Categories
Articles

Atomic force microscopy-based cell nanostructure for ligand-conjugated quantum dot endocytosis

Original Paper

Pdf

file on Synergy

omments

Acta Biochim Biophys

Sin 2006, 38: 646-652

doi:10.1111/j.1745-7270.2006.00211.X

Atomic force microscopy-based

cell nanostructure for ligand-conjugated

quantum dot endocytosis

Yun-Long PAN1*,

Ji-Ye CAI2, Li QIN3, and Hao WANG4

1 The First Affiliated

Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China;

2 College of Life Science

and Technology, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, China;

3

Department of Histology and Embryology, Medical College of Jinan University,

Guangzhou 510632, China;

4 School

for Information and Optoelectronic Science and Engineering, South China Normal

University, Guangzhou 510631, China

Received: May 8,

2006       

Accepted: June 27,

2006

This work was supported

by the grants from the Major State Basic Research Development Program of China

(2001CB510101), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 30230350,

60278014 and 60578025), and the doctor

innovation fund of Jinan University

*

Corresponding author: Tel, 86-20-38688609; Fax, 86-20-38688000; E-mail,

[email protected]

Abstract        While it has been well demonstrated that quantum dots (QDs)

play an important role in biological labeling both in vitro and in

vivo, there is no report describing the cellular nanostructure basis of

receptor-mediated endocytosis. Here, nanostructure evolution responses to the

endocytosis of transferrin (Tf)-conjugated QDs were characterized by atomic

force microscopy (AFM). AFM-based nanostructure analysis demonstrated that the

Tf-conjugated QDs were highly specifically and tightly bound to the cell

receptors and the nanostructure evolution is highly correlated with the cell

membrane receptor-mediated transduction. Consistently, confocal microscopic and

flow cytometry results have demonstrated the specificity­ and dynamic property

of Tf-QD binding and internalization. We found that the internalization of

Tf-QD is linearly related to time. Moreover, while the nanoparticles on the

cell membrane increased, the endocytosis was still very active, suggesting that

QD nanoparticles did not interfere sterically with the binding and function­ of

receptors. Therefore, ligand-conjugated QDs are potentially useful in

biological labeling of cells at a nanometer­ scale.

Key words        quantum dot; endocytosis; nanostructure;

atomic force microscopy

Recently, our understanding of cancer

diagnosis and biological imaging has been significantly extended by the application

of fluorescent semiconductor nanocrystals (quantum dots, QDs) because of their

unique optical properties and outstanding biocompatibility [113]. It is interesting to note that one of

the most important applications of ligand-conjugated QDs is to target them to

the cell surface receptors. For example, Chan and Nie [11] showed that QD

bio-conjugates were transported into the cells by receptor-mediated endocytosis

and detected the clusters and aggregates on the cell surface. Osaki et al.

[12] revealed the size effect of endocytosis in the subviral region and

demonstrated that the endocytosis is highly size-dependent because the size

complementarity governed the molecular recognition in small host-guest systems.

Data of Rosenthal et al. [13] suggested that serotonin-labeled

nanocrystals (SNACs) interacted with the serotonin transporter protein (SERT)

in transfected HeLa cells and oocytes in vitro. They also showed that

fluorescent SNACs could be used to visualize SERTs expressed in human

epithelial kidney cells in an antidepressant-sensitive manner [13].

Although the potential of QDs in biological

labeling and cancer diagnosis has been well described, little is known about

the cellular nanostructures response to the QD labeling­ and receptor-mediated endocytosis

of the QD-ligand. It is important to point out that cell surface structures at

the nanometer scale may have important roles in shaping the function of the

particular molecules on the cell surface. By monitoring the binding,

internalization and function of ligand-conjugated QDs at the nanometer scale,

ligand-conjugated QDs may help to advance the applications­ of QDs in targeting

drug delivery, protein transportation, ligand-receptor binding and signal

transduction in biology and immunology. Furthermore, atomic force microscopy

(AFM) has emerged as a powerful tool in cell biology studies at the nanometer

scale under near physiological condition [14]. Therefore, AFM visualization and

determination of responses in cells at the nanometer scale may elicit

particular molecular recognition and offer new insights into the binding and

internalization of ligand-conjugated QDs.

In this paper, AFM was used to characterize

the cellular nanostructure evolution when HepG2 cells were cultured in

ligand-conjugated QDs and free QDs for different time periods. At the same

time, confocal laser scanning microscopy images, mean fluorescent intensity

(MFI) and percentages of positive cells obtained by flow cytometry were used to

reveal the fluorescent characteristics at different stages of endocytosis. As a

result, the combined methods of AFM, confocal laser scanning microscopy and

flow cytometry demonstrated that transferrin (Tf)-conjugated QDs (Tf-QDs)

interact specifically with the transferrin receptor (TfR) in human hepatic

cancer cells. The internalization of ligand-conjugated QDs during endocytosis

appears to be a linear process with time. These experiments suggested that

AFM-based nanostructure analysis should provide novel insights into

receptor-mediated transductions and fluorescent nanocrystal-based molecule

detection.

Materials and methods

Reagents

Biotin-Tf was purchased from Molecular

Probes (Eugene, USA). Streptavidin-conjugated 605 nm Qdots was purchased from Quantum

Dot (Hayward, USA). All other reagents were of analytical grade.

Cell culture and incubation of

ligand-conjugated quantum dot

HepG2 cells were seeded in a 6-well Lab-Tek

chamber (Nalge Nunc, Naperville, USA) and grown in RPMI 1640 medium with glutamax

supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum in 5% CO2 at 37 ?C.

Two activation methods were applied to activate TfR: (1) first, the

biotinylated Tf were added directly in cell culture well to activate the TfR on

cell surface, and then streptavidin-QDs were loaded into cell culture well to

bind Tf; (2) the Tf-QD conjugates were prepared in test tube using the strong

binding between streptavidin and biotin and then Tf-QD conjugates were loaded

into cell culture well. Tf-QD complexes were formed by incubating biotin-Tf (47

ng/ml) and streptavidin-QDs at 4 ?C with mixture­ for 30 min and added to the

cell culture. Cells were centrifuged to remove unbounded Tf-QDs and fixed by 4%

formaldehyde. Consecutive binding of biotin-Tf and streptavidin-QDs was

conducted with cells labeled by 1.9 ng/ml biotin-Tf in culture medium and then incubated with 200 nM QDs for different

durations. Then the cells were washed, centrifuged­ and fixed for imaging.

Microscopy and flow cytometry

Atomic force microscopy was performed in

contact mode with a commercial atomic force microscope (AutoProbe CP, Veeco, USA) at room

temperature. The AFM images were planar-leveled using the software

(Thermomicroscopes Proscan Image Processing Software Version 2.1) provided by

the manufacturer. The contact angles were measured by this software directly.

Here, the contact angles mean the shrinking degree of cell. The larger contact

angels mean the higher degree of cellular shrinkage. Confocal laser scanning microscopy

was performed with a Bio-Rad MRC600 microscopy system (Bio-Rad, Hercules, USA)

using a 488-nm line excitation of an air-cooled 100 mW argon laser. The emitted

fluorescence was detected through the combination of the appropriate AG2 filter

set with a high pass at 605 nm. Cell suspension with a density of about 5105 cells per milliliter was processed for

flow cytometry under commercial flow cytometry facility (FACSCalibur; BD

Bioscience, Franklin Lakes, USA).

Results

Fine AFM images (Fig. 1) of individual

cells without Tf-QD endocytosis at the nanometer scale were readily observable.

These images showed the characteristic features of cells with an average

diameter of about 16 mm. The

cell membrane showed a smooth feature with several holes, which allowed

endocytosis of nutrients. The contact angle between the cell and the substrate

was about 27?.

Cells were exposed to biotinylated Tf and

TfRs were activated to bind streptavidin-QDs, allowing specific binding of

biotin-Tf and streptavidin-QDs. After exposing to streptavidin-QDs for about 1

min, the filopodia of cells became larger (Fig. 2) probably due to

binding of QDs to Tf. This result clearly demonstrated that Tf activated the

TfR within 1 min. It should be noted that Lidke et al. [4] also reported

similar results using confocal laser scanning microscopy, suggesting that the

QDs bind to the cell filopodia. Importantly, this consistency revealed the high

sensitivity and reliability of AFM-based nanostructure analysis. After about

15-min incubation, the cell edge tended to shrink and the cell body expanded

significantly, suggesting that rapid and extensive endocytosis of Tf-QD

occurred. Collectively, these results demonstrated that the nanoparticles

activate the cell receptor readily and do not damage the cellular receptor

activity and the endocytic pathways. Also, the changes in cell nanostructures

at different time points suggested that endocytosis might be a dynamic process.

To determine whether the receptor

activation pathway was involved in endocytosis at the nanometer scale, we

activated the cell receptors using an alternative approach. We preloaded the

streptavidin-QDs with biotin-Tf to obtain a Tf-QD complex. Importantly, after

culturing the cells in Tf-QDs for 15 min, the cell body expanded and the cell

edge shrank, supporting the feasibility of the idea that ligand-conjugate QDs

preloading and the desired receptor-mediated transportation of ligand-conjugate

QDs could be achieved by such strategy as well. Interestingly, these two

different receptor activation pathways give similar results on cellular

nanostructure (Figs. 3 and 4). It should be noted that bulges

could be observed on the cell edge and these bulges may be cell vesicles or

nanocrystals of Tf-QDs.

there are at least two differences between

control cells and cells that have undergone endocytosis of ligand-conjugated

QDs. First, cells with QDs endocytosis showed expansive body and contractive

edge. As a result, the shrinkage has led to an increase in the contact angles

between the edge and substrate. Second, the cell surface has provided more

space to allow more ligand-conjugated QDs to bind onto the cell membrane, which

have resulted in a dramatic increase of nanoparticles on the cell surface (Fig.

5). The differences in size and shape between these cells could be

attributed to the following factors. First, the binding and internalization of

ligand-conjugated QDs resulted in the expanse of cell body. Second, the

nonspecific endocytosis Tf-QD and aggregation property of QDs after leveling

the storage buffer condition may also result in an increase in the nanoclusters

on the cell surface.

In order to confirm that the differences

were the results of the receptor-mediated Tf-QD endocytosis rather than

unspecific QD binding, we cultured the cells in the presence of free QDs. As

expected, the cell membrane remained almost intact and relatively unaffected

although there were some particles on the cell surface (Fig. 6). It

should be pointed out that such particles [Fig. 6(B)] were likely the

results of nonspecific binding and aggregation. This result was further

confirmed by flow cytometry (Fig. 7). Compared with the blank cells,

there is no significant increase in MFI, but the significant positive cell

percentage could be observed in cells exposed to free QDs. The background

fluorescence of cells exposed to free QDs obtained by flow cytometry (Fig.7)

should arise from nonspecific binding of QDs during cell fixation and the cell

autofluorescence. In contrast, after the cells were exposed to Tf-QDs, both MFI

and positive cell percentage increased simultaneously as the exposure time

increased. Taken together, these results, again, illustrate that Tf-QD is

highly specific and potentially useful in activating and binding Tf to cell

receptors.

The inherent stability of the biotin-Tf and

streptavidin-QDs makes us able to obtain the desired degree of ligand loading

simply by adjusting the mixing stoichiometry. To further investigate the effect

of loading rate on nanostructure response for endocytosis of ligand-conjugated

QDs, we cultured the cells after exposure with different loading rates of

biotin-Tf and steptavidin-QDs (Fig. 5). Again, cells showed the

characteristic features of an expansive body and contractive edge (Fig. 5).

Furthermore, increases in Tf-QD concentration and exposure duration resulted in

more accumulation of Tf-QD on the cell surface (Fig. 5), demonstrating

that exposure duration enhanced the binding of the ligand-conjugated QDs before

internalization. Moreover, the nanoparticles on the cell membrane increased

while the endocytosis was still very active. Taken together, these evidences

suggested that the QD nanoparticles did not interfere sterically with the

binding and function of receptors. Therefore ligand-conjugated QDs are potentially

useful in biological labeling of cells at the nanometer scale.

Based on the AFM images, the fluorescent

signal change of Tf-QD in cell bodies might be a dynamic process coupled with

binding and internalization of ligand-conjugated QDs. This inspires us to

further examine whether the fluorescent signal might correlate with the

cellular nanostructure evolution. In Fig. 8, three representative

fluorescent images of cells, after 106 min, 149 min and 168 min of exposure to

Tf-QDs are shown. In these samples, the fluorescent intensity is enhanced

dynamically. Furthermore, the fluorescent intensity in the central part of the

cell is significantly stronger than that in the cell edge. This became clearer

as the exposure time was increased. The most likely explanation for this

phenomenon is the internalization of Tf-QDs upon the binding of Tf-QDs to cell

Tf receptor. Consistently, AFM observations also suggested the similar

phenomenon, suggesting the reliability and applicability of AFM-based

nanostructure analysis. We also found that internalization of Tf-QD appears to

be linearly related to time (Fig. 9). Importantly, this observation is

consistent with the results of EGF-QDs [4], whose internalization is also

related to time linearly.

Based on our observations of cellular

characteristics of endocytosis of Tf-QDs, we proposed a model (Fig. 10)

for the endocytosis of QDs. It seems that the endocytosis of Tf-QDs represents

a typical trajectory of ligand-conjugated QDs activating cell receptors,

binding onto cell surface, and internalizing. As illustrated above, internalization

of Tf-QDs, not only Tf but also Tf-QD conjugates were able to activate TfR,

therefore, two different­ pathways could achieve stage one. For stage two,

ligand-conjugated QDs bind to the cell receptor. Therefore, the nanoclusters on

the cell surface increased dramatically. For stage three, the ligand-conjugated

QDs experienced internalization, resulting in the expansion of the cell body.

While QDs have

been widely used as a novel fluorescence probe for both in vivo

and in vitro studies, the desired cellular nanostructure

responses for the biological label of QDs have been poorly elucidated. The

well-defined cellular nanostructure analysis should certainly be an important

step for the development of better biological labeling of QDs. First,

elucidation of cellular nanostructures by direct AFM visualization of QDs

endocytosis should significantly extend our understanding of cell

characteristics and be useful for designing and interpreting molecular probes

at the nanometer scale. Second, the insights provided by AFM-based

nanostructure characterization at the nanometer scale allow us to be in a

unique position to study the endocytosis and nanoparticle targeted delivery,

which are difficult to be achieved using other methods such as TEM and SEM

because they require complex pretreatments, which usually damage the cell

structure and functional molecules on the cell membrane. Third, at the

nanometer scale, spatial prevention and nonspecific interactions make it

difficult to detect the desired molecules on the complex cell surface directly.

Apparently, QDs fluorescent probes and AFM can be used to study the inside or

surface molecules of cells, receptor-targeted cross membrane transportation,

and the virus infection at the nanometer scale. Together with confocal laser

scanning microscopy and flow cytometry, direct AFM visualization provides the

background and principles of cellular nanostructure analysis, making a case for

the use of such measurements as disease markers at the nanometer level.

While many groups

have studied the basic principle and application of QDs in biological labeling

in in vivo and in vitro studies, little is known

about the nanostructure evolution induced by endocytosis of ligand-conjugated QDs.

Our AFM study shows that ligand-conjugated QDs are highly specific and bind

strongly to the receptor. Also, the TfR on cell surfaces can be activated

either by Tf or Tf-QD. After receptor stimulation, both pathways can achieve

the desired endocytosis. In this study, we found that the internalization of

Tf-QD is linearly related to time. AFM direct visualization of

ligand-conjugated QDs endocytosis provides novel insights into the biological

labeling of QDs, which should be useful for the design and application of QDs

fluorescent probes.

References

 1   Wu X, Liu H, Liu J, Haley KN, Treadway JA,

Larson JP, Ge N et al. Immunofluorescent labeling of cancer marker Her2

and other cellular targets with semiconductor quantum dots. Nat Biotechnol

2003, 21: 4146

 2   Jaiswal JK, Mattoussi H,

Mauro JM, Simon SM. Long-term multiple color imaging of live cells using

quantum dot bioconjugates. Nat Biotechnol 2003, 21: 4751

 3   Dahan M, Levi S,

Luccardini C, Rostaing P, Riveau B, Triller A. Diffusion dynamics of glycine

receptors revealed by single-quantum dot tracking. Science 2003, 302: 442445

 4   Lidke DS, Nagy P,

Heintzmann R, Arndt-Jovin DJ, Post JN, Grecco HE, Jares-Erijman EA et al.

Quantum dot ligands provide new insights into erbB/HER receptor-mediated signal

transduction. Nat Biotechnol 2004, 22: 198203

 5   Gao X, Cui Y, Levenson

RM, Chung LW, Nie S. In vivo cancer targeting and imaging with

semiconductor quantum dots. Nat Biotechnol 2004, 22: 969976

 6   Hoshino A, Hanaki K,

Suzuki K, Yamamoto K. Applications of T-lymphoma labeled with fluorescent

quantum dots to cell tracing markers in mouse body. Biochem Biophys Res Commun

2004, 314: 4653

 7   Kaul Z, Yaguchi T, Kaul

SC, Hirano T, Wadhwa R, Taira K. Mortalin imaging in normal and cancer cells

with quantum dot immuno-conjugates. Cell Res 2003, 13: 503507

 8   Kloepfer JA, Mielke RE,

Wong MS, Nealson KH, Stucky G, Nadeau JL. Quantum dots as strain- and

metabolism-specific microbiological labels. Appl Environ Microbiol 2003, 69:

42054213

 9   Mansson A, Sundberg M,

Balaz M, Bunk R, Nicholls IA, Omling P, Tagerud S et al. In vitro

sliding of actin filaments labelled with single quantum dots. Biochem Biophys

Res Commun 2004, 314: 529534

10  Mattheakis LC, Dias JM, Choi

YJ, Gong J, Bruchez MP, Liu J, Wang E. Optical coding of mammalian cells using

semiconductor quantum dots. Anal Biochem 2004, 327: 200208

11  Chan WC, Nie S. Quantum dot

bioconjugates for ultrasensitive nonisotopic detection. Quantum dot

bioconjugates for ultrasensitive nonisotopic detection. Science 1998, 281: 20162018

12  Osaki F, Kanamori T, Sando S,

Sera T, Aoyama Y. A quantum dot conjugated sugar ball and its cellular uptake.

On the size effects of endocytosis in the subviral region. J Am Chem Soc 2004,

126: 65206521

13  Rosenthal SJ, Tomlinson I,

Adkins EM, Schroeter S, Adams S, Swafford L, McBride J et al. Targeting

cell surface receptors with ligand-conjugated nanocrystals. J Am Chem Soc 2002,

124: 45864594

14  Charras GT, Horton MA. Single

cell mechanotransduction and its modulation analyzed by atomic force microscope

indentation. Biophys J 2002, 82: 29702981