This article describes a method for studying cellular metabolism in complex communities of multiple cell types, using a combination of stable isotope tracing, cell sorting to isolate specific cell types, and mass spectrometry.
Mammalian cell types exhibit specialized metabolism, and there is ample evidence that various co-existing cell types engage in metabolic cooperation. Moreover, even cultures of a single cell type may contain cells in distinct metabolic states, such as resting or cycling cells. Methods for measuring metabolic activities of such subpopulations are valuable tools for understanding cellular metabolism. Complex cell populations are most commonly separated using a cell sorter, and subpopulations isolated by this method can be analyzed by metabolomics methods. However, a problem with this approach is that the cell sorting procedure subjects cells to stresses that may distort their metabolism.
To overcome these issues, we reasoned that the mass isotopomer distributions (MIDs) of metabolites from cells cultured with stable isotope-labeled nutrients are likely to be more stable than absolute metabolite concentrations, because MIDs are formed over longer time scales and should be less affected by short-term exposure to cell sorting conditions. Here, we describe a method based on this principle, combining cell sorting with liquid chromatography-high resolution mass spectrometry (LC-HRMS). The procedure involves analyzing three types of samples: (1) metabolite extracts obtained directly from the complex population; (2) extracts of “mock sorted” cells passed through the cell sorter instrument without gating any specific population; and (3) extracts of the actual sorted populations. The mock sorted cells are compared against direct extraction to verify that MIDs are indeed not altered by the cell sorting procedure itself, prior to analyzing the actual sorted populations. We show example results from HeLa cells sorted according to cell cycle phase, revealing changes in nucleotide metabolism.
Higher organisms contain complex communities of distinct cell types that collaborate to bring about more complex functions. For example, tumors contain not only cancerous cells, but also fibroblasts, cells that constitute blood vessels, and often immune cell infiltrates1; blood contains a complex mixture of dozens of immune cell subtypes2; and even cultured cell lines may consist of multiple subpopulations, such as the luminal and basal subtypes of breast cancer cells3. Moreover, distinct cell types that coexist can exhibit metabolic "collaboration". For example, in the brain, astrocytes are thought to convert glucose to lactate, which is then "fed" to neurons that oxidize this substrate4; T lymphocytes are in some contexts dependent on adjacent dendritic cells as a source of cysteine5; and cancer cells may collaborate with associated fibroblasts in tumors6. To understand the metabolic behavior of such systems, it is essential to separate and measure the metabolic activities of the various cell types present.
By far the most widely used method for separating cell types is fluorescence-activated cell sorting. This method is broadly applicable, provided that the cell type or state of interest can be "labeled" using fluorescent antibodies, expression of engineered fluorescent proteins, or other dyes. One option is to initially separate cells types through a cell sorter, re-culture the individual cell types obtained, and then perform metabolism studies of these cultures7. However, this is only feasible if the cell type or phenotype is stable in culture conditions, and cannot capture transient behavior such as cell cycle states, nor the metabolic cooperation in co-cultures. For such cases, metabolism must be measured directly on sorted cells. This is challenging since the cell sorting procedure subjects cells to stresses that may distort their metabolism8, and we are aware of only a few studies taking this approach9,10. In particular, we have found that major metabolites such as amino acids may leak from cells kept in cell sorting buffer, so that measurements of absolute metabolite abundance are no longer reliable11 (although relative comparison between sorted fractions may still be valuable).
To circumvent these issues, we label cells with stable isotopes prior to sorting, and focus on the MIDs in cellular metabolites, rather than metabolite abundances. Since MIDs are formed over longer time scales, they should be less affected by short-term exposure to sorting conditions. We quantify MIDs using full-scan high-resolution mass spectrometry, which is sensitive enough to provide data on hundreds of metabolites starting from around 500,000 sorted cells, requiring about 30-60 min of cell sorting time. A comparison between a "mock sorted" control (cells passed through the cell sorter instrument without gating any specific population) and metabolite extraction directly from the culture dish is made to ensure that the observed MIDs are representative of those in the original culture. Depending on the choice of stable isotope tracers, various metabolic pathways can be studied with this method.
1. Metabolite Extraction
2. Mass Spectrometry Analysis
Note: Here we describe the protocol for analyzing cell extracts on a LC-HRMS system. Any metabolomics methods for analysis of cell extracts can be used. Full scan analysis might be useful for detecting a wide range of metabolites.
3. Data Analysis
As an example, here we describe an experiment investigating the metabolism of HeLa cells sorted according to cell cycle phase. To label a wide range of central metabolites on both carbons and nitrogens, we cultured cells for 48 h using U-13C-glucose and U-13C, 15N-glutamine as tracers. To obtain rich MIDs for the validation experiment, we here chose a mixture of 40% U-13C-Glucose and 70% U-13C,15N2-Glutamine, as intermediate levels of isotopes tend to generate more varied MI patterns14.
For the validation experiment we performed a targeted analysis of 85 metabolites. After quality controls steps to remove poor quality LC-MS peaks, we were able to detect 69 peaks in the direct cell extracts, of which 66 were present in the mock sorted cells (96%). 60 of these appeared to be labeled (isotope enrichment above natural abundance), and in most cases their MIDs were similar between dish extracts and mock sorted cells (Figure 2A). For example, the MID of glutamate (which includes both 13C and 15N MIs) is similar between dish and mock sorted extracts (Figure 2B), indicating that the glutamate MID is reliable also in sorted cell populations. However, some metabolites are clearly affected by the sorting procedure: for example, lactate had less 13C3 in mock sorted cells, for unknown reasons. Such metabolites should be viewed with caution when analyzing data from actual sorted fractions. In mock sorted cells, 91% of the measured MI fraction had a standard deviation less than 1% across biological triplicates, indicating that MIDs were highly reproducible in sorted cells.
We next analyzed HeLa sorted into either G0/G1 or S/G2/M cell cycle stages using the FUCCI Geminin probe12. Because these cell cycle stages last only ~10 h, we here "pulse" labeled cultures for 2 h to achieve different isotope labeling between stages. For example, we noted that cytidine is labeled in both populations, but to a higher enrichment in the S/G2/M stage, consistent with increased de novo synthesis of nucleotides during the S phase (Figure 3). In this case, the MID shows the same pattern in both fractions, suggesting that same synthesis pathway is used, but is more active in the S/G2/M stage. These data show that metabolic differences are readily detectable by this method even between closely related subpopulations.
Figure 1: Experimental design. Workflow for preparation of dish, mock sorted and sorted subpopulation extracts. Dish and mock sorted extracts are used in the validation experiment MIDs of dish and mock sorted extracts are compared to test for possible changes due to sorting. Complex population of cells is sorted based on marker of the cell type of interest and then extracted. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2: Validation of MIDs against direct extractions. Scatter plots of (A)13C and 15N enrichment in dish and mock sorted samples. Each dot represents a replicate. Triplicates are joined with lines. (B) 13C-15N MIDs of glutamate. (C) 13C MIDs of lactate. The error bars are standard deviations of triplicate measurements. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3: Metabolic differences between cell cycle phases in HeLa cells. Cytidine is labeled differently in G1-G0 and S-G2-M cells. (A) Cytidine 13C enrichment in G1-G0 and S-G2-M phases of the cell cycle. Dashed line stands for carbon enrichment from natural mass isotope. (B) Cytidine MIDs shown as array plots in G1-G0 and S-G2-M phases. The error bars are standard deviations of triplicate measurements. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Our method is based on the principle that MIDs in cellular metabolites reflect the "history" of metabolic activities of a cell. This makes it possible to investigate metabolic activities in subpopulation of cells, as they occurred in the complex community of cells, prior to the cell sorting procedure. In contrast, peak areas of metabolites differ markedly between extracts of sorted cells and direct extraction from the culture dish11. In part this is because the different chemical composition alters the signal response in mass spectrometry, a so-called "matrix effect", but we have also shown that amino acids are lost from cells during sorting, while cells are kept in buffer11. This may alter the metabolic state and activities of cells during sorting, but this is in itself irrelevant for our method: provided that MIDs are reasonably close to those observed in direct extraction, the data remains a valid measurement of the metabolic state of each subpopulation in the original, complex culture.
We initially tested a method where cells were sorted directly into extraction solution (methanol) to rapidly quench metabolism. Unfortunately, the resulting extracts were difficult to analyze, as they contained high amounts of salts and possibly other contaminants from the cell sorter sheath fluid, resulting in massive ion suppression on our mass spectrometry system. We therefore settled on the protocol described here, where excess fluid deposited by the cell sorter instrument is washed out prior to extraction.
Our protocol entails sorting in HBSS, a physiological salt solution supplemented with glucose to maintain cell viability. In some ways, it may be preferable to sort cells in the actual culture medium to minimize metabolic stress such as amino acid leakage. However, it is difficult to wash the small pellet of sorted cells, and therefore metabolites present in medium would contaminate the sought MIDs of intracellular metabolites. Whenever 13C-labeled glucose is used as a tracer, identical labeled glucose should be used in the HBSS solution as well.
As seen in Figure 2, many, but not all metabolites, maintain their MIDs after the cell sorting procedure. We do not know why certain metabolites (lactate, for example) are specifically altered. This result emphasizes that it is crucial to verify that MIDs of interest are robust towards the cell sorting procedure by mock sorting. Although it is not possible to directly verify the MID of a sorted subpopulation, MIDs that are unaffected by mock sorting (glutamate, for example) should be unaffected by the actual sorting as well, as the procedure is identical except for the cell selection. This validation step should be carried out whenever a new cell type or culture condition is used. It is important to point out that our method is limited to metabolites for which robust MIDs can be verified in this manner.
We anticipate that the method described here will be useful in a number of applications within cell biology and biomedicine. Examples include metabolic phenotypes of co-cultured cells such as stem cell – feeder layer cultures, neuron-astrocyte models4, subpopulations of blood cells2, and also complex cell populations isolated from animal models.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
The authors would like to thank Dr. Anas Kamleh for valuable help with optimizing mass spectrometry methods, and Annika von Vollenhoven for assistance with cell sorting. This research was supported by the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research (grant no. FFL12-0220) and the Strategic Programme in Cancer Research (IR, RN); the Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation (CEW, HG); and Mary Kay Foundation (JW, MJ).
HBSS | Sigma | H6648 | |
INFLUX (inFlux v7 Sorter) | BD Biosciences | ||
U-13C-Glucose | Cambridge isotopes | 40762-22-9 / GLC-018 | |
U-13C,15N2-Glutamine | Cambridge isotopes | CNLM-1275-H-0.1 | |
Methanol (JT Baker), HPLC grade | VWR | BAKR8402.2500 | |
Ultrafree – MC – VV centrifugal Filters. Durapore PVDF 0.1 µm | Millipore | UFC30VV00 | |
Ultimate 3,000 UHPLC | Thermo Fisher scientific | ||
Q-Exactive Orbitrap Mass spectrometer | Thermo Fisher scientific | ||
Merk-Sequant ZIC HILIC column (150 mm x 4.6 mm, 5 µm) | Merck KGaA | 1.50444.0001 | |
Merk-Sequant ZIC HILIC guard column (20×2.1 mm) | Merck KGaA | ||
Acetonitrile Optima LC-MS, amber glass | Fisher Scientific | A955-212 | |
Milli-Q water | Millipore | Produced with a Milli-Q Gradient system | |
MYRSYRA 99.5% OPTIMA (Formic acid) | Fisher Scientific | 11423423 | |
X100 Screw Vial 1.5ml, 8-425 32×11.6mm,amber, 100 units | Thermo Fisher scientific | 10560053 | |
X100 LOCK SKRUV VITT PTFE PACKNING 8-425 (Screw caps) | Thermo Fisher scientific | 12458636 | |
ProteoMass LTQ/FT-Hybrid ESI Pos. Mode Cal Mix | Sigma-Aldrich | MSCAL5 | Calibration kit |
SNAKESKIN 10K MWCO | Thermo Fisher scientific | 88245 | |
Mathematica v.10 | Wolfram Research |