In Situ Nanocharacterization of Yeast Cells Using ESEM and FIB

Part of the Fungal Biology book series (FUNGBIO)


Yeast, one of the simplest eukaryotic microorganisms classified in the fungal kingdom, has been widely used in the food industry and as a model organism in medicine and biology. This practical overview describes how functional micro-/nanotools are prepared based on focused ion beam fabrication, assembled on the nanocharacterization system inside the environmental scanning electron microscopy chamber, mounted on the cooling stage, and used for in situ yeast characterization. The concept of this approach is demonstrated by measuring various yeast cell properties, including cell stiffness, cell–substrate adhesion, and cell–cell interaction with the micro-/nanotool as well as in situ single-cell cutting. Finally, the remaining challenges associated with this characterization system and future research directions are discussed.


Environmental SEM Single-cell analysis FIB Yeast cell Micro-/nanomanipulation Micro-/nanorobot Micro-/nanotool 


  1. Danilatos G (1988) Foundations of environmental scanning electron microscopy. Adv Electron Electron Phys 71:109–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Danilatos G (1991) Review and outline of environmental SEM at present. J Microsc 162:391–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Danilatos G (1993) Introduction to the ESEM instrument. Microsc Res Tech 25:354–361CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Desmet M, Lammertyn J, Scheerlinck N, Verlinden BE, Nicolaı̈ BM (2003) Determination of puncture injury susceptibility of tomatoes. Postharvest Biol Technol 27:293–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dubas ST, Kittitheeranun P, Rangkupan R, Sanchavanakit N, Potiyaraj P (2009) Coating of polyelectrolyte multilayer thin films on nanofibrous scaffolds to improve cell adhesion. J Appl Polymer Sci 114:1574–1579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gumbiner BM (1996) Cell adhesion: the molecular basis of tissue architecture and morphogenesis. Cell 84:345–357CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Hess M (2007) Cryopreparation methodology for plant cell biology. Methods Cell Biol 79:57–100CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Kucsera J, Yarita K, Takeo K (2000) Simple detection method for distinguishing dead and living yeast colonies. J Microbiol Methods 41:19–21CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Lam WA, Rosenbluth MJ, Fletcher DA (2007) Chemotherapy exposure increases leukemia cell stiffness. Blood 109:3505–3508PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Leis A, Rockel B, Andrees L, Baumeister W (2009) Visualizing cells at the nanoscale. Trends Biochem Sci 34:60–70CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Li M, Liu L, Xi N, Wang Y, Dong Z, Tabata O et al (2011) Imaging and measuring the rituximab-induced changes of mechanical properties in B-lymphoma cells using atomic force microscopy. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 404:689–694CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Marcotte L, Tabrizian M (2008) Sensing surfaces: challenges in studying the cell adhesion process and the cell adhesion forces on biomaterials. IRBM 29:77–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Matas AJ, Cobb ED, Bartsch JA, Paolillo DJ, Niklas KJ (2004) Biomechanics and anatomy of Lycopersicon esculentum fruit peels and enzyme-treated samples. Am J Bot 91:352–360CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Möbius W (2009) Cryopreparation of biological specimens for immunoelectron microscopy. Ann Anat (Anatomischer Anzeiger) 191:231–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Muscariello L, Rosso F, Marino G, Barbarisi M, Cafiero G, Barbarisi A (2008) Cell surface protein detection with immunogold labelling in ESEM: optimisation of the method and semi‐quantitative analysis. J Cell Physiol 214:769–776CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Nakajima M, Hirano T, Kojima M, Hisamoto N, Homma M, Fukuda T (2011) Direct nano-injection method by nanoprobe insertion based on E-SEM nanorobotic manipulation under hybrid microscope. In: Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2011 IEEE International Conference on, pp 4139–4144Google Scholar
  17. Ning W, James PB, Donald EI (1993) Mechanotransduction across the cell surface and through the cytoskeleton. Science 260:21Google Scholar
  18. Razatos A, Ong YL, Sharma MM, Georgiou G (1998) Molecular determinants of bacterial adhesion monitored by atomic force microscopy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 95:11059PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Ren Y, Donald AM, Zhang Z (2008) Investigation of the morphology, viability and mechanical properties of yeast cells in environmental SEM. Scanning 30:435–442CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Reyntjens S, Puers R (2001) A review of focused ion beam applications in microsystem technology. J Micromech Microeng 11:287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sarah EC, Yu-Sheng J, Qing-Yi L, JianYu R, James KG (2011) Green tea extract selectively targets nanomechanics of live metastatic cancer cells. Nanotechnology 22:215101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shaler S, Mott L (1996) Microscopic analysis of wood fibers using ESEM and confocal microscopy. In: Proceeding of the woodfiber plastic composites, vol 25, p 32Google Scholar
  23. Shen Y, Ahmad MR, Nakajima M, Kojima S, Homma M, Fukuda T (2011a) Evaluation of the single yeast cell’s adhesion to ITO substrates with various surface energies via ESEM nanorobotic manipulation system. IEEE Trans Nanobioscience 10:217–224CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Shen Y, Nakajima M, Kojima S, Homma M, Fukuda T (2011b) Study of the time effect on the strength of cell–cell adhesion force by a novel nano-picker. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 409:160–165CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Shen Y, Nakajima M, Kojima S, Homma M, Kojima M, Fukuda T (2011c) Single cell adhesion force measurement for cell viability identification using an AFM cantilever-based micro putter. Meas Sci Technol 22:115802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shen Y, Nakajima M, Yang Z, Kojima S, Homma M, Fukuda T (2011d) Design and characterization of nanoknife with buffering beam for in situ single-cell cutting. Nanotechnology 22:305701CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Shen Y, Nakajima M, Yang Z, Tajima H, Najdovski Z, Homma M et al (2013) Single cell stiffness measurement at various humidity conditions by nanomanipulation of a nano-needle. Nanotechnology 24:145703CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Sneddon IN (1965) The relation between load and penetration in the axisymmetric Boussinesq problem for a punch of arbitrary profile. Int J Eng Sci 3:47–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stenson J, Thomas C, Hartley P (2009) Modelling the mechanical properties of yeast cells. Chem Eng Sci 64:1892–1903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Svaldo Lanero T, Cavalleri O, Krol S, Rolandi R, Gliozzi A (2006) Mechanical properties of single living cells encapsulated in polyelectrolyte matrixes. J Biotechnol 124:723–731CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Touhami A, Nysten B, Dufrêne YF (2003) Nanoscale mapping of the elasticity of microbial cells by atomic force microscopy. Langmuir 19:4539–4543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wang K, Sun D (2012) Influence of semiflexible structural features of actin cytoskeleton on cell stiffness based on actin microstructural modeling. J Biomech 45:1900–1908CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Zheng Y, Han D, Zhai J, Jiang L (2008) In situ investigation on dynamic suspending of microdroplet on lotus leaf and gradient of wettable micro-and nanostructure from water condensation. Appl Phys Lett 92:084106-084106-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical and Biomedical EngineeringCity University of Hong KongHong KongChina

Personalised recommendations