4.6 Article

Quantifying the correlation between spatially defined oxygen gradients and cell fate in an engineered three-dimensional culture model

期刊

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2014.0501

关键词

cell culture; biocompatibility; collagen; tissue engineering

资金

  1. Institute of Making, University College London Summer Studentship
  2. BBSRC David Phillips
  3. BBSRC [BB/F023774/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. EPSRC [EP/I00159X/2, EP/I00159X/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/F023774/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/I00159X/1, EP/I00159X/2] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A challenge in three-dimensional tissue culture remains the lack of quantitative information linking nutrient delivery and cellular distribution. Both in vivo and in vitro, oxygen is delivered by diffusion from its source (blood vessel or the construct margins). The oxygen level at a defined distance from its source depends critically on the balance of diffusion and cellular metabolism. Cells may respond to this oxygen environment through proliferation, death and chemotaxis, resulting in spatially resolved gradients in cellular density. This study extracts novel spatially resolved and simultaneous data on tissue oxygenation, cellular proliferation, viability and chemotaxis in three-dimensional spiralled, cellular collagen constructs. Oxygen concentration gradients drove preferential cellular proliferation rates and viability in the higher oxygen zones and induced chemotaxis along the spiral of the collagen construct; an oxygen gradient of 1.03 mmHg mm(-1) in the spiral direction induced a mean migratory speed of 1015 mu mday(-1). Although this movement was modest, it was effective in balancing the system to a stable cell density distribution, and provided insights into the natural cell mechanism for adapting cell number and activity to a prevailing oxygen regime.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据