We present a protocol for capturing the dynamics of zebrafish larval tail fin regeneration on a whole-tissue scale using brightfield-based stereomicroscopy. This technique enables capturing the regeneration dynamics with single cell resolution. This methodology can be adapted to any stereomicroscope equipped with a CCD camera and time-lapse software.
The zebrafish larval tail fin is ideal for studying tissue regeneration due to the simple architecture of the larval fin-fold, which comprises of two layers of skin that enclose undifferentiated mesenchyme, and because the larval tail fin regenerates rapidly within 2-3 days. Using this system, we demonstrate a method for capturing the repair dynamics of the amputated tail fin with time-lapse video brightfield stereomicroscopy. We demonstrate that fin amputation triggers a contraction of the amputation wound and extrusion of cells around the wound margin, leading to their subsequent clearance. Fin regeneration proceeds from proximal to distal direction after a short delay. In addition, developmental growth of the larva can be observed during all stages. The presented method provides an opportunity for observing and analyzing whole tissue-scale behaviors such as fin development and growth in a simple microscope setting, which is easily adaptable to any stereomicroscope with time-lapse capabilities.
The ability of an organism to orchestrate tissue repair processes after injury is crucial for its survival 1. While all animals have the capacity to heal their wounds, the extent to which tissues regenerate differs greatly among species. Vertebrate species such as zebrafish, salamanders and frog tadpoles have the remarkable ability to regenerate lost tissues, including their appendages, portions of their eyes, heart, and central nervous system 2-4. Mammalian species, such as the African spiny mouse and rabbits, are capable of regenerating holes in their pinnae 5-7, and humans and mice regenerate portions of their liver as well as their digit tips during fetal and juvenile stages 8-12. Although it is not well understood yet why and how certain species regenerate tissues more effectively than others, the presence of similar genetic pathways suggests that these mechanisms may lie dormant in species without great regeneration potential 13,14. Thus elucidating tissue repair and regeneration mechanisms in species with satisfactory regeneration outcomes will benefit regeneration in humans.
We have chosen the larval zebrafish tail fin as a paradigm to demonstrate its regeneration with time-lapse brightfield stereomicroscopy. The zebrafish larval tail fin is anatomically simple as compared to the more complex adult structures, consisting of a two-layered, infolded epithelium with somatosensory axons innervating the skin that surrounds medially located mesenchymal cells 15. Despite the anatomical differences, larval tail fin regeneration is somewhat comparable to adult fin regeneration in terms of the molecular signatures and the outgrowth responses 16,17. As compared to the adult fin, imaging larval tail fin regeneration has however several advantages: 1) larval fin regeneration is completed within just 2-3 days 16, 2) larvae can be mounted in low-melt agarose, and 3) larvae do not require feeding until ~ 5 days post fertilization (dpf) due to the presence of the yolk sac. This makes zebrafish larvae ideal for observing tissue repair dynamics in vivo.
The presented method enables the capture of detailed dynamics underlying the early processes of fin regeneration. Many studies have utilized fluorescence-based confocal microscopy to study cellular and subcellular biological processes in embryonic and larval zebrafish. Sophisticated confocal imaging setups are however often not accessible to everyone and highly expensive as compared to other imaging techniques. In contrast, the presented methodology utilizes a Discovery V12 stereomicroscope equipped with Axiovision software and a time-lapse module, thus providing a more affordable alternative to expensive imaging equipment to examine tissue behaviors. We demonstrate that this method can be utilized for imaging tissue regeneration with high temporal resolution at a minimal cost. The implications for this method could extend beyond basic biology to advance mammalian regeneration studies using organ cultures, for therapeutic development through pharmacological and genetic screens, and it can serve as a teaching tool in a classroom setting.
Zebrafish (nacre strain) were bred and raised according to established protocols. All efforts were made to minimize suffering, using 0.4 mM Tricaine for anesthesia and 1 mM Tricaine for euthanasia. Zebrafish embryos and larvae were handled in strict accordance with good animal practice as approved by the appropriate committee (MDI Biological Laboratory animal core IACUC number 13-20). This study was approved by the National Human Genome Research Institute Animal Care and Use Committee, MDIBL Institutional Assurance # A-3562-01 under protocol # 14-09.
Note: The imaging procedure that captures fin regeneration in larval zebrafish is summarized in the following steps:
1. Raising of Zebrafish to Larval Stages
2. Preparation of the Imaging Chamber
3. Mounting and Imaging of the Pre-injured Larva (this Step is Optional)
Note: This step is suitable for comparisons between the amputated and regenerated fin length, as the amputation plane after fin regeneration is not recognizable in zebrafish larvae.
4. Amputation Assay
5. Mounting the Larva for Time-lapse Imaging
6. Time-lapse Imaging
7. Data Analysis
The presented technique is suitable to elucidate tissue repair dynamics in response to amputation. The movie demonstrates that amputation of the fin initially triggers a purse-string effect, characterized by contractions via actin-myosin cables that are present in the fin-fold 28 (Figure 5 A,B). Concomitantly, cells are extruded from the wound (see movie). The contraction may thus be a means to expel cells that are likely destined to undergo cell death. Our results further show that the developmental growth of the larva occurs independently of regeneration (movie), whereas fin regeneration does not initiate until about 14 hr post amputation as measured by fin length and area over the time course of 36 hr following amputation (Figure 5C, D). The total regenerative fin growth after 1.5 days was about 60% of the original fin length (Figure 5E). Taken together, these results demonstrate that amputation triggers fin contraction, extrusion of cells from the wound, and a temporally delayed regenerative response. While extruded cells are likely destined to undergo cell death, the nature of these cells needs to be further clarified.
Figure 1. Imaging chamber ring assembly
(A) Shown is a plastic ring that is attached to a coverslip with silicon grease. A plastic mesh is attached to the inside of the chamber with four small dots of silicon grease. (B) The chamber containing the mounted larva is filled with Tricaine solution and a glass slide is attached to the top. (C) A mounted 2 day-old larva (arrow) is shown at higher magnification to depict its size in relation to the mesh. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2. Imaging chamber assembly made from Petri dishes. (A) Shown is a commercial glass top glass bottom petri dish with a plastic mesh attached to the glass coverslip. (B) Shown is a self-constructed Petri dish chamber with a hole drilled into the lid and a coverslip attached from the outside with silicon grease. The mesh and larva are mounted inside the chamber containing Tricaine solution. To seal the chamber, silicon grease is applied to the upper, outer rim of the bottom chamber and the top lid attached. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3. Scheme of amputation and mounting of a larva for imaging. (A) For amputation, place an anesthetized larva onto an agarose-coated Petri dish and amputate the tail fin with a syringe needle. (B) For mounting, transfer the larva with a transfer pipette into a 1.5 ml tube filled with 42 °C liquid agarose and pipette a drop containing the larva into the imaging chamber, orient the fish and cover the solidified agarose with embryo medium. (C) Scrape off the agarose from the tail fin using a capped microloader pipette tip or similar tool and replace embryo medium with fresh medium. (D) Image the tail fin under a stereomicroscope. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 4. Self-constructed heated incubation chamber. (A-C) Shown is a heated incubation chamber made of cardboard, bubble wrap and Velcro. A wired dome heater (originally designed for chicken egg incubation) is attached to the chamber using aluminum tape. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 5. Fin regeneration dynamics. (A) Scheme of the utilized tail fin amputation assay and quantification method to determine the fin length (red arrow) and area (red outline of the fin). (B) Tail fin amputation initially triggers contraction of the fin, followed by regenerative tissue outgrowth. The fin also undergoes developmental growth, as evidenced by the lateral size increase. (C) Shown is the fin length as a function of time, revealing a linear regenerative growth starting at ~14 hpa. (D) Quantification of the fin area reveals an initially decrease in size, which can be attributed to the contraction of the fin. After ~ 14 hr, the fin size increases at a linear rate. (E) Comparison of the fin length before amputation and after 36 hr shows ~ 60% regrowth. Scale bar: 100 µm Abbreviations: pre-amp, pre-amputation; hours post amputation, hpa; regen, regeneration; amp, amputation Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Movie. Fin regeneration over the time course of 36 hr. Shown is a tail fin of a 2.5-day old larva during the course of regeneration. Starting 30 min post amputation regenerative growth is imaged in 30 min intervals on a stereomicroscope using a 3.5x objective lens.
The presented method allows for observing wound healing and tissue regeneration in living zebrafish larvae with in vivo time-lapse imaging on a brightfield stereomicroscope, using a comparatively simple set-up. This procedure requires certain important aspects that we have tested, which will optimize the outcome: 1) Low agarose concentrations (~0.5%) will minimize growth impediments of the continually growing larval zebrafish, 2) Removal of the agarose around the fin is important not to obscure the healing process, 3) Trapping the agarose in a plastic mesh retains the agarose and animal in a stable position throughout the procedure, and 4) A proper temperature-controlled environment, which is essential for larval viability. We have adapted a heated incubation chamber 23,24, which utilizes bubble wrap that is taped onto cardboard, and a wired dome heater to control the temperature and proper air circulation with minimal fluctuations during the imaging procedure. This simple and cost-efficient chamber can be prepared to fit any microscope. A similar heated incubation chamber has been also utilized for imaging mice and chick development 24,29.
We suggest that pre-amputated larvae are mounted for a pre-amputation image, demounted for amputation, and remounted for time-lapse imaging. Although it is feasible to perform these steps in a single step in the final imaging chamber, in our experience we found that amputating the tail fin on a glass coverslip is not optimal, as it tears the tissue and does not result in a clean cut. The agarose-based amputation method using a syringe needle was originally described by Kawakami and colleagues (2004) 16 and is also, in our experience, ideal to perform the amputations. Thus, the rather complicated series of steps that we presented is well justified and ensures an optimal regeneration outcome.
We showed that larval zebrafish at 2 dpf can be imaged up to 1.5 days in agarose and Tricaine solution. We used pH-optimized Tricaine (pH7) solution prepared with Instant Ocean salt, which does not interfere with the specimen’s health for the presented imaging period. We previously however also demonstrated that using Tricaine in Danieau medium permits time-lapse imaging of 2.5 dpf larval zebrafish on a confocal microscope for at least 2 days 30. Thus, optimal buffer conditions can extend larval health and the length of imaging. Alternatively, lower Tricaine concentrations may be used for anesthesia, or 2-phenoxyethanol, which we found is well tolerated during larval and adult stages at 28 °C for at least 60 hr.
To avoid defects in fin regeneration, we removed the agarose from the tail fin prior to imaging. Our data shows that within 1.5 days the fin has regenerated to about 60%. This regeneration rate is consistent with a previous study defining 3 days as an average time for tail fin regeneration in zebrafish larvae up to 6 dpf 16. Alternative methods to agarose could however be utilized to mount the fish for imaging. For example, thin plasma clots 31 or fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP) tubes coated with methylcellulose and filled with very low agarose concentrations (0.1%) have been recommended for light sheet microscopy 32 and may be suitable for our presented method. However, we do not recommend methylcellulose and 0.1% agarose, as they require that the specimen are mounted at the bottom of the chamber due to the lack of solidification of these media. Very high concentrations of methylcellulose will moreover generate air pockets based on our experience, and these may interfere with the imaging procedure. If these media are preferred with using the bottom chamber, it is important that an appropriate working distance between the objective lens and the specimen is present. It should be noted that methylcellulose as a mounting medium is recommended only for up to 1 day, as it may interfere with larval health 32.
Mounting the specimen in the lid may result in a slow gravitational downward drift. It is therefore recommended to image multiple sections at each time point, which can either be projected into a single plane or only images that are in the focal plane may be extracted for assembling the final movie. Imaging the specimen at the bottom chamber could be an alternative methodology to avoid potential downward drift. Plasma clots could be useful to avoid drift, as the plasma will stick to the outer enveloping layer (EVL, periderm) 31 and therefore may stabilize the specimen. This however needs to be tested, as well as how long larval zebrafish can be maintained in plasma clots without interfering with larval health or fin regeneration.
Our movie was assembled utilizing individual sections (26 µm) of a recorded z-stack, which covered the full thickness of the fin (~10 µm) and which accounted for potential z-drift of the fin during the imaging procedure. In order to retain 3-D information, it is also possible to project z-stacks into single images. Because this may result in blurriness of the image, brightfield deconvolution may be desired. Software, such as Deconvolve or Autoquant X3 could be utilized for this purpose. Alternatively, mathematical algorithms (described in Tadrous33) can be applied for obtaining a point-spread function of high signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Obtaining a high SNR represents one of the major hurdles in brightfield deconvolution. Although this method requires high contrast and thin sample thickness, it would be appropriate for imaging of the tail fin due to its reduced width.
A clear advantage of the presented imaging method is that it is rapidly adaptable to any stereomicroscope equipped with a CCD camera and time-lapse software and offers a low-cost alternative to more expensive confocal imaging systems. While this method does not utilize fluorescence for cell detection, it can be extended for such applications by utilizing an automated system for shutter control and post-imaging deconvolution software 34. This would enable users to further observe wound repair and regeneration processes with single cell or subcellular resolution over longer time periods.
The optical clarity and ease with which embryonic and larval zebrafish can be handled, and the adaptability of this method to any stereomicroscope makes it suitable for teaching basic vertebrate biology in a classroom setting. This method can provide students with a better understanding of the basic biological processes underlying tissue repair and regeneration. Other biological processes that have been captured with a similar method are zebrafish embryonic development 23,34 and cardiac function (unpublished). This method also offers the possibility for monitoring wound repair and regeneration in larvae that have been genetically and pharmacologically manipulated.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
We thank the MDI Biological Laboratory animal core service facility for zebrafish maintenance. Research reported in this publication was supported by Institutional Development Awards (IDeA) from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under grant numbers P20GM104318 (for COBRE) and P20GM103423 (INBRE) and Department of Defense – USAMRAA (W81XWH-BAA-1) grant.
Reagents | |||
Bullseye Agarose (MidSci, Cat. No. BE-GCA500) | |||
Low-melt agarose (Fisher BioReagents, Cat No. BP1360-100) | |||
1-phenyl-2-thiourea [Alfa Aesar, Cat No. L06690] | |||
Instant Ocean Aquarium Salt (Pet store) | |||
Methylene Blue (0.1% solution) (Sigma, Cat. No. M9140) | |||
Tricaine (Ethyl 3-aminobenzoate methanesulfonate, Sigma-Aldrich, Cat. No. E10505) | |||
2-Phenoxyethanol (Sigma-Aldrich, Cat. No. 77699) | |||
Petri Dish 35 x 15 mm (BD Falcon, Cat. No 351008) | |||
Petri Dish 60 x 15 mm (BD Falcon, Cat. No 351007) | |||
Petri Dish 100 x 25 mm (BD Falcon, Cat. No 351013) | |||
5.75 inch boroschillate glass pipets (Fisher) | |||
35 mm Glass Top Glass Bottom Dish (MatTek Corporation, Cat No. D35-20-0-TOP) Glass: 0.085-0.115mm | |||
Superfrost/Plus microscope slides (Fisherbrand, Cat No. 12-550-15) | |||
Glass coverslips (Electron Microscopy Services, Cat No. 72191-75) | |||
Glass coverslips (Warner Instruments, Cat. No. CS-18R15) | |||
Phifer Phiferglass Insect Screen Charcoal – 48" (Home Depot) | |||
DOW CORNING® HIGH VACUUM GREASE | |||
Microloader pipette tips 20 µl (Eppendorf, Cat. No. 930001007) | |||
Fine Scissors – Sharply Angled Up (Fine Science Tools, Cat. No. 14037-10) | |||
3 mL Luer-Lok™ disposable syringe (BD, Cat. No. 309657) | |||
60 mL Luer-Lok™ disposable syringe (BD, Cat. No. 309653) | |||
23-gauge syringe needles (BD, Cat. No. 305145) | |||
Dumont #5 Forceps (Fine Science Tools, Cat. No. 11295-00) | |||
Equipment | |||
LabDoctor Mini Dry Bath (MidSci) | |||
Zeiss Discovery.V12 compound microscope | |||
Zeiss Plan Apo S 3.5X objective | |||
Zeiss AxioCam MRm | |||
Zeiss Axiovision software, Release 4.8.2SP1 (12-2011) |