Display options
Cite
Hua K, Ferland RJ. Fixation methods can differentially affect ciliary protein immunolabeling. Cilia. 2017;6:5doi: 10.1186/s13630-017-0045-9.
Hua, K., & Ferland, R. J. (2017). Fixation methods can differentially affect ciliary protein immunolabeling. Cilia, 65. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13630-017-0045-9
Hua, Kiet, and Ferland, Russell J. "Fixation methods can differentially affect ciliary protein immunolabeling." Cilia vol. 6 (2017): 5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13630-017-0045-9
Hua K, Ferland RJ. Fixation methods can differentially affect ciliary protein immunolabeling. Cilia. 2017 Mar 24;6:5. doi: 10.1186/s13630-017-0045-9. eCollection 2017. PMID: 28352462; PMCID: PMC5366141.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Cilia. 2017 Mar 24;6:5. doi: 10.1186/s13630-017-0045-9. eCollection 2017.

Fixation methods can differentially affect ciliary protein immunolabeling.

Cilia

Kiet Hua, Russell J Ferland

Affiliations

  1. Department of Neuroscience and Experimental Therapeutics, Albany Medical College, 47 New Scotland Avenue, MC-136, Albany, NY 12208 USA.
  2. Department of Neurology, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY 12208 USA.

PMID: 28352462 PMCID: PMC5366141 DOI: 10.1186/s13630-017-0045-9

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Primary cilia are immotile, microtubule-based organelles present on most cells. Defects in primary cilia presence/function result in a category of developmental diseases referred to as ciliopathies. As the cilia field progresses, there is a need to consider both the ciliary and extraciliary roles of cilia proteins. However, traditional fixation methods are not always suitable for examining the full range of localizations of cilia proteins. Here, we tested a variety of fixation methods with commonly used cilia markers to determine the most appropriate fixation method for different cilia proteins.

METHODS: Mouse inner medullary collecting duct and human retinal pigmented epithelial cells were grown to confluence, serum starved, and fixed with one of the following fixation agents: paraformaldehyde-sucrose, paraformaldehyde-PBS, methanol, cytoskeletal buffer followed by methanol, or three variations of cytoskeletal buffer-paraformaldehyde fixation. Each cell type and fixation method combination was probed with the following ciliary markers: acetylated α-tubulin, detyrosinated tubulin, polyglutamylated tubulin, β-tubulin, adenylyl cyclase 3 (AC3), ADP-ribosylation factor-like protein 13b (Arl13b), centrosome and spindle pole associated protein 1 (CSPP1), or intraflagellar transport protein 20 (IFT20). Intraflagellar transport protein 88 (IFT88) and GM130 (Golgi marker) were also used. We assessed actin (via phalloidin) and microtubule integrity, centrioles, cilia, and two extraciliary sites (mitotic figures and Golgi).

RESULTS: For the cilia markers examined, paraformaldehyde fixation preserved cilia immunolabeling of cilia-membrane proteins (AC3 and Arl13b), but failed to reveal cilia immunostaining of axonemal proteins (CSPP1 and IFT20). Methanol revealed cilia labeling for some axonemal proteins, but not others, and this depended on cell type. Generally, any method that first included a wash in cytoskeletal buffer, before fixing, revealed more distinct cilia immunolabeling for axonemal proteins (CSPP1, IFT20, and IFT88), but resulted in the loss of cilia labeling for cilia-membrane proteins (AC3 and Arl13b). All three different post-translational modifications of tubulin antibodies positively immunolabeled cilia in all fixation methods tested. Ultimately, we found that fixing cells in a solution of paraformaldehyde prepared in cytoskeletal buffer allowed for the preservation of cilia immunolabeling for most cilia proteins tested and allowed visualization of two extraciliary sites (mitotic figures and Golgi).

CONCLUSION: Some general patterns were observed to guide in the choice of a fixation agent. Cilia-membrane proteins generally benefit from quick fixation with no prior permeabilization, whereas axonemal proteins tend to benefit from permeabilization and use of cytoskeletal buffer.

Keywords: Fixation; Immunocytochemistry; Primary cilia; Technique

References

  1. J Ultrastruct Res. 1961 Oct;5:453-67 - PubMed
  2. Hum Mol Genet. 2009 Oct 15;18(20):3926-41 - PubMed
  3. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2014 Jun;71(11):2165-78 - PubMed
  4. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Dec 26;109 (52):21354-9 - PubMed
  5. Cell Motil. 1985;5(3):175-93 - PubMed
  6. Histochem Cell Biol. 2008 Jun;129(6):687-93 - PubMed
  7. Science. 1972 Sep 22;177(4054):1104-5 - PubMed
  8. Curr Biol. 2006 Aug 8;16(15):R604-14 - PubMed
  9. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2013 Aug;25(4):506-11 - PubMed
  10. Nat Methods. 2012 Jul;9(7):671-5 - PubMed
  11. Methods Cell Biol. 2015 ;127:19-35 - PubMed
  12. PLoS One. 2013 May 01;8(5):e62165 - PubMed
  13. J Cell Physiol. 2006 Oct;209(1):199-210 - PubMed
  14. Cell Biol Int. 2005 May;29(5):333-9 - PubMed
  15. PLoS One. 2015 Aug 04;10(8):e0134789 - PubMed
  16. Oncogene. 2005 Feb 10;24(7):1159-73 - PubMed
  17. Cell. 1977 Nov;12(3):561-71 - PubMed
  18. Mol Biol Cell. 2006 Sep;17(9):3781-92 - PubMed
  19. Cilia. 2012 Apr 25;1(1):4 - PubMed
  20. Differentiation. 2012 Feb;83(2):S23-9 - PubMed
  21. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2015 May 22;461(1):180-5 - PubMed
  22. Annu Rev Physiol. 2007;69:377-400 - PubMed
  23. J Biol Chem. 2015 Nov 6;290(45):27053-66 - PubMed
  24. Curr Biol. 2009 Jul 14;19(13):R526-35 - PubMed
  25. PLoS One. 2015 Oct 14;10 (10 ):e0140378 - PubMed
  26. Am J Hum Genet. 2014 Jan 2;94(1):62-72 - PubMed
  27. Pediatr Nephrol. 2011 Jul;26(7):1039-56 - PubMed
  28. PLoS One. 2014 Dec 10;9(12 ):e114087 - PubMed
  29. EMBO Rep. 2015 Oct;16(10 ):1275-87 - PubMed
  30. Science. 2006 Aug 4;313(5787):629-33 - PubMed
  31. Am J Hum Genet. 2014 Jan 2;94(1):80-6 - PubMed
  32. Mol Biol Cell. 2010 Aug 1;21(15):2555-67 - PubMed
  33. Cell Biol Int Rep. 1978 Sep;2(5):425-32 - PubMed
  34. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2014 Jan;39(1):244-5 - PubMed
  35. N Engl J Med. 2011 Apr 21;364(16):1533-43 - PubMed
  36. Trends Biochem Sci. 2015 Dec;40(12 ):765-78 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support