Comparative study of two high-efficiency methods for purifying spermatogonial stem cells

doi:10.12047/j.cjap.6046.2021.056

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: To compare the advantages and disadvantages of the differential attachment method and immunomagnetic bead method for purification of mouse spermatogonial stem cells (mSSCs). Methods: Ten male C57BL/6 mice aged 12～15 days were selected and sacrificed by cervical dislocation. Testes were collected and the seminiferous tubule single cell suspension was obtained by enzymatic digestion. mSSCs were purified by using the differential attachment method and immunomagnetic bead method respectively. Then a detailed comparison of the two methods in terms of cell number, separation efficiency, and impact on cell proliferation and growth was conducted. Results: Both of the methods could isolate and purify stem cells from single cell suspension of mouse seminiferous tubules. mSSCs showed typical grape cluster-like clones in vitro culture, which could be continuously cultured and proliferated for over 3 months in vitro. The testes of 10 mice could obtain 3×10⁵±0.4×10⁵ mSSCs (n=5) by differential attachment method, cell recovery rate (the number of cells after purification/the number of cells of the single cell suspension of seminiferous tubules) was 1.5%±0.1%; 6×10⁵±0.4×10⁵ mSSCs (n= 5) could be obtained by immunomagnetic bead method. The recovery rate was about 3%±0.1%, and the number of stem cells obtained by the immunomagnetic bead method was higher. The stem cells obtained by the differential attachment method were more pure, because the stem cell colonies were preferentially obtained after 5 days of in vitro culture, while the stem cells obtained by the immunomagnetic bead method needed to be cultured for about 10 days before the obvious cell colonies could be observed, but the two types of purification method had no obvious effect on the long-term growth of cells in vitro. Conclusion: Both methods can get high quality mSSCs, but both methods have their own advantages and disadvantages. The differential attachment method is more economical and practical than the other, it does not require special equipment, but the stem cell number obtained is relatively lower and the time needed is longer.

Key words: seminiferous tubules, spermatogonial stem cells, immunomagnetic bead method, differential attachment method, mouse

CLC Number:

Q2-33

ZHANG Yan, Baiyin-batu, YU Bo-yang, YANG Zheng, YUN Xia, REN Xiang-yu, LIU Tao-di. Comparative study of two high-efficiency methods for purifying spermatogonial stem cells[J]. CJAP, 2021, 37(5): 571-576.

References

[1] Ibtisham F, Honaramooz A. Spermatogonial stem cells for in vitro spermatogenesis and in vitro restoration of fertility [J]. Cells, 2020, 9: 745-775.
[2] Guo JT, Grow EJ, Yi C, et al. Chromatin and single-cell RNA-seq profiling reveal dynamic signaling and metabolic transitions during human spermatogonial stem cell development[J]. Cell Stem Cell, 2017, 21: 533-546.
[3] Takehashi M, Kanatsu-Shinohara M, Miki H, et al. Production of knockout mice by gene targeting in multipotent germkine stem cells[J]. Dev Biol, 2007, 312(1): 344-352.
[4] Miao XY, Zhang X. Production of transgenic mice carryingthanatin gene by intratesticular injection[J]. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 2011, 415 (3): 429-433.
[5] Kanatsu-Shinihara M, Kimiko I, Lee J, et al. Generation of pluripotent stem cells from neonatal mouse testis[J]. Cell, 2004, 119(7): 1001-1012.
[6] Guan K, Nayernia K, Maier LS, et al. Pluripotency of spermatogonial stem cells from adult mouse testis[J]. Nature, 2006, 440(7088): 1199-1203.
[7] Dong LH, Gul M, Hildorf S, et al. Xeno-free propgation of spermatogonial stem cells from infant boys[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2019, 20(21): 5390-5414.
[8] Kanatsu-Shinohara M, Mori Y, Shinihara T. Enrichiment of mouse spermatogonial stem cells based on aldehyde dehydrogenase activity[J]. Biol Reprod, 2013, 89(6): 140-149.
[9] Kanatsu-Shinohara M, Morinoto H, Shinohara T. Enrichment of mouse spermaotogonial stem cells by melanoma cell adhesion molecular expression[J]. Biol Reprod, 2012, 87(6): 139-148.
[10] Kortusuz P, Kose S, Yersal N, et al. Magnetic-based cell isolation technique for the selection of stem cells[J]. Methods Mol Bio, 2018, 1879(1):153-163.
[11] Gassei K, Ehmcke J, Schlatt S. Efficient enrichment of undifferentiated GFR alpha 1+ spermatogonia from immature rat testis by magnetic activated cell sorting[J]. Cell Tissue Res, 2009, 337: 177-183.
[12] Kubota H, Avarbock MR, Brinster RL. Spermatogonial stem cells share some, but not all, phenotypic and functional characteristics with other stem cells[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2003, 100(11): 6487-6492.
[13] 张岩, 罗奋华, 刘林宏, 等. 大鼠精原干细胞的高效纯化方法[J]. 中国细胞生物学学报, 2011, 33(5): 543-547.
[14] 王俊龙, 杨施, 田汝辉, 等. 人精原干细胞分离、培养与鉴定[J]. 中华男科学杂, 2015, 21(3): 208-213.
[15] 张岩. 大鼠精原干细胞的长期培养、鉴定及其特异标记基因表达载体的构建[D]. 内蒙古大学, 2011.
[16] 张岩, 吴应积. 精原干细胞来源的多能干细胞的形成及其应用[J]. 生物医学工程学杂志, 2011, 28 (1): 208-212.
[17] Tian J, Ma K, Pei CB, et al. Relative safety of various spermatogenic stem cell purification methods for application in spermatogenic stem cell transplantation [J], Stem Cell Res Ther, 2019, 10: 382-393.
[18] Kanatsu-Shinohara M, Miki H, Takashi S. Enrichment of mouse spermatogonial stem cells by melanoma cell adhesion molecule expression[J]. Biol Reprod, 2012, 87(6): 1-10.
[19] Kanatsu-Shinohara M, Takehashi M, Takashima S, et al. Homing of mouse spermatogonial stem cells to germline niche depends on beta1-integrin [J]. Cell Stem Cell, 2008, 3(5): 533-542.
[20] Bai Y, Feng M, Liu S, et al. Differential gene expression in mouse spermatogonial stem cells and embryonic stem cells[J]. Int J Mol Med, 2016, 38(2): 423-432.
[21] Shaun G, Brinster R. Isolation of the spermatogonial stem cell-containing fraction from testes[J]. Cold Spring Harb Protoc, 2017, (4): 289-292.