$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
KAV produces visual representations of network structure
The contrast between the ECFCs and the matrix background in the phase contrast images enables KAV to identify cell-specific structures. ECFC networks identified by KAV are represented pictorially as skeleton and mask renditions to illustrate structures used by the software for quantification (Figure 2A). Importantly, qualitative assessment of the skeleton and mask renditions enables rapid identification of KAV sensitivity and accuracy, which can be useful in determining optimal threshold settings and interpreting analysis outcomes. When the quality of the phase contrast images is high and sufficient contrast is achieved, KAV accurately identifies ECFC networks as indicated by similarity between the phase contrast image and the KAV-generated skeleton and mask renditions (Figure 2A and Video 1).
Alternatively, if phase contrast images do not have high contrast and/or artefacts of imaging such as gridding occur, network detection accuracy is reduced and outcomes become ambiguous (Figure 2B). Additionally, formation of air bubbles within the cell media can also obscure detection accuracy (Figure 2). However, problems with image quality can often be overcome through selection of different thresholding methods included in the KAV software. For example, the phase contrast image in Figure 2B was analyzed using identical image processing settings except for the thresholding method. From the Skeleton and Mask renditions, it is evident that the Otsu thresholding resulted in a more accurate detection of the ECFC networks shown in the phase contrast image (Figure 2B). Therefore, image quality is critical to achieving accurate and meaningful results in this assay. However, different thresholding methods included in the KAV user interface allow adjustment of image analysis based on the quality of the input images.
Time-lapse microscopy identifies qualitative and quantitative differences in ECFC vasculogenesis following intrauterine gestational diabetes mellitus exposure
Recently, the KAV analytic approach was applied to assess fetal ECFC function following exposure to maternal type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in utero16. Using KAV, altered kinetics of vasculogenesis were identified in fetal ECFCs exposed to T2DM. However, in addition to T2DM exposure, which occurs throughout the entire gestation, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), or the development of glucose intolerance commonly in the third trimester of pregnancy, also impairs ECFC function13. Therefore, KAV was applied to determine if GDM-exposed ECFCs also display altered kinetics of ECFC network formation. Phase 1 (0-5 h) and Phase 2 (5+ h) were assessed using time lapse microscopy coupled with KAV analysis (Figure 3). Representative phase contrast images acquired at the start of image acquisition (0.50 h) and throughout the time course (5.00 and 10.00 h) depict ECFC network formation in the four samples tested from a single experimental day (Figure 3 and Video 1). Despite equivalent cell loading, as observed in the phase contrast images at 0.50 hours, qualitative differences in network structure are evident at the 5.00 and 10.00-hour time points. ECFCs from the uncomplicated pregnancy (UC) form a complex and intricate network 5 hours post-plating, similar to our previously published data16. Conversely, ECFCs from GDM sample 1 (GDM1) form very few network structures that are not interconnected. However, this pattern is not reflected in all ECFC samples obtained from GDM pregnancies, indicative of heterogeneity between samples. Samples GDM2 and GDM3 display greater network formation compared to GDM1, although the patterns of connectivity appear altered compared to the UC sample. Importantly, KAV measures several structural components of ECFC networks to identify both obvious and subtle phenotypes.
In addition to generating skeleton and mask renditions of network structure, KAV quantitates ten metrics of network structure, including the number of individual network structures, nodes, triple-branched nodes, quadruple-branched nodes, branches, total branch length, average branch length, branch to node ratio, total closed networks, and network area16. KAV compiles the data for each sample into a single table of values for all images of the time course. Table 1 includes representative raw data from one imaging study for one ECFC sample. Parameters of network structure measured by KAV are organized into columns, and the data for sequential images acquired over time are organized into rows. For example, in our studies, image 1 was obtained 30 min post-plating with subsequent images being collected every 15 min. Raw values generated by KAV can then be graphed or further analyzed using more complex statistical approaches16.
Five graphs depicting mean values of network structure from three separate experiments are shown for a single uncomplicated sample (UC) and the three GDM samples (Figure 4). The UC sample in these experiments performed similarly to previously analyzed UC samples16. Previously, it was identified that ECFC vasculogenesis in vitro is bi-phasic, consisting of Phase 1 (0 - 5 h) and Phase 2 (5 - 10 h)16. This pattern is consistent in the current studies, as evidenced by the graph depicting closed network data (Figure 4). The UC sample formed a greater number of closed networks compared to all three of the GDM samples. Interestingly, three of the four samples appear to have a similar time to maximal number of closed networks, which occurs between 2.5 and 3 hours. However, the GDM2 sample was slower to reach maximal closed networks, which occurred 5 hours post-plating. And, despite the GDM2 sample forming fewer maximal networks compared to the UC sample, the networks it forms were maintained similarly to the UC sample over time. Conversely, GDM1 and GDM3, which formed fewer networks compared to the UC sample, also exhibited an overall reduction in network number over time. Overall, from the graph depicting closed network number, it is evident that all ECFC samples displayed a bi-phasic pattern of network formation, however the rate of formation and the maximal number of networks achieved vary across samples.
Network area represents the average area within the closed networks formed by the ECFCs. Therefore, the greater the closed network number, the smaller the network areas. This pattern is reflected in the network area graphs where the UC sample, which formed a larger number of closed networks, had smaller network areas over time compared to the three GDM samples (Figure 4). GDM2, which reached maximal closed networks more slowly, exhibited high network area initially, however the area stabilized over time, and this was most similar to the UC sample at 15 hours. Over time, the average network area in all samples increased due to network de-stabilization. However, some samples, like GDM1 and GDM3, exhibited a more rapid increase in network area, which is likely indicative of decreased stability compared to other samples exhibiting a more gradual increase.
GDM-exposed ECFCs exhibit reduced network stability
The ratio of branches to nodes is a novel phenotype calculated by KAV and identified in our previous studies, and this is indicative of network connectivity16. In the current study, the UC sample had a low ratio, which represented a high level of network connectivity that was maintained over time (Figure 4). Conversely, the three GDM samples had a higher ratio of branches to nodes, especially in Phase 2 of network formation. This observation demonstrates reduced connectivity and de-stabilization of network structures.
Overall, GDM1 formed fewer nodes and branches compared to the other samples, with the reduction maintained over the course of the experiment. GDM2 and GDM3 formed and maintained a greater number of branches compared to the UC sample, especially between 5-15 h. The numbers of nodes detected in the GDM2 and GDM3 networks were more similar to the number of nodes in the UC sample, especially between 10-15 h. A greater number of branches, but a similar number of nodes, could account for the increased branch to node ratio evident at the later time points in the GDM samples. Importantly, simultaneous changes in branch and node number can be difficult to interpret in separate graphs. However, the novel branch to node ratio offers a way to assess how changes, including slight changes difficult to detect in the individual graphs, in both branch and node number, result in altered network connectivity.

Figure 1: Schematic outlining 10 parameters quantified by Kinetic Analysis of Vasculogenesis (KAV). KAV quantitates ten distinct parameters of network structure. All parameters are color-coded and outlined in the schematic numerically (1-10). Parameters include the number of branches (green, 1), closed networks (blue, 2), and nodes (red, 3), average network area (orange, 4), the number of network structures (black, 5), triple-branched nodes (yellow, 6), and quad-branched nodes (purple, 7), as well as the total (9) and average (10) branch length, and the ratio of the number of branches to the number of nodes (10). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2: Kinetic Analysis of Vasculogenesis (KAV) quantitates network structure. (A) Skeleton and mask renditions of network structures identified by KAV using phase contrast images provide visual representation of network structures identified and quantified by KAV. Scale bar = 500 µm. (B) A representative phase contrast image of ECFC networks 10 h post-plating that has low contrast and grid marks from stitching individual images together. Different thresholding methods, such as Mean or Otsu, can be selected in the KAV plug-in to improve quantitation accuracy, if phase contrast images have low contrast or if gridding occurs. Skeleton and mask renditions of the phase contrast image are shown for both Mean and Otsu thresholding methods. Phase contrast images were captured using a 10X objective. Scale bar = 500 µm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 3: Intrauterine GDM exposure alters ECFC network formation. Images of ECFC network formation were captured at 15 min intervals for 15 h by phase contrast microscopy. Representative phase contrast images at 5 h increments, starting at the time of plating (0.5 h), are shown for the UC and three GDM samples. Phase contrast images were captured using a 10X objective. Scale bar = 500 µm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 4: ECFCs exposed to intrauterine GDM exhibit altered network formation kinetics. ECFCs were obtained from an uncomplicated pregnancy (UC, black) and three pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM 1-3, red). Phase contrast images were captured at 15 min intervals for 15 h. Kinetic Analysis of Vasculogenesis (KAV) software quantitated closed networks, network areas, branches, nodes, and the ratio of branches to nodes. The data illustrated represent the mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM) of three separate experiments for each sample. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Video 1: Intrauterine GDM exposure alters kinetics of ECFC network formation. Images of ECFC network formation were captured at 15 min intervals for 15 h by phase contrast microscopy. Phase contrast images are shown for the UC and three GDM samples over 15 h starting at 0.5 h. The scale bar represents 500 µm. Please click here to view this video. (Right-click to download.)
| Image | Total Branch Networks | Nodes | Triples | Quadruples | Branches | Total Branch Length* | Avg Branch Length* | Branch to Node Ratio | Closed Networks | Network area** |
| 1 | 382 | 290 | 278 | 11 | 943 | 47210 | 124 | 3.25 | 9 | 480214 |
| 2 | 284 | 345 | 337 | 8 | 940 | 50699 | 179 | 2.72 | 16 | 264469 |
| 3 | 205 | 376 | 366 | 9 | 910 | 55728 | 272 | 2.42 | 27 | 150621 |
| 4 | 162 | 422 | 407 | 15 | 947 | 59692 | 368 | 2.24 | 40 | 98713 |
| 5 | 132 | 454 | 441 | 12 | 967 | 61923 | 469 | 2.13 | 53 | 72951 |
| 6 | 122 | 435 | 419 | 14 | 907 | 62587 | 513 | 2.09 | 68 | 56948 |
| 7 | 88 | 429 | 411 | 17 | 852 | 63983 | 727 | 1.99 | 74 | 51429 |
| 8 | 68 | 451 | 437 | 13 | 874 | 63960 | 941 | 1.94 | 74 | 51780 |
| 9 | 93 | 437 | 417 | 18 | 905 | 60901 | 655 | 2.07 | 49 | 82919 |
| 10 | 126 | 511 | 487 | 24 | 1075 | 61981 | 492 | 2.1 | 37 | 116857 |
| 11 | 49 | 397 | 384 | 12 | 737 | 61823 | 1262 | 1.86 | 79 | 48805 |
| 12 | 81 | 376 | 364 | 10 | 751 | 56817 | 701 | 2 | 63 | 64431 |
| 13 | 98 | 509 | 482 | 26 | 1028 | 60799 | 620 | 2.02 | 44 | 98056 |
| 14 | 93 | 449 | 416 | 31 | 909 | 58282 | 627 | 2.02 | 45 | 94081 |
| *rounded to nearest micron, **rounded to nearest micron^2 |
Table 1: Representative raw data from one imaging study for one ECFC sample.