This protocol demonstrates the use of a robotic platform for microinjection into single neural stem cells and neurons in brain slices. This technique is versatile and offers a method of tracking cells in tissue with high spatial resolution.
A central question in developmental neurobiology is how neural stem and progenitor cells form the brain. To answer this question, one needs to label, manipulate, and follow single cells in the brain tissue with high resolution over time. This task is extremely challenging due to the complexity of tissues in the brain. We have recently developed a robot, that guide a microinjection needle into brain tissue upon utilizing images acquired from a microscope to deliver femtoliter volumes of solution into single cells. The robotic operation increases resulting an overall yield that is an order of magnitude greater than manual microinjection and allows for precise labeling and flexible manipulation of single cells in living tissue. With this, one can microinject hundreds of cells within a single organotypic slice. This article demonstrates the use of the microinjection robot for automated microinjection of neural progenitor cells and neurons in the brain tissue slices. More broadly, it can be used on any epithelial tissue featuring a surface that can be reached by the pipette. Once set up, the microinjection robot can execute 15 or more microinjections per minute. The microinjection robot because of its throughput and versality will make microinjection a broadly straightforward high-performance cell manipulation technique to be used in bioengineering, biotechnology, and biophysics for performing single-cell analyses in organotypic brain slices.
This protocol describes the use of a robot to target and manipulate single cells in brain tissue slices, focusing in particular on single neural stem cells and neurons. The robot was developed to address a central question in developmental neurobiology, that is how neural stem and progenitor cells contribute to the brain morphogenesis1,2,3,4,5. To answer this question, one needs to label and track single neural stem cells and follow their lineage progression over time to correlate single cell behavior with tissue morphogenesis. This can be achieved in different ways, e.g., by electroporating brain tissue in utero or by labeling single cell using lipophilic dies. Although powerful, these methods lack precise single cell resolution (electroporation) and/or the possibility to manipulate the intracellular space (lipophilic dye). Microinjection into single cells was developed to overcome this challenge6,7,8. During microinjection, a pipette is briefly inserted into a single cell within intact tissue under pressure to microinject femtoliter volumes of reagents9. We have previously described a manual procedure for microinjecting single neural stem cells in organotypic tissue (Figure 1A)10,11. Microinjection into neural stem cells relies on the use of a micropipette that is inserted into single neural stem cells to inject a solution containing a fluorescent dye, along with other molecules of interest. The selective targeting of neural stem cells is achieved by approaching the developing telencephalon via the ventricular surface (or ventricle, see cartoon in Figure 1A), that is formed by the apical plasma membrane of apical progenitors (cartoon in Figure 1A). This process must be repeated for each cell that the experimenter desires to inject. Further, the success of microinjection is dependent on the precise control of the depth and duration of micropipette injection in the tissue. Thus, despite the unique advantages, manual microinjection is extremely tedious and requires considerable practice to perform at reasonable throughput and yield, making this technique difficult to use in a scalable fashion. To overcome this limitation, we have recently developed an image guided robot, the Autoinjector12 (or microinjection robot) that can automatically perform microinjections into single cells.
The microinjection robot makes use of microscopic imaging and computer vision algorithms to precisely target specific locations in 3-D space within tissue for microinjection (Figure 1B). The microinjection robot can be constructed by making relatively simple modifications to an existing microinjection setup. The overall schematic of the microinjection robot is shown in Figure 1C. A pipette is mounted in a pipette holder attached to a three-axis manipulator. A microscope camera is used to acquire images of the tissue and the microinjection needle. A custom pressure regulation system is used to control the pressure inside the pipette and a programmable micromanipulator is used to control the position of the microinjector pipette. The camera images of the tissue and microinjection pipette are used to determine the spatial location of the microinjection pipette tip and the locations at which microinjections need to be performed. The software then calculates trajectories needed to move the pipette within the tissue. All the hardware is controlled by the software that we previously developed. All software is written in coding language (e.g., Python and Arduino) and can be download from https://github.com/bsbrl/Autoinjector with instructions. The graphical user interface (GUI) allows the user to image the tissue and micropipette, and to customize the trajectory of microinjection. Our system can be established using relatively simple modifications to an inverted microscope equipped with brightfield and epi-fluorescence filters.
First, we provide instructions on preparing brain organotypic tissue slices for microinjection. Then the protocol illustrates starting the microinjection robot followed by preparatory steps, such as pipette motion calibration, that need to be done prior to microinjection. This is followed by defining the injection parameters. After this, the user can define the trajectory used by the microinjection robot and start the injection procedure. The microinjected tissue (in this case brain organotypic tissue slices) can be kept in culture for different time periods depending on the experimental design10,11. The tissue can be processed to follow and study the identity and fate of the injected cells and their progeny. Alternatively, the microinjected cells can be followed using live imaging. Within the scope of this protocol, we demonstrate the use of the robot to automatically microinjection neural progenitor cells in organotypic slices of mouse E14.5 dorsal telencephalon. The robot is further capable of microinjection into newborns neurons in the mouse telencephalon, as well as in the human fetal telencephalon12.
In summary, we describe a robotic platform that can be used to follow and manipulate single cells in tissue. The platform makes use of pressure and it is, therefore, extremely versatile as to the chemical nature of the compound to inject. In addition, it can be adapted to target cells other than stem cells. We expect our system to be easily adapted to other model systems as well.
All animal studies were conducted in accordance with German animal welfare legislation, and the necessary licenses were obtained from the regional Ethical Commission for Animal Experimentation of Dresden, Germany (Tierversuchskommission, Landesdirektion Dresden). Organotypic slices were prepared from E14.5 or E16.5 C57BL/6 mouse embryonic telencephalon (Janvier Labs).
1. Installation of software
2. Preparation of reagents and pipettes
3. Tissue slice preparation
4. Microinjection
5. Tissue culture and tissue slice processing for immunofluorescence
Microinjection serves the purpose of tracking and manipulating single neural stem cells and their progeny in living tissue and to follow their lineage progression in a physiological environment. In this article, we have demonstrated the use of the microinjection robot for targeting and automatically microinjecting organotypic slices of the mouse telecephalon. Figure 2 illustrates representative images of successfully injected progenitor cells and Figure 3 illustrates injected newborn neurons. When injected with Dextran Alexa-488 (or Alexa-A555) dye, cells appear fully filled with the dye. As for apical progenitors (Figure 2) confocal imaging allows reconstructing with high spatial resolution the cell morphology, the presence -or absence- of the apical and basal attachment, and to combine the morphological enquiry with marker expression. By combining these criteria, the user can assign a specific cell fate to the microinjected cells and their progeny. As for the neuron injection, the user can reconstruct the neuronal morphology, including the structure and features of apical dendrite and axon. Automated microinjection can provide significantly higher throughput as compared to manual microinjection (Figure 2B). Further, EdU labeling confirms that cell viability is not affected by automation (Figure 2C). Keeping the organotypic slice in culture allows following lineage progression of the microinjected cells (we shown 4 – 24h in Figure 2D). If the microinjection solution contains genetic material (DNA, mRNA, CRISPR-Cas9 guides) or recombinant proteins, then this allows studying if and how lineage progression is affected by the manipulation.
Microinjection into single neural stem cells in tissue provides excellent single cell resolution and for that reason it has been used to dissect the cell biology of neural stem cell progression and fate transition (Figure 3A). Microinjection allows the delivery of complex mixture of chemicals. We previously made use of this feature to study junctional coupling in neural progenitor cells by mixing gap-junctional permeable with gap junctional impermeable fluorescent dyes12. We extended previous work by studying junctional coupling in newborn neurons, by injecting Lucifer Yellow along with Dextran-A555 (Figure 3B). As shown in Figure 3B, a proportion of newborn pyramidal neurons are coupled via gap junctions to neighboring neurons. This observation is consistent with the idea that immature neurons communicate via gap-junction13,14. Furthermore, targeting neurons shows that the use of the microinjection robot can be generalized to several cell types in the developing mammalian brain. This experimental setup will be useful to dissect the cell biology of neurons in tissue, for example by delivering specific oligopeptides to interfere with protein-protein interactions.
Figure 1: Automated microinjection setup and protocol. (A) Overall protocol for tissue preparation and automated microinjections using the microinjection robot. Right inset: Cartoon schematic of mouse Telencephalon targeted for microinjection in this protocol. (B) Flowchart of the automated microinjection steps. (C) Schematic of the microinjection robot hardware. (D) Graphic user interface (GUI) of the software used to control and operate the microinjection robot. This figure is adapted from ref.12. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2: Robotic microinjection into apical progenitors. Schematic and expected results when using the microinjection robot to target apical progenitors (APs) via the apical surface (apical injection). (A) Top row. On the left: schematic of the process. On the right: GUI with relevant parameters for apical injection. Bottom row. On the left: phase contrast image taken during the injection procedure (V: ventricle; BL: basal lamina). On the right: representative results showing microinjected APs. Dashed line represents the ventricle (V). Scale bar: 10 µm. (B) Successful injections per minute for a novice user on the manual microinjection system, an experienced user on the manual microinjection system, and the microinjection robot. (C) EdU incorporation in microinjected cells and in non-injected cells in the injected area. Organotypic slices of mouse E14.5 dorsal telencephalon were either (i) non injected or (ii) subjected to manual or automated microinjection (injected slice) using Dextran-A488 (for manual and autoinjector). Slices were kept in culture in the presence of EdU for 24 h, then they were fixed and stained for DAPI and EdU. Injected and non-injected cells in the injected area were scored for EdU positivity. (D) Use of the microinjection robot Lineage tracing. A fluorescent dye (Dx3-A555, magenta) is injected into single neural stem cell (t = 0 h). The fluorescent dye is partitioned to the daughter cells (d1, d2) during mitosis. This allows following the progeny of the injected cell (t = 4 h and 24 h) and revealing the lineage progression over time. For t = 24 h, we show several examples of the progeny one expects to find. Scale bars: 10 µm. Graphs in B and C are taken from ref.12 Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3: Robotic microinjection into neurons. Schematic and expected results when using the microinjection robot to target pyramidal neurons (N) via the basal surface (basal injection). (A) Top row. On the left: schematic of the process. On the right: GUI with relevant parameters for basal injection. Bottom row. On the left: phase contrast image taken during the injection procedure (V: ventricle; BL: basal lamina). On the right: representative results showing a microinjected N. Dashed line represents the basal lamina (BL). Scale bar: 10 µm. (B) Use of the autoinjector to study gap junctional communication in tissue. Pyramidal neurons were injected with a solution containing two dyes: the gap junctional-impermeable Dx-A555 (not shown) and the gap-junctional permeable Lucifer Yellow (green). Dx-A555 is confined to the targeted cell (asterisks), while the LY diffuses to cells that are connected via gap junction to the targeted cell (dashed lines). Left panel: Low exposure, only the microinjected cells are visible. Right panel: High exposure allows visualization of the injected cells as well as the coupled cells (dashed lines). Scale bar: 10 µm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Supplementary File: Troubleshooting several common errors that arise during microinjection. Please click here to download this file.
Microinjection into single neural stem cells in tissue provides excellent single cell resolution and for that reason it has been used to dissect the cell biology of neural stem cell progression and fate transition (Figure 2; see also10,11,12). The automated microinjection procedure can be performed on other types of cells in both embryonic mice and human brain tissue. Representative results of microinjection of newborn neurons by targeting the basal surface of the telencephalon are shown in Figure 3.
The principle established here can be applied to target several different cell types in embryonic mouse brains and human brains. We have previously shown that the microinjection robot can also be used to target single progenitor cells in the mouse hindbrain and telencephalon and newborn neurons in the mouse and human developing neocortex12. To obtain the best results of the injection procedure, one should optimize all the steps before starting the injection. It is important to carefully consider and optimize the preparation of viable and well preserved organotypic tissue slices from brain tissue (Figure 1). It is crucial to be quick in the dissection and slicing procedure illustrated in Figure 1. For apical injection targeting the APs, one should pick the slices showing the ideal orientation of the apical surface. For APs injection, the ideal orientation is the apical surface perpendicular to the bottom of the Petri dish. Any other orientation will be permissive as well, however, the apical surface perpendicular to the Petri dish provides a wider surface area for injection, thus increasing the success of injection. For injection into neurons, the orientation of the slice plays little to no effect.
Once the slices to inject are selected, the injection procedure per slice takes approximately 5 minutes. Considering that one works with living tissue, it is highly recommended to speed up the injection procedure. To this end we recommend setting all the parameters for injection via the GUI (Figure 1D) before the tissue is ready, to reduce any unnecessary waiting time. For troubleshooting please refer to the Supplementary file.
In case of long-term slice culture, steps after the automated microinjection procedure can affect the health of the cells and thereby the experiment. Therefore, it is highly recommended to run a quality control test and to optimize the slice culture conditions. To evaluate cell viability after the slicing and injection procedure, we performed EdU labeling during the culture and we quantified the number of pyknotic nuclei (a proxy for apoptotic cells) in the cultures and injected tissue12. These quantifications did not reveal any significant impact of microinjection on tissue viability (Figure 2C). We recommend running similar quality controls while establishing the organotypic tissue slicing and microinjection pipeline in the lab.
Compared to manual microinjection, the microinjection robot provides several advantages. First, the learning curve for the user is less steep as compared to manual injection: a new user will reach a high proficiency after a limited number of sessions, typically 1 or 2. Second, in the case of manual microinjection, a comparable proficiency requires months of training. The injection procedure is faster and more efficient (Figure 2B). We quantified these parameters and found that the microinjection robot outperformed a skilled manual user with respect to the injection success (% of successful injection/total number of injections) and in the total number of injections per unit time12. This results in an overall 300% increase of injection efficiency (% of successful injection/min) for the microinjection robot compared to a skilled user. The increase in efficiency was even more pronounced when comparing the microinjection robot with a beginner user and reached 700%. Last but not the least, the microinjection robot can be easily programmed to systematically explore all spatial parameters. This is particularly advantageous when adapting the microinjection robot to target new cells or tissues, or when using the microinjection robot for purposes requiring different spatial resolution.
Building the microinjection robot requires minimal changes to an existing epi-fluorescence microscope12. We have previously provided instructions for this adaptation at https://github.com/bsbrl/Autoinjector. Once the hardware is setup, this protocol provides key methodological details for successfully undertaking automated microinjections. Overall, the microinjection robot has a successful injection rate of 15.52 + 2.48 injections/min, which is 15x greater than an inexperienced user (1.09 ± 0.67 injections/min), and 3x greater than an expert user (4.95 ± 1.05 injections/min)12. This improvement in successful injection rate empowers both novice and expert users to inject more cells in a shorter amount of time which is essential to preserve tissue viability. Additionally, the microinjection robot is customizable and the trajectory, depth of the injection, number of injections, spacing between injections can all be tuned using the GUI. These features allow the microinjection robot to be used as a tool to optimize previously laborious experiments, and to explore fundamentally new experiments that require higher yield than previously possible.
The main limitations of the microinjection procedure we described here are related to the preparation of tissue slices, a crucial step that needs extensive optimization. In addition, microinjection relies on the presence of a surface that can be approached by the glass pipette. This feature limits the type of tissues and tissue locations that can be targeted via microinjection using the present setup.
The microinjection robot currently uses brightfield imaging and has been used in in vitro brain slice preparations. In the future, the microinjection robot could be combined with 2-photon imaging to increase the specificity of single cell targeting in vivo for molecular or dye tagging. Such efforts have already been made for single cell electrophysiology15,16. The current device requires manual observation of the microinjection procedure. Future versions could include strategies for cleaning clogged microinjection pipettes17 or integration of fluid handling robots18 for multiplexed, fully autonomous microinjections. These devices could increase the scale of microinjection by orders of magnitude. Adapting algorithms for parallel control of multiple microinjection pipettes19 could enable multiplexed delivery of dozens of dyes and molecular reagents into the same cells within the same experiments. This has the potential to open new avenues for molecular screening in tissue.
The microinjection robot could be used to tag functionally identified cells using DNA or RNA barcodes. This could in turn be combined with other single cell analysis techniques, such as single cell RNA sequencing (scRNAseq) and electron microscopy. Our preliminary results show that microinjected cells and their progeny can be recovered and isolated using tissue dissociation followed by FACS sorting (Taverna, unpublished results). The FACS sorted cells can then be used for scRNAseq. Furthermore, preliminary results show that the single cell resolution capabilities of the microinjection robot can be used in combination with electron microscopic analysis to explore the cell biology on neural stem cells in tissue at high spatial resolution (Taverna and Wilsch-Bräuninger, unpublished results). These data suggest that the microinjection robot can be used as a tool for correlative light and electron microscopy in tissue and in broader sense, for the multimodal analysis of cell identity and behavior in tissue.
Microinjection relies on the use of pressure and one can afford injecting solutions with high molecular complexity (e.g., an entire transcriptome). This feature of microinjection has been exploited in the past for isolating and cloning ligand-gated receptors20. Along this line, the microinjection robot might be used for modeling and studying multi-genic traits at the cellular level. Combined with a sub-pooling strategy, the microinjection robot might also be used as a platform to identify the minimum set of genes driving a certain trait/cellular behavior. Thus far, the microinjection robot has been used to manipulate the cell’s biochemistry via the delivery of mRNA, DNA or recombinant proteins10,21,22. We foresee an application of the microinjection robot in probing the biophysics of the intracellular space, for example, by delivering nanomaterials or nanomachines that allow sensing and/or manipulation of the biophysical properties of the intracellular space.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
The authors would like to acknowledge the Nomis Foundation (ET). SBK acknowledges funds from the Mechanical Engineering department, College of Science and Engineering, MnDRIVE RSAM initiative of the University of Minnesota, Minnesota department of higher education, National Institutes of Health (NIH) 1R21NS103098-01, 1R01NS111028, 1R34NS111654, 1R21NS112886 and 1R21 NS111196. GS was supported by National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship and NSF IGERT training grant.
Chemicals | |||
Agarose, Low Melt | Carl Roth | Cat# 6351.2 | |
Agarose, Wild Range | Sigma-Aldrich | Cat# A2790 | |
Best-CA 221 Glue | Best Klebstoffe GmbH & Co.KG | Cat# CA221-10ml | |
B-27 Supplement | Thermo Fisher Scientific | Cat# 17504044 | |
Cellmatrix Type-IA (Collagen, Type !) | FUJIFILM Wako Chemicals | Cat# 637-00653 | |
Distilled Water | |||
DMEM-F12, CO2 independent (w/o Phenol red) | Sigma-Aldrich | Cat# D2906 | |
DMEM-F12, CO2 independent (with Phenol red) | Sigma-Aldrich | Cat# D8900 | |
HEPES-NAOH, pH 7.2, 1M (HEPES buffer) | Carl Roth | Cat# 9105.3 | |
L-Glutamine, 200 mM | Thermo Fisher Sientific | Cat# 25030024 | |
Mowiol 4-88 | Sigma-Aldrich | Cat# 81381 | |
N-2 Supplement | Thermo Fisher Scientific | Cat# 17502048 | |
Neurobasal Medium | Thermo Fisher Scientific | Cat# 21103049 | |
Nuclease-free water | Thermo Fisher Scientific | Cat# AM9937 | |
O2 (40%), CO2 (5%), N2 (55%) Mix, 50 liters | |||
Paraformaldehyde | Merck | Cat# 818715 | |
PBS | |||
Penicillin-Streptomycin (10,000 U/mL) | Thermo Fisher Scientific | Cat# 15140122 | |
Rat serum | Charles River Laboratories | ||
Japan | |||
Sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) | Merck | Cat# 106323 | |
Sodium hydroxide (NaOH) | Merck | Cat# 106482 | |
Tyrode’s salt | Sigma | Cat# T2145-10x1L) | |
Equipment | |||
Borosilicate glass capillaries, 1.2 mm outer diameter x 0.94 mm inner diameter | Sutter Instruments | Cat# BF-120-94-10 | |
Bottle-top filter system, 500 mL | Corning | Cat# 430769 | |
Computer PC | |||
Custom pressure rig | Custom pressure rig | ||
Electronic pressure regulator | Parker Hannifin | Cat# 990-005101-002 | |
Falcon tubes, 15 mL | Corning | Cat# 430791 | |
Falcon tubes, 50 mL | Corning | Cat# 430829 | |
Fine-tip paintbrush | |||
Flaming/ Brown micropipette puller | Sutter Instruments | Cat# P-97 | |
Forceps, Dumont no. 3 | Fine Science Tools | Cat# 11231-30 | |
Forceps, Dumont no. 5 | Fine Science Tools | Cat# 11255-20 | |
Forceps, Dumont no. 55 | Fine Science Tools | Cat# 11252-20 | |
Heating block | Labtech International | Cat # Dri block Digi2 | |
Inverted fluorescence microscope | Zeiss | Cat# Axiovert 200 | |
Light source | Olympus | Cat# Highlight 3100 | |
Manual pressure regulator | McMaster Carr | Cat# 0-60 PSI 41795K3 | |
Microloader Tips | Eppendorf | Cat# 5242956.003 | |
Microcontroller | Arduino | Cat# Arduino Due | |
Microscope camera Hamamatsu Orca Flash 4.0 V3 | |||
Motorized stage XY for microscope | |||
Multiwell plate, 24 wells | Nunc | Cat# 142475 | |
Pasteur pipettes, plastic | |||
Petri dish, 60 x 15 mm | Greiner | Cat# 628102 | |
Petri dish, 35 x 10 mm | Nunc | Cat# 153066 | |
Petri dish, 34 x 14 mm, including Microwell no. 1.5 cover glass | MatTek | Cat# P35G-1.5-14-C | |
Pipette holder | Warner Instruments | Cat# 64-2354 MP-s12u | |
Pipette and tips | |||
Puller filament, 3.0-mm square box filament | Sutter Instrument | Cat# FB330B | |
Slice culture incubation box | MPI-CBG | Cat# custom made | |
Solenoid valve | Cat# LHDA053321H-A | ||
Stereomicroscope | Olympus | Cat# SZX12 | |
Tabletop centrifuge | Heraeus | Cat# 5431622 | |
Thermometer | |||
Three-axis Manipulator | Sensapex Inc | Cat# tree-axis uMP | |
Vibratome | Leica | Cat# VT1000s | |
Whole-embryo-culture-system incubator | Ikemoto Company | Cat# RKI-10-0310 | |
Waterbath | |||
Software and Algorithms | |||
Arduino | Arduino | ||
Fiji | RRID: SCR_002285 | ||
Python | Python Software foundation | Python 2.7.12 | |
ZEN | RRID: SCR_013672 |