No abstract

Using high resolution focused ion beam scanning electron microscopy (FIB-SEM) we study the details of cell-nanostructure interactions using serial block face imaging. 3T3 Fibroblast cellular monolayers are cultured on flat glass as a control surface and on two types of nanostructured scaffold substrates made from silicon black (Nanograss) with low- and high nanowire density. After culturing for 72 hours the cells were fixed, heavy metal stained, embedded in resin, and processed with FIB-SEM block face imaging without removing the substrate. The sample preparation procedure, image acquisition and image post-processing were specifically optimised for cellular monolayers cultured on nanostructured substrates. Cells display a wide range of interactions with the nanostructures depending on the surface morphology, but also greatly varying from one cell to another on the same substrate, illustrating a wide phenotypic variability. Depending on the substrate and cell, we observe that cells could for instance: break the nanowires and engulf them, flatten the nanowires or simply reside on top of them. Given the complexity of interactions, we have categorised our observations and created an overview map. The results demonstrate that detailed nanoscale resolution images are required to begin understanding the wide variety of individual cells’ interactions with a structured substrate. The map will provide a framework for light microscopy studies of such interactions indicating what modes of interactions must be considered.

Knowledge of cells' interactions with nanostructured materials is fundamental for bio-nanotechnology. We present results for how individual mouse fibroblasts from cell line NIH3T3 respond to highly spiked surfaces of silicon black that were fabricated by maskless reactive ion etching (RIE). We did standard measurements of cell viability, proliferation, and morphology on various surfaces. We also analyzed the motility of cells on the same surfaces, as recorded in time lapse movies of sparsely populated cell cultures. We find that motility and morphology vary strongly with nano-patterns, while viability and proliferation show little dependence on substrate type. We conclude that motility analysis can show a wide range of cell responses e.g. over a factor of two in cell speed to different nano-topographies, where standard assays, such as viability or proliferation, in the tested cases show much less variation of the order 10-20%.

No abstract