Development of 3D cultures of zebrafish liver and embryo cell lines: a comparison of different spheroid formation methods
Ecotoxicology, ISSN: 1573-3017, Vol: 30, Issue: 9, Page: 1893-1909
2021
- 13Citations
- 29Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations13
- Citation Indexes13
- 13
- Captures29
- Readers29
- 29
Article Description
Fish cell spheroids are promising 3D culture models for vertebrate replacement in ecotoxicology. However, new alternative ecotoxicological methods must be adapted for applications in industry and for regulatory purposes; such methods must be cost-effective, simple to manipulate and provide rapid results. Therefore, we compared the effectiveness of the traditional hanging drop (HD), orbital shaking (OS), and HD combined with OS (HD+OS) methods on the formation of zebrafish cell line spheroids (ZFL and ZEM2S). Time in HD (3–5 days) and different 96-well plates [flat-bottom or ultra-low attachment of round-bottom (ULA-plates)] in OS were evaluated. Easy handling, rapid spheroid formation, uniform-sized spheroids, and circularity were assessed to identify the best spheroid protocol. Traditional HD alone did not result in ZFL spheroid formation, whereas HD (5 days)+OS did. When using the OS, spheroids only formed on the ULA-plate. Both HD+OS and OS were reproducible in size (177.50 ± 2.81 µm and 225.62 ± 19.20 µm, respectively) and circularity (0.83 ± 0.02 and 0.80 ± 0.01, respectively) of ZFL spheroids. Nevertheless, HD+OS required a considerable time to completely form spheroids (10 days) and intensive handling, whereas the OS was fast (5 days of incubation) and simple. OS also yielded reproducible ZEM2S spheroids in 1 day (226.23 ± 0.57 µm diameter and 0.80 ± 0.01 circularity). In conclusion, OS in ULA-plate is an effective and simple spheroid protocol for high-throughput ecotoxicity testing. This study contributes to identify a fast, reproducible, and simple protocol of single piscine spheroid formation in 96-well plates and supports the application of fish 3D model in industry and academia. [Figure not available: see fulltext.]
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85112249116&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10646-021-02459-6; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34379241; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10646-021-02459-6; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10646-021-02459-6; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10646-021-02459-6
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know