Cell and Tissue Biology

, 1:115 | Cite as

Karyotypic variability in rat kangaroo cell lines cultivated on fibronectin-coated surface

  • G. G. Poljanskaya
  • T. S. Goryachaya
  • G. P. Pinaev
Article
  • 47 Downloads

Abstract

Numerical and structural karyotypic variability was investigated in the NBL-3-17 and NBL-3-11 “markerless” rat kangaroo kidney cell lines cultivated on a fibronectin-coated surface. For the NBL-3-17 cell line grown on a fibronectin-coated surface for periods of 1, 2, 4 and 8 days, the chromosome number distribution changed. These changes involved a significant decrease in the frequency of cells with the modal chromosome number and an increase in the frequency of cells with a lower chromosome number. Many new additional structural variants of the karyotype (SVK) appeared. The observed alterations seem to be due to the predominant adhesion of cells with a lower chromosome number, disturbances of the mitotic apparatus and selection for SVK adapted to the changes in culture conditions. Detachment of cells from the fibronectin-coated surface followed by 5 days cultivation on a hydrophilic surface restored the control cell distribution. For the NBL-3-11 cell line cultured on the fibronectin-coated surface for 1, 2, 4 and 8 days, the numerical karyotypic variability did not change compared to control variants. For the NBL-3-17 cell line grown on a fibronectin-coated surface for 1, 2, 4 and 8 days, the frequency of chromosomal aberrations also did not change relatively to the control. In the NBL-3-11 cell line, the frequency of chromosomal aberrations under the same conditions significantly increased, mainly due to chromosome and chromatid breaks and dicentrics (telomeric associations). The differences in the numerical and structural karyotypic variability between NBL-3-17 (hypotriploid) and NBL-3-11 (hypodiploid) cell lines cultivated on fibronectin are discussed. It is assumed that the observed differences in the karyotypic variability between these cell lines were determined by the specific karyotypic structure of the NBL-3-11 cell line and the altered gene expression of the NBL-3-17 hypotriploid cell line caused by increased doses of certain functioning genes.

Key words

Karyotypic variability cell line extracellular matrix proteins fibronectin structural variant of the karyotype chromosomal aberrations 

References

  1. Ahmed, N., Riley, C., Rice, G., and Quinn, M., role of integrin receptors for fibronectin, collagen and laminin in the regulation of ovarian carcinoma functions in response to a matrix microenvironment, Clin. Exp. Metastasis, 2005, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 391–402.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amadori, M. and Berneri, C., Genotypic and phenotypic changes of BHK-21 cells grown in suspension cultures, Cytotechnology, 1993, vol. 11,Suppl. 1, pp. 106–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amit, M., Shariki, C., Margulets, V., and Itskovitz-Eldor, J., Feeder and serum free culture of human embryonic stem cells, Biol. Reprod., 2004, vol. 70, pp. 837–845.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Are, A., Pinaev, G., Burova, E., and Lindberg, U., Attachment of A431 cells on immobilized antibodies to the EgF receptor promotes cell spreading and reorganization of the microfilament system, Cell Motility and Cytoskelet., 2001, vol. 48, pp. 24–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Are, A.F., Pospelova, T.V., and Pinaev, G.P., The peculiarities of actin cytoskeleton structure and its rearrangements under the influence of extracellular matrix proteins in normal, immortalized and transformed rat fibroblasts, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1999, vol. 41, pp. 707–715.Google Scholar
  6. Basson, M.D., Turowski, G., and Emenaker N.J., Regulation of human (Caco-2) intestinal epithelial cell differentiation by exstracellular matrix proteins, Exp. Cell Res., 1996, vol. 225, pp. 301–305.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Belkin, V.M., Kukharenko, V.I., Volodarskaia, S.M., Grinberg, K.N., and Mazurov V.I., Changes in fibronectin biosynthesis in human embryonal fibroblasts with trisomy for chromosomes 7 and 9, Vopr. Med. Khim. (Russian), 1985, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 125–130.Google Scholar
  8. Blake, D.A., Yu, H., Young, D.L., and Cardwell D.R., Matrix stimulates the proliferation of human corneal endothelial cells in culture, Invest Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., 1997, vol. 38, pp. 1119–1129.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Cherepanova, O.A., Kalmykova, N.V., Voronkina, I.V., Are A.F., Gorelik, Yu.V., and Pinaev G.P., Different characters of interaction of normal and transformed human keratinocytes with laminin isoforms, Tsitologiya (Russian), 2002, vol. 44, pp. 151–158.Google Scholar
  10. Cowan, C.A., Klimanskaya, I., McMahon, J., Atienza, J., Witmyer, J., Zucker, J.P., Wang, S., Morton, C.C., McMahon, A.P., Powers, D., and Melton, D.A., Derivation of embryonic stem-cell lines from human blastocysts, New Engl. J. Med., 2004, vol. 350, pp. 1353–1356.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crepieux, P., Kwon, H., Leclerc, N., Spencer, W., Richard, S., Lin, R., and Hiscott J., IkBα physically interacts with a cytoskeleton-associated protein through its signal response domain, Mol. Cell Biol., 1997, vol. 17, pp. 7375–7385.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Domnina, L.V. and Lyubimov, A.V., Isolation and characterization of the extracellular matrix from cultured cells, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1988, vol. 30, pp. 299–303.Google Scholar
  13. Draper, J.S., Smith, K., Gokhale, P., Moore, H.D., Maltby, E., Johnson, J., Meisner, L., Zwaka, T.P., Thomson, J.A., and Andrews, P.W., Recurrement gain of chromosomes 17q and 12 in cultured human embryonic stem cells, Nat. Biotechnol., 2004, vol. 22, pp. 53–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Filatov, M.V., Kotlovanova, S.I., Stepanov, S.I., Tretyakov, A.N., Strel’tsov, P.G., and Drobchenko, E.D., Reproduced instability of chromosomes of established Chinese hamster cell line as revealed by flow cytometry, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1988, vol. 30, pp. 999–1007.Google Scholar
  15. Freeman, M.R., Song, Y., Carson, D.D., Guthrie, P.D., and Chung, L.W., Extracellular matrix and androgen receptor expression associated with spontaneous transformation of rat prostate fibroblasts, Cancer Res., 1991, vol. 51, no. 7, pp. 1910–1916.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Fukumoto, S., and Yamada, Y., Review: extracellular matrix regulates tooth morphogenesis, Connect Tissue Res., 2005, vol. 46, nos. 4–5, pp. 220–226.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Graf, J., Ogle, R.C., Robey, F.A., Sasaki, M., Martin, G.R., Yamada, Y., and Kleinma, H.K., A pentapeptide from the laminin B1 chain mediates cell adhesion and binds the 67 000 laminin receptor, Biochemistry, 1987, vol. 26, pp. 6896–6900.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Imreh, M.P., Gertow, K., Cederwall, J., Unger, C., Holmberg, K., Szoke, K., Csoregh, L., Fried, G., Dilber, S., Blennow, E., and Ahrlund-Richter, L., In vitro culture conditions favoring selection of chromosomal abnormalities in human ES cells, J. Cell. Biochemistry, 2006, vol. 99, pp. 508–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kato, K., Shiga, K., Yamaguchi, K., Hata, K., Kobayashi, T., Miyazaki, K., Saijo, S., and Miyagi, T., Plasma-membrane-associated sialidase (NEU3) differentially regulates integrin mediated cell proliferation through laminin-and fibronectin-derived signaling, Biochem. J., 2006, vol. 394,pt. 3, pp. 647–656.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Klimanskaya, I., Chung, Y., Meisner, L., Johnson, J., West, M.D., and Lanza, R., Human embryonic stem cells derived without feeder cells, Lancet, 2005, vol. 365, no. 9471, pp. 1636–1641.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Koenig, A., Mueller, C., Hasel, C., Adler, G., and Menke, A., Collagen Type 1 induces disruption of E-Cadherin-mediated cell-cell contacts and promotes proliferation of pancreatic carcinoma cells, Cancer Res., 2006, vol. 66, no. 9, pp. 4662–4671.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Levan, G. Contributions to the chromosomal characterization of the PTK1, rat-kangaroo cell line, Hereditas, 1970, vol. 64, pp. 85–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Litvinchuk, L.F., Mamaeva, S.E., Kovtunovich, N.G., and Pinaev G.P., Karyotype characteristics of constant cell lines I. Karyotype variability of M-HeLa cells under static and roller cultivation technique, Tsitologiya (Russian) 1986, vol. 28, pp. 56–61.Google Scholar
  24. Mamaeva, S.E., Regularities cell karyotypic evolution in culture, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1996, vol. 38, pp. 787–814.Google Scholar
  25. Mamaeva, S.E., Litvinchuk, L.F., and Pinaev, G.P., Karyotype characteristics of constant cell lines II. Variability and chromosome content balance of M-HeLa cells, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1986, vol. 28, pp. 193–203.Google Scholar
  26. McKusick, V., The anatomy of the human genome, J. Hered., 1980, vol. 71, pp. 370–391.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Mostafavi-Pour, Z., Askari, J.A., Parkinson, S.J., Parker, P.J., Ng, T.T.C., and Humphries, M.J., Integrin-specific signaling pathways controlling focal adhesion formation and cell migration, J. Cell Biol., 2003, vol. 161, pp. 155–167.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nielsen, K., The chromosomes of an in vitro derivative of an Ehrlich ascites tumor of the mouse during its adaptation from monolayer to suspension culture, Hereditas, 1972, vol. 70, pp. 217–224.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ocalan, M., Goodman, S.L., Kuhl, U., Hauschka, S.D., and von der Mark, K., Laminin alters cell shape and stimulates motility and proliferation of murine skeletal myoblasts, Dev. Biol. Jap., 1988, vol. 125, pp. 158–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ohno, S., Evolution by gene duplication, Moscow: Mir, 1973, p. 227.Google Scholar
  31. Paranko, J., Pelliniemi, L.J., Vaheri, A., Foidart, J.M., and Lakkala-Paranko, T., Morphogenesis and fibronectin in sexual differentiation of rat embryonic gonads, Differentiation, 1983, vol. 23,Suppl., pp. 72–81.Google Scholar
  32. Petoukhova, O.A., Turoverova, L.V., Kropacheva, I.V., and Pinaev G.P., Morphological peculiarities of epidermoid carcinoma A431 cells spread on immobilized ligands, Tsitologiya (Russian), 2004, vol. 46, pp. 5–15.Google Scholar
  33. Poljanskaya, G.G., Karyological characteristics of cell sublines derived from Kangaroo rat kidney and Indian muntjac skin fibroblasts, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1988, vol. 30, pp. 732–738.Google Scholar
  34. Poljanskaya, G.G., Regularities of karotypic variability in cell cultures in long-term term cultivation under various conditions, Uspechi Sovrem. Biol., 2000, vol. 120, pp. 529–539.Google Scholar
  35. Poljanskaya, G.G., Abramyan, D.S., and Glebov, O.K., The karyotypic structure of clonal population of Chinese hamster cells during a prolonged cultivation, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1981, vol. 23, pp. 818–830.Google Scholar
  36. Poljanskaya, G.G., and Dyakonova, M.Yu., The influence of cultivation on the karyotypic structure of a subline of Rat kangaroo kidney, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1988, vol. 30, pp. 1355–1363.Google Scholar
  37. Poljanskaya, G.G., Efremova, T.N., and Ender, N.A., The influence of mycoplasmal contamination of the human uterine leiomyosarcoma cell line SK-UT-1B on karyotypic structure, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1998, vol. 40, pp. 23–30.Google Scholar
  38. Poljanskaya, G.G., and Efremova, T.N., Effects of mycoplasmal contamination and cyprofloxacin-induced decontamination on the karyotypic structure of the Chinese hamster lung cell line V-79, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1993, vol. 35, pp. 71–78.Google Scholar
  39. Poljanskaya, G.G., and Efremova, T.N., The influence of mycoplasmal contamination and decontamination with ciprofloxacin on karyotypic structure of cell line of Indian muntjac skin fibroblasts, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1994, vol. 36, pp. 393–400.Google Scholar
  40. Poljanskaya, G.G. and Efremova, T.N., The influence of mycoplasmal contamination of cultures of two Rat kangaroo kidney cell sublines on their karyotypic structure, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1996, vol. 38, pp. 75–84.Google Scholar
  41. Poljanskaya, G.G. and Efremova, T.N., The influence of mycoplasmal contamination of the human epithelioid cervix carcinoma cell line M-HeLa clone 11 on karyotypic variability, Tsitologiya (Russian), 2000, vol. 42, pp. 794–801.Google Scholar
  42. Poljanskaya, G.G., Goryachaya, T.S., Michailova, N.A., and Pinaev, G.P., The influence of laminin on numerical karyotypic variability of two rat kangaroo kidney cell lines, Tsitologiya (Russian), 2003a, vol. 45, pp. 1038–1047.Google Scholar
  43. Poljanskaya, G.G., Goryachaya, T.S., and Pinaev, G.P., The influence of laminin on karyotypic variability of Indian muntjac skin fibroblasts cell line, Tsitologiya (Russian), 2002, vol. 44, pp. 491–498.Google Scholar
  44. Poljanskaya, G.G., Goryachaya, T.S., and Pinaev G.P., The influence of laminin on structural karyotypic variability of Rat kangaroo kidney cell lines, Tsitologiya (Russian), 2003b, vol. 45, pp. 1048–1053.Google Scholar
  45. Poljanskaya, G.G., Goryachaya, T.S., and Pinaev, G.P., The influence of immobilized fibronectin on karyotypic variability of the Indian muntjac skin fibroblasts cell subline, Tsitologiya (Russian), 2005, vol. 47, pp. 925–932.Google Scholar
  46. Poljanskaya, G.G. and Sizova, L.S., A study of genotoxic influence of ciprofloxacin on cultivated cells of Rat kangaroo kidney and Indian muntjac skin fibroblasts, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1996, vol. 38, pp. 958–973.Google Scholar
  47. Poljanskaya, G.G. and Vakhtin, Yu.B., The karyotypic structure of cell populations in vitro as integral system, Tsitologiya (Russian), 2003, vol. 45, pp. 115–131.Google Scholar
  48. Rosette, C. and Karin, M., Cytoskeletal control of gene expression: depolymerization of microtubules activates NF-kappa B, J. Cell Biol., 1995, vol. 128, pp. 1111–1119.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sablina, A.A., Chumakov, P.M., Levine, A.J., and Kopnin, B.P., p53 activation in response to microtubule disruption is mediated by integrin-Erk signaling, Oncogene, 2001, vol. 20, pp. 899–909.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Semenova, E.G., Khomenko, A.V., and Mamaeva, S. E., Fluctuations in the cell cycle span and karyotype of murine L cells depending on the mode of cultivation, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1984, vol. 26, pp. 1156–1160.Google Scholar
  51. Tzareva, A.A., Isaenko, A.A., Urmanova, M.A., Yurchenko, M.D., Balzovskaya, E.G., and Rodionova, M.O., Investigation of the Vero cell karyotype cultured in a monolayer by static and roll-bottle methods, Tsitoloigya (Russian), 1990, vol. 32, pp. 741–747.Google Scholar
  52. Wang, J. and Milner R., Fibronectin promotes brain capillary endothelial cell survival and proliferation through alpha5beta1 and alphavbeta3 integrins via MAP kinase signaling, J. Neurochem., 2006, vol. 96, no. 1, pp. 148–159.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Waterman-Storer, C.M., Salmon, W.C., and Salmon E.D., Feedback interactions between cell-cell adherens junctions and cytoskeletal dynamics in newt lung epithelial cells, Mol. Biol. Cell, 2000, vol. 11, pp. 2471–2483.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Xiao, L., Yuan, X., and Sharkis J., Activin A maintains self-renewal and regulates FGF, Wnt and BMP pathways in human embryonic stem cells, Stem Cells, 2006, vol. 24, pp. 1476–1486.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Xu, C., Inokuma, M.S., Denham, J., Golds, K., Kundu, P., Gold, J.D., and Carpenter, M.K., Feeder-free growth of undifferentiated human embryonic stem cells, Nature Biotechnology, 2001, vol. 19, pp. 971–974.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zakharov, A.F., Kakpakova, E.S., and Egolina, N.A., Relationships between numerical and structural variability of the karyotype in cultured Chinese hamster cells, Tsitologiya (Russian), 1966, vol. 8, pp. 193–201.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. G. Poljanskaya
    • 1
  • T. S. Goryachaya
    • 1
  • G. P. Pinaev
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of CytologyRussian Academy of SciencesSt. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations