Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Choosing an Appropriate Modelling Framework for Analysing Multispecies Co-culture Cell Biology Experiments

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In vitro cell biology assays play a crucial role in informing our understanding of the migratory, proliferative and invasive properties of many cell types in different biological contexts. While mono-culture assays involve the study of a population of cells composed of a single cell type, co-culture assays study a population of cells composed of multiple cell types (or subpopulations of cells). Such co-culture assays can provide more realistic insights into many biological processes including tissue repair, tissue regeneration and malignant spreading. Typically, system parameters, such as motility and proliferation rates, are estimated by calibrating a mathematical or computational model to the observed experimental data. However, parameter estimates can be highly sensitive to the choice of model and modelling framework. This observation motivates us to consider the fundamental question of how we can best choose a model to facilitate accurate parameter estimation for a particular assay. In this work we describe three mathematical models of mono-culture and co-culture assays that include different levels of spatial detail. We study various spatial summary statistics to explore if they can be used to distinguish between the suitability of each model over a range of parameter space. Our results for mono-culture experiments are promising, in that we suggest two spatial statistics that can be used to direct model choice. However, co-culture experiments are far more challenging: we show that these same spatial statistics which provide useful insight into mono-culture systems are insufficient for co-culture systems. Therefore, we conclude that great care ought to be exercised when estimating the parameters of co-culture assays.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baker RE, Simpson MJ (2010) Correcting mean-field approximations for birth-death-movement processes. Phys Rev E 82:041905

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Binder BJ, Landman KA (2011) Quantifying evenly distributed states in exclusion and nonexclusion processes. Physical Review E 83:041914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolker BM, Pacala SW (1997) Using moment equations to understand stochastically driven spatial pattern formation in ecological systems. Theor Pop Biol 52:179–197

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bolker BM, Pacala SW (1999) Spatial moment equations for plant competition: understanding spatial strategies and the advantages of short dispersal. Am Nat 153:575–602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai AQ, Landman KA, Hughes BD (2007) Multi-scale modeling of a wound-healing cell migration assay. J Theor Biol 245:576–594

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Chapra SC, Canale RP (1998) Numerical methods for engineers. McGraw Hill, Singapore

    Google Scholar 

  • Codling EA, Plank MJ, Benhamou S (2008) Random walk models in biology. J R Soc Interface 5:813–834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deroulers C, Aubert M, Badoual M, Grammaticos B (2009) Modeling tumor cell migration: From microscopic to macroscopic models. Phys Rev E 79:031917

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Dieckmann U, Law R (1999) Relaxation projections and the method of moments. In: The geometry of ecological interactions: simplifying spatial complexity, simplifying spatial complexity. Cambridge University Press

  • Diggle PJ (1983) Statistical analysis of spatial and spatio-temporal point patterns. CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Filipe JAN (1999) Hybrid closure approximation to epidemic models. Phys A 266:238–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filipe JAN, Maule MM (2003) Analytical methods for predicting the behaviour of population models with general spatial interactions. Math Biosci 183:15–35

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie DT (1977) Exact stochastic simulation of coupled chemical reactions. J Phys Chem 81:2340–2631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes BD (1995) Random walks and random environments, vol 1. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer N, Walzl A, Unger C, Rosner M, Krupitza G, Henstschläger M, Dolznig H (2013) In vitro cell migration and invasion assays. Mutat Res-Rev Mutat 752:10–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Law R, Murrell DJ, Dieckmann U (2003) Population growth in space and time: spatial logistic equations. Ecology 84:252–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liggett TM (1999) Stochastic interacting systems: contact voter and exclusion processes. Springer, Berlin

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Markham DC, Simpson MJ, Baker RE (2013a) Simplified method for including spatial correlations in mean-field approximations. Phys Rev E 87:062702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markham DC, Simpson MJ, Maini PK, Gaffney E, Baker RE (2013b) Incorporating spatial correlations into multispecies mean-field models. Phys Rev E 88:052713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murrell DJ, Dieskman U, Law R (2004) On moment closures for population dynamics in continuous space. J Theor Biol 229:421–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phelps JH, Tucker CL III (2006) Lagrangian particle calculations of distributive mixing: limitations and applications. Chem Eng Sci 61:6826–6836

  • Press WH, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT, Flannery BP (2007) Numerical recipes: the art of scientific computing. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  • Raghib M, Hill NA, Dieckmann U (2011) A multi scale maximum entropy closure for locally regulated space-time point process models of population dynamics. J Math Bio 62:605–653

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sengers BG, Please CP, Oreffo ROC (2007) Experimental characterization and computational modelling of two-dimensional cell spreading for skeletal regeneration. J Roy Soc Interface 4:1107–1117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharkey KJ, Fernandez C, Morgan KL, Peeler E, Thrush M, Turnbull JF, Bowers RG (2006) Pairlevelapproximations to the spatio-temporal dynamics of epidemics on asymmetric contact networks. J MathBiol 53, 61–85

  • Sherratt JA, Murray JD (1990) Models of epidermal wound healing. Proc R Soc Lond B 241:29–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson MJ, Landman KA, Hughes BD (2009) Multi-species simple exclusion processes. Phys A 388:399–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson MJ, Baker RE (2011) Corrected mean-field models for spatially dependent advection-diffusion-reaction phenomena. Phys Rev E 83:051922

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson MJ, Binder BJ, Haridas P, Wood BK, Treloar KK, McElwain DLS, Baker RE (2013) Experimental and modelling investigation of monolayer development with clustering. Bull Math Biol 75:871–889

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson MJ, Sharp JA, Baker RE (2014a) Distinguishing between mean-field, moment dynamics and stochastic descriptions of birth-death-movement processes. Phys A 395:236–246

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson MJ, Haridas P, McElwain DLS (2014b) Do pioneer cells exist? PLoS ONE 9(1):e85488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer A (2004) Maximum entropy formulation of the Kirkwood superposition approximation. J Chem Phys 121:3657–3666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson KR, Bridge C, Murray JD, Alvord EC Jr (2003) Virtual and real brain tumors: using mathematical modeling to quantify glioma growth and invasion. J Neurol Sci 216:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todaro GJ, Green H (1963) Quantitative studies of the growth of mouse embryo cells in culture and their development into established lines. J Cell Biol 17:299–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treloar KK, Simpson MJ, Binder BJ, McElwain DLS, Baker RE (2014) Assessing the role of spatial correlations during collective cell spreading. Sci Rep 4:5713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tremel A, Cai A, Tirtaatmadja N, Hughes BD, Stevens GW, Landman KA, O’Connor AJ (2009) Cell migration and proliferation during monolayer formation and wound healing. Chem Eng Sci 64:247–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kilsdonk JWJ, Bergers M, Van Kempen LCLT, Schalkwijk J, Swart GWM (2010) Keratinocytes drive melanoma invasion in a reconstructed skin model. Melanoma Res 20:372–380

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Z, Wang Y, Farhangfar F, Zimmer M, Zhang Y (2012) Enhanced keratinocyte proliferation and migration in co-culture with fibroblasts. PLoS ONE 7:e40951

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xie Y, Rizzi SC, Dawson R, Lynam E, Richards S, Leavesley DI, Upton Z (2010) Development of a three-dimensional human skin equivalent wound model for investigating novel wound healing therapies. Tisssue Eng Part C 16:1111–1123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zheng C, Bennett GD (2002) Applied contaminant transport modeling. Wiley-Blackwell, London

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We appreciate experimental support from Parvathi Haridas. This research is supported by the Australian Research Council (FT130100148) and the 2011 International Exchange Scheme funded by the Royal Society.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wolfson Centre for Mathematical Biology, Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK

    Deborah C. Markham & Ruth E. Baker

  2. Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Matthew J. Simpson

  3. Tissue Repair and Regeneration Program, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, QUT, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Matthew J. Simpson

Authors
  1. Deborah C. Markham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthew J. Simpson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ruth E. Baker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ruth E. Baker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Markham, D.C., Simpson, M.J. & Baker, R.E. Choosing an Appropriate Modelling Framework for Analysing Multispecies Co-culture Cell Biology Experiments. Bull Math Biol 77, 713–734 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-014-0050-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-014-0050-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation