» Articles » PMID: 24357035

Comparative Investigation of the Use of Various Commercial Microcarriers As a Substrate for Culturing Mammalian Cells

Overview
Publisher Springer
Specialties Biology
Cell Biology
Date 2013 Dec 21
PMID 24357035
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Microcarriers provide large adhesion area allowing high cell densities in bioreactor systems. This study focused on the investigation of cell adhesion and cell growth characteristics of both anchorage-dependent CHO-K1 and anchorage-independent Ag8 myeloma cell lines cultivated on four different microcarriers (Biosilon®, Microhex®, Cytodex 3®, Cytoline 2®) by considering the cell kinetics and physiological data. Experiments were performed in both static and agitated cell culture systems by using 24-well tissue culture plates and then 50-ml spinner flasks. In agitated cultures, the highest specific growth rates (0.026 h for CHO-K1 and 0.061 h for Ag8 cell line) were obtained with Cytodex 3® and Cytoline 2® microcarriers for CHO-K1 and Ag8 cell line, respectively. Metabolic characteristics showed some variation among the cultures with the four microcarriers. The most significant being the higher production of lactate with microcarriers with CHO-K1 cells relative to the Ag8 cells. SEM analyses revealed the differences in the morphology of the cells along with microcarriers. On Cytodex 3® and Cytoline 2®, CHO-K1 cells attached to the substratum through long, slender filopodia, whereas the cells showed a flat morphology by covering the substratum on the Biosilon® and Microhex®. Ag8 cells maintained their spherical shapes throughout the culture for all types of microcarriers. In an attempt to scale-up, productions were carried out in 50-ml spinner flasks. Cytodex 3® (for CHO-K1 cells) and Cytoline 2® (for Ag8 cells) were evaluated. The results demonstrate that high yield of biomass could be achieved through the immobilization of the cells in each culture system. And cell cultures on microcarriers, especially on Cytodex 3® and Cytoline 2®, represented a good potential as microcarriers for larger scale cultures of CHO-K1 and Ag8, respectively. Moreover, owing to the fact that the cell lines and culture media are specific, outcomes will be applicable for other clones derived from the same host cell lines.

Citing Articles

3D bioprinting for orthopaedic applications: Current advances, challenges and regulatory considerations.

Stanco D, Urban P, Tirendi S, Ciardelli G, Barrero J Bioprinting. 2021; 20:None.

PMID: 34853818 PMC: 8609155. DOI: 10.1016/j.bprint.2020.e00103.


The Role of the Microenvironment in Controlling the Fate of Bioprinted Stem Cells.

West-Livingston L, Park J, Lee S, Atala A, Yoo J Chem Rev. 2020; 120(19):11056-11092.

PMID: 32558555 PMC: 7676498. DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00126.


The use of Toxoplasma gondii tachyzoites produced in HeLa cells adhered to Cytodex 1 microcarriers as antigen in serological assays: an application of microcarrier technology.

Saglam Metiner P, Can H, Ayyildiz Tamis D, Karakavuk M, Kimiz Gebologlu I, Iz S Cytotechnology. 2019; 71(1):91-105.

PMID: 30607647 PMC: 6368493. DOI: 10.1007/s10616-018-0269-6.


Three-Dimensional Bioprinting of Cartilage by the Use of Stem Cells: A Strategy to Improve Regeneration.

Roseti L, Cavallo C, Desando G, Parisi V, Petretta M, Bartolotti I Materials (Basel). 2018; 11(9).

PMID: 30227656 PMC: 6164915. DOI: 10.3390/ma11091749.


Bioprinting and Differentiation of Stem Cells.

Irvine S, Venkatraman S Molecules. 2016; 21(9).

PMID: 27617991 PMC: 6273261. DOI: 10.3390/molecules21091188.

References
1.
Nilsang S, Nehru V, Plieva F, Nandakumar K, Rakshit S, Holmdahl R . Three-dimensional culture for monoclonal antibody production by hybridoma cells immobilized in macroporous gel particles. Biotechnol Prog. 2009; 24(5):1122-31. DOI: 10.1002/btpr.28. View

2.
Suzuki E, Ollis D . Enhanced antibody production at slowed growth rates: experimental demonstration and a simple structured model. Biotechnol Prog. 1990; 6(3):231-6. DOI: 10.1021/bp00003a013. View

3.
Landauer K, Durrschmid M, KLUG H, Wiederkum S, Bluml G, Doblhoff-Dier O . Detachment factors for enhanced carrier to carrier transfer of CHO cell lines on macroporous microcarriers. Cytotechnology. 2008; 39(1):37-45. PMC: 3449803. DOI: 10.1023/A:1022455525323. View

4.
Chun B, Chung S . Attachment characteristics of normal human cells and virus-infected cells on microcarriers. Cytotechnology. 2008; 37(1):1-12. PMC: 3449971. DOI: 10.1023/A:1016196220750. View

5.
Kong D, Chen M, Gentz R, Zhang J . Cell growth and protein formation on various microcarriers. Cytotechnology. 2012; 29(2):151-8. PMC: 3449910. DOI: 10.1023/A:1008053421462. View