1
|
Chvalova V, Vomastek T, Grousl T. Comparison of holotomographic microscopy and coherence-controlled holographic microscopy. J Microsc 2024; 294:5-13. [PMID: 38196346 DOI: 10.1111/jmi.13260] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2023] [Revised: 12/18/2023] [Accepted: 12/26/2023] [Indexed: 01/11/2024]
Abstract
Quantitative phase imaging (QPI) is a powerful tool for label-free visualisation of living cells. Here, we compare two QPI microscopes - the Telight Q-Phase microscope and the Nanolive 3D Cell Explorer-fluo microscope. Both systems provide unbiased information about cell morphology, such as individual cell dry mass, perimeter and area. The Q-Phase microscope uses artefact-free, coherence-controlled holographic imaging technology to visualise cells in real time with minimal phototoxicity. The 3D Cell Explorer-fluo employs laser-based holotomography to reconstruct 3D images of living cells, visualising their internal structures and dynamics. Here, we analysed the strengths and limitations of both microscopes when examining two morphologically distinct cell lines - the cuboidal epithelial MDCK cells which form multicellular clusters and solitary growing Rat2 fibroblasts. We focus mainly on the ability of the devices to generate images suitable for single-cell segmentation by the built-in software, and we discuss the segmentation results and quantitative data generated from the segmented images. We show that both microscopes offer slightly different advantages, and the choice between them depends on the specific requirements and goals of the user.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vera Chvalova
- Laboratory of Cell Signalling, Institute of Microbiology of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic
- Faculty of Science, Department of Cell Biology, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Tomas Vomastek
- Laboratory of Cell Signalling, Institute of Microbiology of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Tomas Grousl
- Laboratory of Cell Signalling, Institute of Microbiology of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Chvalova V, Venkadasubramanian V, Klimova Z, Vojtova J, Benada O, Vanatko O, Vomastek T, Grousl T. Characterization of RACK1-depleted mammalian cells by a palette of microscopy approaches reveals defects in cell cycle progression and polarity establishment. Exp Cell Res 2023:113695. [PMID: 37393981 DOI: 10.1016/j.yexcr.2023.113695] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2022] [Revised: 06/08/2023] [Accepted: 06/22/2023] [Indexed: 07/04/2023]
Abstract
The Receptor for Activated C Kinase 1 (RACK1) is an evolutionarily conserved scaffold protein involved in the regulation of numerous cellular processes. Here, we used CRISPR/Cas9 and siRNA to reduce the expression of RACK1 in Madin-Darby Canine Kidney (MDCK) epithelial cells and Rat2 fibroblasts, respectively. RACK1-depleted cells were examined using coherence-controlled holographic microscopy, immunofluorescence, and electron microscopy. RACK1 depletion resulted in decreased cell proliferation, increased cell area and perimeter, and in the appearance of large binucleated cells suggesting a defect in the cell cycle progression. Our results show that the depletion of RACK1 has a pleiotropic effect on both epithelial and mesenchymal cell lines and support its essential role in mammalian cells.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vera Chvalova
- Laboratory of Cell Signalling, Institute of Microbiology of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Videnska 1083, 142 00, Prague, Czech Republic; Faculty of Science, Charles University, 128 00, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Vignesh Venkadasubramanian
- Laboratory of Cell Signalling, Institute of Microbiology of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Videnska 1083, 142 00, Prague, Czech Republic; Faculty of Science, Charles University, 128 00, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Zuzana Klimova
- Laboratory of Cell Signalling, Institute of Microbiology of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Videnska 1083, 142 00, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Jana Vojtova
- Laboratory of Regulation of Gene Expression, Institute of Microbiology of the Czech Academy of Sciences, 142 00, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Oldrich Benada
- Laboratory of Molecular Structure Characterization, Institute of Microbiology of the Czech Academy of Sciences, 142 00, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Ondrej Vanatko
- Department of Cellular Neurophysiology, Institute of Experimental Medicine of the Czech Academy of Sciences, 142 00, Prague, Czech Republic; Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, 150 06, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Tomas Vomastek
- Laboratory of Cell Signalling, Institute of Microbiology of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Videnska 1083, 142 00, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Tomas Grousl
- Laboratory of Cell Signalling, Institute of Microbiology of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Videnska 1083, 142 00, Prague, Czech Republic.
| |
Collapse
|