Abstract
In vitro cell culture model systems often employ monocultures, despite the fact that cells generally exist in a diverse, heterogeneous microenvironment in vivo. In response, heterogeneous cultures are increasingly being used to study how cell phenotypes interact. However, the ability to accurately identify and characterize distinct phenotypic subpopulations within heterogeneous systems remains a major challenge. Here, we present the use of a computational, image analysis–based approach—comprising automated contour-based cell tracking for feature identification, principal component analysis for feature reduction, and partitioning around medoids for subpopulation characterization—to non-destructively and non-invasively identify functionally distinct cell phenotypic subpopulations from live-cell microscopy image data. Using a heterogeneous model system of endothelial and smooth muscle cells, we demonstrate that this approach can be applied to both mono and co-culture nuclear morphometric and motility data to discern cell phenotypic subpopulations. Morphometric clustering identified minimal difference in mono- versus co-culture, while motility clustering revealed that a portion of endothelial cells and smooth muscle cells adopt increased motility rates in co-culture that are not observed in monoculture. We anticipate that this approach using non-destructive and non-invasive imaging can be applied broadly to heterogeneous cell culture model systems to advance understanding of how heterogeneity alters cell phenotype.

This work presents a computational, image-analysis-based approach—comprising automated contour-based cell tracking for feature identification, principle component analysis for feature reduction, and partitioning around medoids for subpopulation characterization—to non-destructively and non-invasively identify functionally distinct cell phenotypic subpopulations from live-cell microscopy image data.






Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The datasets used in the current study are available by reasonable request from the corresponding author.
References
Casbas-Hernandez, P., J.M. Fleming, and M.A. Troester, Gene expression analysis of in vitro cocultures to study interactions between breast epithelium and stroma. Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology, 2011: p. 12.
Friedl P, Gilmour D (2009) Collective cell migration in morphogenesis, regeneration and cancer. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 10(7):445–457
Duell, B.L., et al., Epithelial cell coculture models for studying infectious diseases: benefits and limitations. Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology, 2011: p. 9.
Xin X et al (2019) 3D cell coculture tumor model: a promising approach for future cancer drug discovery. Process Biochem 78:148–160
Rossi G, Manfrin A, Lutolf MP (2018) Progress and potential in organoid research. Nat Rev Genet 19(11):671–687
Duraiyan J et al (2012) Applications of immunohistochemistry. Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences 4(Suppl 2):S307–S309
de Matos LL et al (2010) Immunohistochemistry as an important tool in biomarkers detection and clinical practice. Biomarker Insights 2010(5):9–20
Giulietti A et al (2001) An overview of real-time quantitative PCR: applications to quantify cytokine gene expression. Methods 25(4):386–401
Bustin SA (2002) Quantification of mRNA using real-time reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR): trends and problems. J Mol Endocrinol 29(1):23–39
Ansari AM et al (2016) Cellular GFP toxicity and immunogenicity: potential confounders in in vivo cell tracking experiments. Stem Cell Rev Rep 12(5):553–559
Nielsen J et al (2019) Prognostic molecular markers in pediatric liver disease - are there any? BBA-Mol Basis Dis 1865(3):577–586
Metze K, Adam R, Florindo JB (2019) The fractal dimension of chromatin - a potential molecular marker for carcinogenesis, tumor progression and prognosis. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 19(4):299–312
Baker, R.M., et al., Automated, contour-based tracking and analysis of cell behaviour over long time scales in environments of varying complexity and cell density. Journal of The Royal Society Interface, 2014. 11(97).
Wang J et al (2017) On-command on/off switching of progenitor cell and cancer cell polarized motility and aligned morphology via a cytocompatible shape memory polymer scaffold. Biomaterials 140:150–161
Wang, J., et al., Shape memory activation can affect cell seeding of shape memory polymer scaffolds designed for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Journal of Materials Science-Materials in Medicine, 2017. 28(10).
Gu H et al (2016) How Escherichia coli lands and forms cell clusters on a surface: a new role of surface topography. Sci Rep 6:29516
Song F et al (2017) How bacteria respond to material stiffness during attachment: a role of Escherichia coil flagellar motility. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 9(27):22176–22184
Brasch ME et al (2019) Nuclear position relative to the Golgi body and nuclear orientation are differentially responsive indicators of cell polarized motility. PLoS One 14(2):e0211408
Passucci G et al (2019) Identifying the mechanism for superdiffusivity in mouse fibroblast motility. PLoS Comput Biol 15(2):e1006732
Benhamou S (2004) How to reliably estimate the tortuosity of an animal’s path: straightness, sinuosity, or fractal dimension? J Theor Biol 229(2):209–220
Codling EA, Plank MJ, Benhamou S (2008) Random walk models in biology. J R Soc Interface 5(25):813–834
Gorelik R, Gautreau A (2014) Quantitative and unbiased analysis of directional persistence in cell migration. Nat Protoc 9(8):1931–1943
Šolc K (1971) Shape of a random-flight chain. J Chem Phys 55(1):335–344
Peres-Neto PR, Jackson DA, Somers KM (2005) How many principal components? stopping rules for determining the number of non-trivial axes revisited. Comput Stat Data Anal 49(4):974–997
Lê S, Josse J, Husson F (2008) FactoMineR: an R package for multivariate analysis. J Stat Softw 1(1):2008
Rousseeuw PJ (1987) Silhouettes: a graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. J Comput Appl Math 20(C):53–65
Hennig C, Liao TF (2013) How to find an appropriate clustering for mixed-type variables with application to socio-economic stratification. J Roy Stat Soc: Ser C (Appl Stat) 62(3):309–369
Elleithy, K. and T. Sobh, Innovations and advances in computer, information, systems sciences, and engineering. Vol. 152. 2012: Springer Science & Business Media.
Forster B et al (2004) Complex wavelets for extended depth-of-field: a new method for the fusion of multichannel microscopy images. Microsc Res Tech 65(1–2):33–42
Wang HQ et al (2007) Coculture with endothelial cells enhances vascular smooth muscle cell adhesion and spreading via activation of beta(1)-integrin and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt. Eur J Cell Biol 86(1):51–62
Williams C, Wick TM (2005) Endothelial cell-smooth muscle cell co-culture in a perfusion bioreactor system. Ann Biomed Eng 33(7):920–928
Jackson DA (1993) Stopping rules in principal components analysis: a comparison of heuristical and statistical approaches. Ecology 74(8):2204–2214
Zwick WR, Velicer WF (1986) Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychol Bull 99(3):432–442
Tibshirani R, Walther G, Hastie T (2001) Estimating the number of clusters in a data set via the gap statistic. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol 63(2):411–423
Quinn GP, Keough MJ (2002) Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge U.K
Samet H (1984) The quadtree and related hierarchical data structures. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 16(2):187–260
Kohonen T (2013) Essentials of the self-organizing map. Neural Netw 37:52–65
Ivanenkov YA et al (2009) Computational mapping tools for drug discovery. Drug Discovery Today 14(15–16):767–775
Schneider P, Tanrikulu Y, Schneider G (2009) Self-organizing maps in drug discovery: compound library design, scaffold-hopping, repurposing. Curr Med Chem 16(3):258–266
Beckonert O et al (2003) Visualizing metabolic changes in breast-cancer tissue using H-1-NMR spectroscopy and self-organizing maps. NMR Biomed 16(1):1–11
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to Dr. M. Lisa Manning and Giuseppe Passucci for guidance on clustering methodologies and techniques. Additional thanks to Dr. Eric Finkelstein for providing initial cell sources and guidance on endothelial and smooth muscle cell culture.
Funding
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under a collaborative award to J.H.H. (CMMI-1334611) and supported by an IGERT fellowship under NSF-DGE 1068780 to M.E.B. Additional undergraduate research funding from the Ronald E. McNair Program, the Renée Crown University Honors Program, Donofrio Scholars Program, and LSAMP program was provided to A.N.P to sponsor completion of this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
MEB, ANP, and JHH conceived of the final concept. MEB and ANP designed and executed cell experiments. Preliminary computational methodology was optimized by ANP. Final computational methodology and results executed and isolated by MEB. MEB, ANP, and JHH wrote, edited, and approved of the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Brasch, M.E., Peña, A.N. & Henderson, J.H. Image-based cell subpopulation identification through automated cell tracking, principal component analysis, and partitioning around medoids clustering. Med Biol Eng Comput 59, 1851–1864 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-021-02418-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-021-02418-7