$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
In the assays and comparisons documented below, we used two hESC lines (H9 and HS429, from WiCell and the Karolinska Institute, respectively) and two hiPSC lines (NCS001 and NCS002, both generated by the Norwegian Core Facility for Human Pluripotent Stem Cells). The data presented in the figures and tables are from the hESC lines, but entirely similar results were obtained from the hiPSC lines.
In our hands, mechanical harvesting resulted in the colonies being split into approximately five to six clumps of ~200-250 µm in diameter, whereas with EDTA-induced dis-adhesion followed by trituration, each colony was split into ~10-20 clumps of ~60 µm in diameter. We estimate that the number of cells in each EDTA-harvested clump is ~20. As it is impractical to split a colony into clumps of this size with a scalpel, in this respect, EDTA-induced dis-adhesion is superior, as it generates clumps of a size that is more favorable for colony cell survival10,11.
The hESC/hiPSC colonies harvested using EDTA were also more homogeneous in size and shape compared to the colonies harvested mechanically (Figure 1A-F). This is because the cutting required for mechanical harvesting generates uneven edges and varying clump sizes. To evaluate this quantitatively, we assessed the colony circularity (as a measure of how rounded the colony edges were; a value of 1 indicates a perfect circle) 5 days after passaging using the ImageJ-win64 protocol12. The colony circularity was significantly lower in the colonies harvested mechanically (mechanical harvesting: 0.61 ± 0.10; EDTA-based harvesting: 0.84 ± 0.01; n = 10, p < 0.001, Mann-Whitney U-test, U = 10).
The cell density in the harvested and replated colonies, which is a measure of post-harvesting cell-cell interactions during colony formation, was similar with EDTA-based harvesting and mechanical harvesting (Table 1 and Figure 1G,H). The mechanically harvested colonies had a greater tendency to develop necrosis in their central regions (Figure 1J). This was likely due to variability in the shape and, particularly, the size of the mechanically isolated cell clumps, as when these clumps are too large, they can easily fold upon themselves when being transferred to new culture dishes. This was not the case with the colonies harvested using EDTA, which uniformly exhibited a translucent appearance with distinct edges (Figure 1I).
Using EDTA-based harvesting, we were able to collect essentially all the colonies that had been established in a well within 2-3 min. Using mechanical harvesting, collecting all the colonies in a well would be tedious and time-consuming. We typically managed to collect only ~30%, or ~20-25 colonies, using mechanical harvesting, and this took ~20 min. Likewise, using collagenase digestion followed by gentle scraping, it was typically difficult to harvest all the colonies, although the total procedure only took a few minutes. Thus, EDTA-based harvesting is as fast or faster than enzymatic harvesting and more efficient than either mechanical or enzymatic harvesting.
To assess the effect of the different harvesting methods on stemness and pluripotency, we first subjected the colonies obtained after 20 passages using EDTA-based or mechanical harvesting to qPCR analysis (Figure 2) and immunocytochemical staining (Figure 3 and Figure 4) for stemness markers. The colonies obtained using either method exhibited a stable expression of stemness markers both at the mRNA and protein levels. We then assessed pluripotency by differentiation to the three germ layers in embryoid bodies (Figure 5 and Figure 6). The embryoid bodies generated from the hESCs or hiPSCs obtained after 20 passages using either method contained a mixture of cells expressing commonly assessed markers for ectoderm, mesoderm, and endoderm.
Finally, we assessed the incidence of genomic aberrations in hESCs and hiPSCs passaged by each method using qPCR-based genetic analysis (see the Table of Materials). The colonies obtained after 20 passages using either harvesting method exhibited some examples of modest deviation from a reference diploid chromosomal pattern (the abnormalities assessed were those commonly associated with the reprogramming of hiPSCs but can also be obtained in hESCs) (Figure 7). However, the pattern of these deviations was essentially the same in the colonies obtained after either harvesting method, indicating that they were not linked to the harvesting method.

Figure 1: Colony morphology and cell density following EDTA-based or mechanical harvesting. (A-F) Representative brightfield images of H9 hESC colonies established in feeder-free culture for 5 days after 20 passages using (A-C) EDTA-based or (D-F) mechanical harvesting. (G,H) Representative fluorescence images of the cell density in H9 hESC colonies established after 20 passages using (G) EDTA-based or (H) mechanical harvesting. The cell nuclei are stained with DAPI. (I,J) Representative brightfield images of H9 hESC colonies established after 20 passages using (I) EDTA-based or (J) mechanical harvesting. Note the necrotic central region in the colony harvested mechanically (arrow in J). All the images were acquired 5 days following the 20th passage. Scale bars = 100 µm. Abbreviations: hESC = human embryonic stem cell; EDTA = ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid; DAPI = 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2: Expression of stemness marker mRNA in two hESC lines (H9 and HS429) generated after EDTA-based or mechanical harvesting. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction of the indicated markers in H9 (upper panel) and HS429 (lower panel) hESCs after a single passage using mechanical harvesting, after 20 passages using mechanical harvesting, and after 20 passages using EDTA-based harvesting (1:5 dilution). The expression level is relative to that of the housekeeping gene ACTB (beta-actin). The error bars indicate the standard deviation. Abbreviations: hESC = human embryonic stem cell; EDTA = ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 3: Expression of stemness marker proteins in the H9 hESC line after different harvesting conditions. Representative immunofluorescence staining of H9 hESC colonies harvested mechanically (A-E) before further passaging, (F-J) after 20 passages using mechanical harvesting, and (K-O) after 20 passages using EDTA-based harvesting. Scale bars = 100 µm. Abbreviations: hESC = human embryonic stem cell; EDTA = ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid; DAPI = 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 4: Expression of stemness marker proteins in the HS429 hESC line after different harvesting conditions. Representative immunofluorescence staining of HS429 hESC colonies harvested mechanically (A-E) before further passaging, (F-J) after 20 passages using mechanical harvesting, and (K-O) after 20 passages using EDTA-based harvesting. Scale bars = 100 µm. Abbreviations: hESC = human embryonic stem cell; EDTA = ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid; DAPI = 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 5: Expression of markers for the three germ layers in embryoid bodies generated from the H9 hESC line following mechanical or EDTA-based harvesting. Representative immunofluorescence staining of markers for (A and D rows) ectoderm (ECTO, TUJI), (B and E rows) endoderm (ENDO, AFP), and (C and F rows) mesoderm (MESO, SMA). EBs generated (A-C) after 20 passages of mechanical harvesting or (D-F) after 20 passages of EDTA-based harvesting. Scale bars = 40 µm. Abbreviations: hESC = human embryonic stem cell; EDTA = ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid; EBs = embryoid bodies. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 6: Expression of markers for the three germ layers in embryoid bodies generated from the HS429 hESC line following mechanical or EDTA-based harvesting. Representative immunofluorescence staining of markers for (A and D rows) ectoderm (ECTO, TUJI), (B and E rows) endoderm (ENDO, AFP), and (C and F rows) mesoderm (MESO, SMA). EBs generated (A-C) after 20 passages of mechanical harvesting (A-C) or (D-F) after 20 passages of EDTA-based harvesting. Scale bars = 40 µm. Abbreviations: hESC = human embryonic stem cell; EDTA = ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid; EBs = embryoid bodies. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 7: qPCR-based genetic analysis of common genomic aberrations in the HS9 and HS429 ESC lines and the NCS002 iPSC line following 20 passages using mechanical or EDTA-based harvesting. The baseline at value 2 represents normal diploidy at all the chromosomal markers. A value of 1 or 3 would represent a loss or gain, respectively, of the indicated chromosomal marker in all the cells. Intermediate values between 1 and 2 or between 2 and 3 indicate the presence of a loss or gain of the indicated marker in a fraction of the cells. Note that the pattern of aberrations is similar in the two harvesting conditions. Abbreviations: ESC = embryonic stem cell; EDTA = ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid; iPSC = induced pluripotent stem cell. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
| Cell density (cells/mm2) | | |
| H9 | mean | stdev |
| Mechanical harvest before further passaging | 3918 | 263.3 |
| Mechanical harvest 20 times | 3868 | 197.7 |
| EDTA harvest 20 times | 4080 | 127.8 |
| HS429 | mean | stdev |
| Mechanical harvest before further passaging | 5249 | 565.4 |
| Mechanical harvest 20 times | 5247 | 726.3 |
| EDTA harvest 20 times | 4963 | 448.8 |
Table 1: Comparison of the cell densities in the colonies from the two hESC lines (H9 and HS429) generated after EDTA-based or mechanical harvesting. The cell densities were assessed either after a single passage using mechanical harvesting, after 20 passages using mechanical harvesting, or after 20 passages using EDTA-based harvesting (at 1:5 dilution). In all cases, n = 5 colonies.