4.6 Review

Supraphysiological Oxygen Levels in Mammalian Cell Culture: Current State and Future Perspectives

期刊

CELLS
卷 11, 期 19, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cells11193123

关键词

oxygen; physioxia; hyperoxia; ROS; oxidative stress; gene expression; senescence; metabolism; mitochondrial dynamics; drug response

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada Discovery Grant [RGPIN 2017-06785, RGPIN 2020-05274]
  2. Mitacs Globalink Graduate Fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most conventional incubators used in cell culture do not regulate O-2 levels, which leads to a higher oxygen concentration compared to the physiological conditions in human tissues. This review discusses the effects of supraphysiological O-2 levels on various biological processes and emphasizes the importance of maintaining physiological oxygen levels in cell culture to better replicate in vivo-like tissue physiology and pathology and to avoid artifacts in research involving cell culture.
Most conventional incubators used in cell culture do not regulate O-2 levels, making the headspace O-2 concentration similar to 18%. In contrast, most human tissues are exposed to 2-6% O-2 (physioxia) in vivo. Accumulating evidence has shown that such hyperoxic conditions in standard cell culture practices affect a variety of biological processes. In this review, we discuss how supraphysiological O-2 levels affect reactive oxygen species (ROS) metabolism and redox homeostasis, gene expression, replicative lifespan, cellular respiration, and mitochondrial dynamics. Furthermore, we present evidence demonstrating how hyperoxic cell culture conditions fail to recapitulate the physiological and pathological behavior of tissues in vivo, including cases of how O-2 alters the cellular response to drugs, hormones, and toxicants. We conclude that maintaining physioxia in cell culture is imperative in order to better replicate in vivo-like tissue physiology and pathology, and to avoid artifacts in research involving cell culture.

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