Du W, Chen P, Liu C, Liu BF (2015) Assembly of multiple cell gradients directed by three-dimensional microfluidic channels. Lab Chip 15(15):3203–3210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mehling M, Tay S (2014) Microfluidic cell culture. Curr Opin. Biotechnol 25:95–102Google Scholar
  27. Morel M, Galas JC, Dahan M, Studer V (2012) Concentration landscape generators for shear free dynamic chemical stimulation. Lab Chip 12(7):1340–1346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sackmann EK, Fulton AL, Beebe DJ (2014) The present and future role of microfluidics in biomedical research. Nature 507(7491):181–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sayin O, Arslan N, Guner G (2012) The protective effects of resveratrol on human coronary artery endothelial cell damage induced by hydrogen peroxide in vitro. Acta Clin Croat 51(2):227–235Google Scholar
  30. Selimovic S, Sim WY, Kirn SB, Jang YH, Lee WG, Khabiry M, Bae H, Jambovane S, Hong JW, Khademhosseini A (2011) Generating nonlinear concentration gradients in microfluidic devices for cell studies. Anal Chem 83(6):2020–2028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Seo YJ, Lee JW, Lee EH, Lee HK, Kim HW, Kim YH (2004) Role of glutathione in the adaptive tolerance to H2O2. Free Radic Biol Med 37(8):1272–1281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shamloo A, Ma N, Poo MM, Sohn LL, Heilshorn SC (2008) Endothelial cell polarization and chemotaxis in a microfluidic device. Lab Chip 8(8):1292–1299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sun J, Chen P, Feng XJ, Du W, Liu BF (2011) Development of a microfluidic cell-based biosensor integrating a millisecond chemical pulse generator. Biosens Bioelectron 26(8):3413–3419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Veenstra TT, Lammerink TSJ, Elwenspoek MC (1999) Characterization method for a new diffusion mixer applicable in micro flow injection analysis systems. J Micromech Microeng 9(2):199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wilkinson PC, Lackie JM (1983) The influence of contact guidance on chemotaxis of human neutrophil leukocytes. Exp Cell Res 145(2):255–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Xu BY, Hu SW, Qian GS, Xu JJ, Chen HY (2013) A novel microfluidic platform with stable concentration gradient for on chip cell culture and screening assays. Lab Chip 13(18):3714–3720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Young EWK, Beebe DJ (2010) Fundamentals of microfluidic cell culture in controlled microenvironments. Chem Soc Rev 39(3):1036–1048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zicha D, Dunn GA, Brown AF (1991) Analyzing chemotaxis using the Dunn direct-viewing chamber. J Cell Sci 99(Pt 4):769–775Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Key Laboratory for Biomedical Photonics of MOE at Wuhan National Laboratory for Optoelectronics-Hubei Bioinformatics and Molecular Imaging Key Laboratory, Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Life Science and TechnologyHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations