Methods for Synchronizing Mammalian Cells

  • Michael H. Fox
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology™ book series (MIMB, volume 241)


When studying cell cycle checkpoints, it is often very useful to have large numbers of cells that are synchronized in various stages of the cell cycle. A variety of methods have been developed to obtain synchronous (or partially synchronous) cells, all of which have some drawbacks. Many cell types that attach to plastic culture dishes round up in mitosis and can then be dislodged by agitation. This mitotic shake-off method, originally discovered by Terasima and Tolmach (1), is useful for cells synchronized in metaphase, which on plating into culture dishes move into G1 phase in a synchronous manner. A drawback to the mitotic shake-off method is that only a small percentage (2–4%) of cells are in mitosis at any given time, so the yield is very small. Also, cells rapidly become asynchronous as they progress through G1 phase, so the synchronization in S phase and especially G2 phase is not very good. The first limitation can be overcome by plating multiple T150 flasks with cells, using roller bottles, or blocking cells in mitosis by inhibitors such as Colcemid or nocodazole (2). Mitotic cells that are collected can be held on ice for an hour or so while multiple collections are done to obtain larger numbers of cells.


Mitotic Index Chinese Hamster Ovary Cell Mitotic Cell Cell Cycle Time Roller Bottle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Terasima, T. and Tolmach, L. J. (1963) Growth and nucleic acid synthesis in synchronously dividing populations. Exp. Cell Res. 30, 344–362.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zieve, G. W., Turnbull, D., Mullins, J. M., and McIntosh, J. R. (1980) Production of large numbers of mitotic mammalian cells by use of the reversible microtubule inhibitor nocodazole. Exp. Cell Res. 126, 397–405.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bucknall, R. A., Moores, H., Simms, R., and Hesp, B. (1973) Antiviral effects of aphidicolin, a new antibiotic produced by Cephalosporium aphidicola. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 4, 294–298.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ohashi, M., Taguchi, T., and Ikegami, S. (1978) Aphidicolin: a specific inhibitor of DNA polymerases in the cytosol of rat liver. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 82, 1084–1090.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Waters, R. (1981) Aphidicolin: an inhibitor of DNA repair in human fibroblasts. Carcinogenesis 2, 795–797.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Krakoff, I. H., Brown, N. C., and Reichard, P. (1968) Inhibition of ribonucleoside diphosphate reductase by hydroxyurea. Cancer Res. 28, 1559–1565.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wawra, E. and Wintersberger, E. (1983) Does hydroxyurea inhibit DNA replication in mouse cells by more than one mechanism? Mol. Cell. Biol. 3, 297–304.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fox, M. H., Read, R. A., and Bedford, J. S. (1987) Comparison of synchronized Chinese hamster ovary cells obtained by mitotic shake-off, hydroxyurea, aphidicolin, or methotrexate. Cytometry 8, 315–320.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grdina, D. J., Meistrich, M. L., Meyn, R. E., Johnson, T. S., and White, R. A. (1987) Cell synchrony techniques. In Gray, J. W. and Darzynkiewicz, Z. (eds.) Techniques in Cell Cycle Analysis. Humana Press, Clifton, NJ, pp. 367–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Arndt-Jovin, D. J. and Jovin, T. M. (1977) Analysis and sorting of living cells according to deoxyribonucleic acid content. J. Histochem. Cytochem. 25, 585–589.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael H. Fox
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Environmental and Radiological Health SciencesColorado State UniversityFort Collins

Personalised recommendations