This protocol describes the harvesting and visualization of elasmoid scales of zebrafish during in vivo regeneration. In addition, the ex vivo culture of these scales for up to 7 days after harvest is presented.
Skeletal diseases are often complex in their etiology and affect millions of people worldwide. Due to the aging population, there is a need for new therapeutics that could ease the burden on healthcare systems. As these diseases are complex, it is difficult and expensive to accurately model bone pathophysiology in a lab setting. The challenge for the field is to establish a cost-effective, biologically relevant platform for modeling bone disease that can be used to test potential therapeutic compounds. Such a platform should ideally allow dynamic visualization of cell behaviors of bone-building osteoblasts and bone-degrading osteoclasts acting in their mineralized matrix environment. Zebrafish are increasingly used as models due to the availability of genetic tools, including transgenic reporter lines, and the fact that some skeletal tissues (including the scales) remain translucent to adulthood, allowing dynamic imaging options. Since zebrafish scales have both osteoblasts and osteoclasts and are highly abundant, they provide an easily accessible and abundantly available resource of independent bone units. Moreover, once removed, adult zebrafish scales fully regenerate, therefore offering a way to study the spatiotemporal growth of mineralized tissue in vivo. Here, we detail protocols for harvesting and tracking the regeneration of the scales. Lastly, a protocol for stable culture of scales ex vivo for a week and following the healing response after controlled damage to the mineralized matrix of the scale over time is also presented.
Bone is a hard connective tissue that forms a major part of the skeleton, enabling locomotion and acting as a mineral reserve in the body. In order to maintain healthy bone, an exquisite balance between bone formation and degradation is essential via the coupled activity of osteoblasts (which are anabolic) and osteoclasts (which resorb bone). This balance is disrupted by aging or hormonal imbalance, often leading to bone fragility diseases such as osteoporosis1. Although existing drugs have been approved to target bone fragility diseases, many have side effects; therefore, there is a need for new therapeutics1. Thus, there remains a need for abundant sources of biologically relevant bone tissue that can be used to test potential therapeutic compounds.
Traditionally, rodent models and cell culture systems have been used to study bone biology. However, zebrafish are increasingly becoming another model of choice. While not a mammalian system, zebrafish offer certain advantages for bone research over rodents; these include their fecundity and the translucency of the larvae; even in adulthood, some skeletal tissues, including the scales and the fins, remain translucent, allowing high-resolution in vivo imaging and the increased availability of skeletal mutants2,3. Both the fins and scales of zebrafish are capable of complete regeneration after removal. Skeletal regeneration and injury repair of zebrafish fins have been studied extensively4,5, while zebrafish scales are a newer bone model in the field but offer advantages for ex vivo culture6.
Scales are highly abundant, with at least 300 scales on each fish that serve as a protective covering for the fish. Each scale is a small mineralized plate consisting of bone-forming osteoblasts and bone-resorbing osteoclasts of a collagen-rich skeletal matrix7. The ossification process of both zebrafish scales and human bones requires the differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells into osteoblasts to form the mineralized matrix. Zebrafish scales offer a great advantage for skeletal research with their strong regenerative ability that can be used to study bone regeneration and repair. However, despite the presence of both osteoblasts and osteoclasts, zebrafish scales lack osteocytes that are important for human bone remodeling and mechanosensation; the superficial location of the scales means that they can be easily removed with a pair of forceps. Upon removal of the scale, a cascade of events occurs, and scale regeneration begins8,9. There are various staining and imaging options available to visualize the activity of osteoblasts and osteoclasts and the mineralization of the scales, as shown in Figure 1. Additionally, the availability of many relevant fluorescent transgenic reporter lines of zebrafish means that one can visualize cell dynamics during regeneration7,10,11. This process allows one to gain more understanding of de novo bone formation by observing the early patterning of scale regeneration on the flank of the fish to study morphology, cellular activity, and genetic profiles of these regenerated scales. The biology of scale formation and regeneration has been well characterized. Importantly, scales can show a good predictive ability for therapeutically relevant compounds12 and treatment of fish with glucocorticoids leads to a scale that regenerates to show osteoporotic phenotypes13. The transcriptome of the regenerating scales shows that genes activated in scale regeneration are enriched for those linked to human skeletal diseases, further demonstrating their relevance as a model system6,14.
Finally, these scales can be cultured ex vivo for up to 7 days. Compared to cell line cultures that are typically composed of a single cell type, ex vivo scale culture provides in vitro bone study opportunities within its natural environment containing both osteoblasts and osteoclasts with its natural extracellular matrix8,12,15,16.
Scale culture also allows us to perform drug screening for novel osteoanabolic targets. The abundance of scales on the fish means that one can fill at least two plates of the 96-well plate from just a single fish, allowing for compound screening in a multiwell format where every single well contains one scale along with its natural niche of cells. Additionally, since the scales are thin, drug absorption is predictable12. In summary, the elasmoid scales of zebrafish have great potential in skeletal research and can help us gain more insight into the cellular events during bone formation and repair. Here, we describe protocols for harvesting scales to follow regeneration in vivo and culture the scales ex vivo.
The University Animal Scientific Unit (ASU) is responsible for zebrafish care under the guidance of zebrafish husbandry guidelines. All procedures, including scale harvesting, live bone staining, and live imaging, were approved and performed under a UK Home Office Project License (PP4700996). For this manuscript, young adult transgenic zebrafish from the sp7:mCherry [Tg(osterix:mCherry-NTR)pd46] line was used17. The fish included both males and females of 4 months old.
1. In vivo scale regeneration
2. Live bone staining
NOTE: Live skeletal staining can be performed either when experimental fish are not transgenic for fluorescent reporters or when carrying single-color transgenic reporters. Live staining can be used to complement transgenics; for example, one might use an osteoblast reporter such as sp7/osx in one color (e.g., GFP), then stain bone in red with Alizarin red (AR). AR and calcein green can be used for the same fish together; in this scenario, AR is used to label original or ontogenetic bone by binding to the mineralized matrix of aged bone, and calcein binds to calcium ions that are abundant in newly formed bone. For example, when staining an ontogenetic scale, AR can be visualized, but calcein green may be absent or minimal since ontogenetic scales have low levels of new bone formation.
3. Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) staining on scales post-harvest
4. Von KOSSA staining on scales post-harvest
5. Colorimetric TRAP staining
NOTE: For the detailed procedure, please refer to previously published work18.
6. Mounting of stained scales
7. Ex vivo culture of scales
NOTE: This step is adapted from de Vrieze et al.12.
Scale regeneration
Scale regeneration can be tracked with a standard fluorescent stereomicroscope by imaging the flank of the zebrafish. Figure 3A shows changes in sp7/osx expression of the scales during scale regeneration in a 4-month-old zebrafish. Timepoints for flank imaging shown in Figure 3A are ontogenetic (original scales, before harvesting), day 2, day 4, and day 10 post-harvest. We typically use osx (also known as osterix or sp7) transgenic lines (either as a GFP (Tg(Ola.sp7:NLS-eGFP)19 or mCherry Tg(osterix:mCherry-NTR)pd46)17 to track changes in the skeletal system as it labels bone-making osteoblasts. Early patterning of newly formed scales can be seen on 2 days of regeneration. This early pattern of scale regeneration is disrupted in some cases, especially in skeletal mutants. By tracking the progress of regeneration, one can analyze the capacity and rate of regeneration. On scale harvesting day, individual imaging of harvested scales can be performed after flank imaging using the same stereomicroscope, as shown in Figure 3B. Regenerated scales have much higher osx expression compared to Day 0 ontogenetic scales because osteoblasts are required for the new bone formation.
Ex vivo scale culture
Although one can study the de novo bone formation process by tracking the regeneration process on the flank of the fish, we can also use this model to study the repair and healing of skeletal injuries with ex vivo scale culture by making an injury on the scales with a scalpel. Using a live imaging system, the repair can be tracked in real-time. Figure 4 shows a representative result of an injury healing response on an ontogenetic scale in 3 days into a culture where the osteoblasts are labeled with osx: mCherry. The injury site shown by the insets at the beginning of the culture shows a clear gap between osteoblasts and scale circuli (Figure 4A). One can monitor the migration of osteoblasts toward the injury site with time-lapse imaging. After 3 days in culture, the width of the gap is reduced, and the expression of theosx can be seen between the gap and the newly formed scale circuli (Figure 4B). Additionally, the morphology in terms of the shape of the osteoblasts, is more circular at the beginning of the culture and after 3 days, is more elongated. This change in osteoblast appearance is likely due to being in culture and not in its natural environment (attached to the fish).
Figure 1: Examples of imaging options for scales. Osteoblasts can be visualized with osx/sp7 transgenic reporter lines (either in GFP or mCherry). ALP staining can be used to show the osteoblast activity. TRAP staining can show the activity of osteoclasts. Alizarin red (AR) and Calcein green are both dyes that can be used in live fish; AR labels mineralization and Calcein labels newly formed bone. The extent of mineralization can also be shown with von Kossa staining. Scale bars: 500 µm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2: Schematic illustration of a scale regeneration experiment. Generic schematic of a scale regeneration experiment showing that fish is separated into individual tanks before the experiment. Length, sex, and health are recorded. The schematic also shows the suggested area on the flank of the fish to harvest scales and suggested imaging timepoints. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3: Representative images of osterix expression (to visualize osteoblasts) during scale regeneration taken from a 4-month-old zebrafish. (A) The flank images captured on day 0 (pre-harvest, ontogenetic scales), 2 dph (days post-harvest) day 2, 4 dph, and 10 dph for tracking changes in osx expression. Scale bars: 1 mm. (B) Representative images of an ontogenetic scale and a scale at 10 dph taken from the same fish as in panel (A). Note the increased levels of osx expression as shown in magenta in the center of the regenerating scales. Scale bars: 500 µm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 4: Representative results of skeletal injury repair response on an ontogenetic scale captured from a 4-month-old zebrafish using a live imaging system. (A) Ontogenetic scales with an injury made by scalpel on the same day as harvest (timepoint 0/day0) of the culture. (B) The same scale is shown 3 days after injury. Inset shows the region of injury. Scale bars: 500 µm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
The elasmoid scales of zebrafish, as a novel model for skeletal research, hold great potential to help our understanding of bone maintenance, regeneration, and injury repair. The abundance of scales on fish allows for medium to high-throughput compound screening while reducing the number of animals used and limiting intra-individual variation. Here, protocols for scale regeneration and ex vivo scale culture are presented to study regeneration and repair.
Some critical steps need to be considered when following this protocol. Careful removal of the scales is essential, especially when using a transgenic reporter line to limit the disturbance to the cell population caused by harvesting. If comparisons are to be made to ontogenetic scales, ensure that the region does not contain spontaneously regenerating scales (which can naturally occur through the lifespan of the fish). Ensure the environment and equipment are sterile for ex vivo culture to achieve optimal cell survival and minimal infection in culture.
Depending on the specific research question, adaptations can be made to the protocol, such as combining different transgenic reporter lines to visualize other cell types of gene expression profiles during regeneration and repair11,14.
The wide range of staining one can perform on the scales means that for each tested compound or condition one can look at its effects on the bone from different angles; while sp7/osx reporters can show osteoblast numbers, ALP staining can visualize osteoblast activity, TRAP staining can visualize osteoclast activity, Calcein green live staining can label newly forming bone and Alizarin red or von Kossa staining can show scale mineralization. Luciferase activity to quantify osteoblasts can also be used12. Combined with these staining techniques, one can learn the relative contribution of osteoblasts and osteoclasts to a given bone effect. Scales lack osteocytes, which are prevalent in mammalian bone and are the main drivers of bone mechanosensory response; scale repair and regeneration in this model are primarily driven by osteoblasts with subsequent remodelling by osteoclasts8,9. It is crucial to note that variation occurs between individuals and age groups20. To minimize this, the scale harvest area must be constant, as different locations can give rise to different scale morphologies, and fish from the same sibling groups are used so that age and size are consistent. However, because multiple scales can be harvested per fish, one can run more experiments using fewer fish, reducing intra-individual variability.
In summary, these protocols show experimental techniques that can be appliedto ontogenetic and regenerating scales. In conclusion, elasmoid scales show great potential as a skeletal model to aid the understanding of bone formation and repair; and will help to reduce animal use for high throughput osteoanabolic compound screening.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
We would like to thank Mathew Green of the Animal Service Unit for fish husbandry and Katy Jepson from the Wolfson Bioimaging Centre. CLH, DB, and QT were funded by Versus Arthritis (CLH Senior Fellowship 21937, DB and QT Intermediate Fellowship 22044), RR was funded by (NHMRC APP1158758). This work was also supported by the BBSRC grant (BB/T001984/1).
10x Phosphate buffered saline (PBS) | Gibco | 70013-016 | PBS |
12-Multichanel Pipette | Sartorius | 728230 | Multichanel pipette, Proline Plus Mechanical Pipette, 12 Channel, , 10-100 µL. |
15 mL Centrifuge tubes | Corning | 430791 | Centrifuge tube, CentriStar Cap, Polypropylene, RNAse/DNAse free, Non-pyrogenic |
4% Paraformaldehyde (PFA) | Sigma | P6148 | PFA |
Alizarin red | Sigma | A5533 | |
Amphotericin B | ThermoFisher Scientific | 15290026 | |
Bemis Parafilm M Laboratory Wrapping Film | Fisher Scientific | 11772644 | Sealing film |
Calcein powder | Sigma | C0875 | |
Calcium Chloride | Thermo Scientific | L13191.30 | |
Corning 96 well plate | Corning | 3596 | 96-well-plate, Clear, Flat Bottom Polystyrene TC-treated Microplates, Individually Wrapped, with Lid, Sterile |
Cover slips | VWR | 631-0146 | |
Cytiva HyClone Iron-Supplemented Calf Serum | Fisher Scientific | SH30072.03 | |
Danieau | Sigma | ||
DMEM | Life Technologies | 31053 | |
Falcon tubes | Corning | 430828 | |
Fast Red Violet LB stock solution | Sigma | F3381 | |
GlutaMAX Supplement | Life Technologies | 35050 | |
Glycerol | Sigma | 81381 | |
Hepes | Sigma | H3375 | |
Incubator | X | Incubator, Set up to 28 °C and 5% CO2 | |
IncuCyte Zoom | Sartorious | X | Live Imaging System, Set up to 28 °C and 5% CO2 |
Leica stereomicroscope | X | Sterioscope | |
L-tartrate dibasic dihydrate | Sigma | 228729 | |
Mgcl2 | BDH Laboratory Sup. | 261237T | |
Microscope slides | Epredia | J2800AMNZ | |
Mowiol 4-88 | Sigma | 9002-89-5 | |
MQ water | X | ||
N, N’-dimethylformamide (Merck: D4451) | Merck | D4451 | |
NaCL | Fisher Chemical | S/3120/53 | |
Naphthol AS-MX phosphate | Merck | N4875 | |
NBT/BCIP solution | Sigma | #000000011681451001 | |
Penicillin-Streptomycin | Life Technologies | 15140 | |
Petri Dishes | Corning | 430589 | 35 mm sterile Petri dish, Non-treated, Nonpyrogenic, Polystyrene. |
Reagent Reservoir | Startub | E2310-1025 | 25mL Reagent Reservoir |
Silver nitrate | Sigma | 209139 | |
Sodium acetate | Sigma | 52889 | |
Sodium beta-glycerophosphate pentahydrate | Thermo Scientific | L03425.14 | |
Sodium pyruvate solution | Sigma | S8636 | |
Sodium tartrate | Sigma | S4797 | |
Sodium thioculphate | Sigma | 563188 | |
Tricaine methane sulfonate (MS222) | Sigma | E10521 | |
Tris | Sigma | 252859 | |
Triton-X100 | Sigma | T8787 | |
Tween-20 | SLS | CHE3852 | |
Tweezers Number 5 | Dumont | 500341 | Tweezer, INOX, biology grade |
Zebrafish tanks | Tecniplast | ZB30BCP | 3.5 L – 28 cm x 11 cm x 17 cm |
Zebrafish tanks | Tecniplast | ZB30BCP | 1 L – 28 cm x 7 cm x 11 cm |