Published in:
Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research
RNA sequencing analysis reveals quiescent microglia isolation methods from postnatal mouse brains and limitations of BV2 cells
Published in: Journal of Neuroinflammation | Issue 1/2018
Login to get accessAbstract
Background
Microglia play key roles in neuron–glia interaction, neuroinflammation, neural repair, and neurotoxicity. Currently, various microglial in vitro models including primary microglia derived from distinct isolation methods and immortalized microglial cell lines are extensively used. However, the diversity of these existing models raises difficulty in parallel comparison across studies since microglia are sensitive to environmental changes, and thus, different models are likely to show widely varied responses to the same stimuli. To better understand the involvement of microglia in pathophysiological situations, it is critical to establish a reliable microglial model system.
Methods
With postnatal mouse brains, we isolated microglia using three general methods including shaking, mild trypsinization, and CD11b magnetic-associated cell sorting (MACS) and applied RNA sequencing to compare transcriptomes of the isolated cells. Additionally, we generated a genome-wide dataset by RNA sequencing of immortalized BV2 microglial cell line to compare with primary microglia. Furthermore, based on the outcomes of transcriptional analysis, we compared cellular functions between primary microglia and BV2 cells including immune responses to LPS by quantitative RT-PCR and Luminex Multiplex Assay, TGFβ signaling probed by Western blot, and direct migration by chemotaxis assay.
Results
We found that although the yield and purity of microglia were comparable among the three isolation methods, mild trypsinization drove microglia in a relatively active state, evidenced by high amount of amoeboid microglia, enhanced expression of microglial activation genes, and suppression of microglial quiescent genes. In contrast, CD11b MACS was the most reliable and consistent method, and microglia isolated by this method maintained a relatively resting state. Transcriptional and functional analyses revealed that as compared to primary microglia, BV2 cells remain most of the immune functions such as responses to LPS but showed limited TGFβ signaling and chemotaxis upon chemoattractant C5a.
Conclusions
Collectively, we determined the optimal isolation methods for quiescent microglia and characterized the limitations of BV2 cells as an alternative of primary microglia. Considering transcriptional and functional differences, caution should be taken when extrapolating data from various microglial models. In addition, our RNA sequencing database serves as a valuable resource to provide novel insights for appropriate application of microglia as in vitro models.