What Should We Print? Emerging Principles to Rationally Design Tissues Prone to Self-Organization

  • N.C. Rivron
  • J. Rouwkema
  • R. Truckenmüller
  • C.A. van Blitterswijk
Chapter

Abstract

In vitro-generated tissues hold significant promise to mimic healthy and diseased tissues and impact both regenerative medicine and fundamental science. Current technologies allow for the formation of precise multicellular assemblies using, for instance, cell patterning approaches. These approaches lead to the formation of systems that are not necessarily stable and will remodel and reorganize over time, based on physical and/or biological principles (i.e. migration of the cells, shrinkage of the hydrogel). Shapes and patterns are thus not inevitably translated to the final tissue. Besides the technical issues of tissue assembly, there is a need for understanding collective cellular behaviors so as to design tissues prone to predictable and adequate self-deformation, self-remodeling and self-organization. Microfabricated tissues are powerful tools to study, in vitro, these processes. They will help to set the basic principles to rationally design tissues prone to further development and subsequently improve approaches to engineer more complex tissue architectures and functionalities. In this chapter, we will first briefly define and discuss the principles and mechanisms of self-organization during natural tissue development. We will then depict current attempts in studying these principles in in vitro microfabricated tissue models. We will specifically focus on current models using hydrogel templates or supports to assemble cells into primitive patterns. Finally, we will discuss the role of geometries in promoting heterogeneity of biological and physical cues leading to the emergence of self-organized forms.

References

  1. 1.
    Camazine S, Deneubourg JL, Franks NR, Sneyd J, Theraulaz G, Bonabeau E (eds) (2003) Self-organization in biological systems. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Whitesides GM, Grzybowski B (29 Mar 2002) Self-assembly at all scales. Science 295(5564):2418–2421PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bonabeau E, Dorigo M, Theraulaz G (6 Jul 2000) Inspiration for optimization from social insect behaviour. Nature 406(6791):39–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Verde F, Berrez JM, Antony C, Karsenti E (March 1991) Taxol-induced microtubule asters in mitotic extracts of Xenopus eggs: requirement for phosphorylated factors and cytoplasmic dynein. J Cell Biol 112(6):1177–1187PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tabony J, Job D (2 Aug 1990) Spatial structures in microtubular solutions requiring a sustained energy source. Nature 346(6283):448–451PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Surrey T, Nedelec F, Leibler S, Karsenti E (11 May 2001) Physical properties determining self-organization of motors and microtubules. Science 292(5519):1167–1171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nedelec FJ, Surrey T, Maggs AC, Leibler S (18 Sep 1997) Self-organization of microtubules and motors. Nature 389(6648):305–308PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Devreotes P, Janetopoulos C (6 Jun 2003) Eukaryotic chemotaxis: distinctions between directional sensing and polarization. J Biol Chem 278(23):20445–20448PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maly IV, Wiley HS, Lauffenburger DA (Jan 2004) Self-organization of polarized cell signaling via autocrine circuits: computational model analysis. Biophys J 86(1 Pt 1):10–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wedlich-Soldner R, Wai SC, Schmidt T, Li R (13 Sep 2004) Robust cell polarity is a dynamic state established by coupling transport and GTPase signaling. J Cell Biol 166(6):889–900PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xu J, Wang F, Van Keymeulen A, Herzmark P, Straight A, Kelly K et al (25 Jul 2003) Divergent signals and cytoskeletal assemblies regulate self-organizing polarity in neutrophils. Cell 114(2):201–214PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Albrecht DR, Underhill GH, Wassermann TB, Sah RL, Bhatia SN (May 2006) Probing the role of multicellular organization in three-dimensional microenvironments. Nat Methods 3(5):369–375PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nelson CM, Jean RP, Tan JL, Liu WF, Sniadecki NJ, Spector AA et al (16 Aug 2005) Emergent patterns of growth controlled by multicellular form and mechanics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102(33):11594–11599PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nelson CM, Vanduijn MM, Inman JL, Fletcher DA, Bissell MJ (13 Oct 2006) Tissue geometry determines sites of mammary branching morphogenesis in organotypic cultures. Science 314(5797):298–300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ruiz SA, Chen CS (Nov 2008) Emergence of patterned stem cell differentiation within multicellular structures. Stem Cells 26(11):2921–2927PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Phng LK, Gerhardt H (Feb 2009) Angiogenesis: a team effort coordinated by notch. Dev Cell 16(2):196–208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Singhvi R, Kumar A, Lopez GP, Stephanopoulos GN, Wang DI, Whitesides GM et al (29 Apr 1994) Engineering cell shape and function. Science 264(5159):696–698PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Khetani SR, Bhatia SN (Jan 2008) Microscale culture of human liver cells for drug development. Nat Biotechnol 26(1):120–126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sodunke TR, Turner KK, Caldwell SA, McBride KW, Reginato MJ, Noh HM (Sep 2007) Micropatterns of Matrigel for three-dimensional epithelial cultures. Biomaterials 28(27):4006–4016PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tang MD, Golden AP, Tien J (29 Oct 2003) Molding of three-dimensional microstructures of gels. J Am Chem Soc 125(43):12988–12989PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McGuigan AP, Bruzewicz DA, Glavan A, Butte MJ, Whitesides GM (2008) Cell encapsulation in sub-mm sized gel modules using replica molding. PLoS One 3(5):e2258PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kelm JM, Djonov V, Ittner LM, Fluri D, Born W, Hoerstrup SP et al (Aug 2006) Design of custom-shaped vascularized tissues using microtissue spheroids as minimal building units. Tissue Eng 12(8):2151–2160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rago AP, Dean DM, Morgan JR (1 Mar 2009 ) Controlling cell position in complex heterotypic 3D microtissues by tissue fusion. Biotechnol Bioeng 102(4):1231–1241PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Engler AJ, Sen S, Sweeney HL, Discher DE (25 Aug 2006) Matrix elasticity directs stem cell lineage specification. Cell 126(4):677–689PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    McBeath R, Pirone DM, Nelson CM, Bhadriraju K, Chen CS (April 2004) Cell shape, cytoskeletal tension, and RhoA regulate stem cell lineage commitment. Dev Cell 6(4):483–495PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Levenberg S, Rouwkema J, Macdonald M, Garfein ES, Kohane DS, Darland DC et al (July 2005) Engineering vascularized skeletal muscle tissue. Nat Biotechnol 23(7):879–884PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rivron NC, Rouwkema J, Truckenmuller R, Karperien M, De Boer J, Van Blitterswijk CA (Oct 2009) Tissue assembly and organization: developmental mechanisms in microfabricated tissues. Biomaterials 30(28):4851–4858PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • N.C. Rivron
    • 1
  • J. Rouwkema
    • 1
  • R. Truckenmüller
    • 1
  • C.A. van Blitterswijk
    • 2
  1. 1.MIRA Institute for Biomedical Technology and Technical MedicineUniversity of TwenteAEThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Institute for BioMedical Technology (BMTI)University of TwenteEnschedeThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations