Representative plots of flow cytometry analysis of HSCs and MPPs in a healthy young adult C57Bl/6 mouse are shown in Figure 1. The gating strategy follows the latest harmonizing nomenclature proposed by the ISEH13. When analyzing the impact of a perturbation, such as infection or cancer, it is important to use a control mouse as a reference for normal gates. Fluorescence-minus-one (FMO) controls can be particularly useful to delineate the boundaries of the gates, but it should be noted that blindly setting up gate limits based on FMOs may omit target cells or include non-target cells. For example, the lower the intensity of the CD48 set, the higher the enrichment for quiescent long-term HSCs17. Furthermore, different properties of certain populations rely on the intensity of specific markers. For example, HSCs expressing higher CD150 levels are more myeloid-biased18.
The frequencies and absolute numbers obtained in the analysis of hematopoietic cell populations applied to a total of four animals are presented in Table 1.
Figure 2 shows representative plots of flow cytometry analysis of ECs and MSCs. The majority of hematopoietic cells are excluded following a Ter119/CD45 negative selection. LepR+ MSCs can then be readily identified, while true ECs require a subsequent selection of Sca-1+ cells. While Sca-1 is often used in immunofluorescence studies to specifically mark arterioles, this is not the case in flow cytometry, as this technique is highly sensitive, and ECs always express a certain (even if low) degree of Sca-1 at the cell surface. By not selecting only Sca-1+ cells, other non-endothelial cells would be included in the analysis, such as CD31-expressing myeloid cells, which might significantly impact the quantification of ECs in the BM. ECs can be analyzed as a whole population or based on specific markers that partially reveal their heterogeneity. Endomucin in combination with CD31 is very useful to identify the functionally distinct type H endothelium15 (Figure 2). Furthermore, it has been previously shown that ICAM-1 expression allows the discrimination between arteriolar (aBMECs) and sinusoidal ECs (sBMECs) (Figure 3)20.
The frequencies and absolute numbers obtained in the analysis of MSCs and endothelial cell populations applied to a total of four animals are presented in Table 2 and Table 3.
Although BM functional areas are not clearly delineated in evident histological regions, it is well established that bone-lining endosteal areas and central BM areas are enriched in certain cell types and events (e.g., the release of platelets/pro-platelets from megakaryocytes in the sinusoids of central BM areas). It is, therefore, useful to enrich for cell types in central and endosteal areas to separately analyze these two compartments. We applied a method of flushing the diaphysis to enrich for central cell types and crushing the metaphysis to enrich for endosteal cell types (Figure 4A). The quantification of aBMECs and sBMECs in flushed (central) and crushed (endosteal) BM tissue (Figure 4B) validates the applicability of this mechanical isolation method, as aBMECs are notoriously more abundant in endosteal regions, and sinusoids are more frequent in central BM areas.

Figure 1: Analysis of hematopoietic cell populations. Representative plots showing the gating strategy for the flow cytometry analysis of hematopoietic cell populations in total BM using the software provided. Abbreviations: FSC-H = forward scatter - height, FSC-A = forward scatter - area, Lin = lineage, LKS = Lin- Sca-1+ c-Kit+ hematopoietic progenitor cells, MPPsLy = multipotent progenitors - lymphoid, MPPsG/M = multipotent progenitors - granulocyte/macrophage, MPPsMk/E = multipotent progenitors - megakaryocyte/erythrocyte, MPPs = multipotent progenitors, HSCs = hematopoietic stem cells. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2: Analysis of stromal cell populations. Representative plots showing the gating strategy for the flow cytometry analysis of stromal cells in total BM using the software provided. Abbreviations: FSC-H = forward scatter - height, FSC-A = forward scatter - area, MSCs = mesenchymal stem cells, LepR = leptin receptor, ECs = endothelial cells. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 3: Analysis of endothelial cells. Representative plots showing the gating strategy for the flow cytometry analysis of ECs in total BM using the software provided. Abbreviations: FSC-H = forward scatter - height, FSC-A = forward scatter - area, ECs = endothelial cells, aBMECs = arterial bone marrow endothelial cells, sBMECs = sinusoidal bone marrow endothelial cells. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 4: Analysis of EC populations in central and endosteal areas. (A) Representation of the different parts of a murine long bone. (B) Plots showing the statistically significant differences in the frequencies of CD31+ endothelial cells in aBMECs (enriched in the crushed sample) and sBMECs (enriched in the flushed sample). Each dot represents a mouse (n = 9), and samples are paired. The statistical test used was the paired T-test. **** denotes two-tailed P-value < 0.0001. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
| Cell population | Mean of freq. of BM live cells ± SD (n=4) in total BM | Mean of cell count ± SD (n=4) per femur in total BM | Mean of freq. of BM live cells ± SD (n=4) in endosteal BM | Mean of freq. of BM live cells ± SD (n=4) in central BM |
| Lin- | 3.05 ± 0.13 | 337610 ± 59414 | 3.56 ± 0.21 | 3.53 ± 0.19 |
| LKS | 0.096 ± 0.026 | 10206 ± 1794 | 0.102 ± 0.025 | 0.133 ± 0.022 |
| MPPsLy | 0.058 ± 0.011 | 6141 ± 716 | 0.058 ± 0.011 | 0.085 ± 0.007 |
| MPPsG/M | 0.011 ± 0.004 | 1233 ± 326 | 0.013 ± 0.003 | 0.014 ± 0.003 |
| MPPsMk/E | 0.0010 ± 0.0002 | 113 ± 21 | 0.0014 ± 0.0004 | 0.0012 ± 0.0005 |
| MPPs | 0.0092 ± 0.0045 | 940 ± 374 | 0.0105 ± 0.0048 | 0.0118 ± 0.0061 |
| HSCs | 0.0054 ± 0.0023 | 572 ± 191 | 0.0055 ± 0.0023 | 0.0059 ± 0.0016 |
Table 1: Quantitative data for hematopoietic cell populations. Mean of frequency in BM live cells of the different hematopoietic cell populations analyzed in total, endosteal, and central BM and cell counts per femur in total BM. Data shown as mean ± standard deviation (SD), n = 4.
| Cell population | Mean of freq. of BM live cells ± SD (n=4) | Mean of cell count ± SD (n=4) per tibia |
| ECs | 0.080 ± 0.011 | 4523 ± 1521 |
| Type H ECs | 0.041 ± 0.006 | 2299 ± 752 |
| Type L ECs | 0.038 ± 0.005 | 2103 ± 736 |
| MSCs | 0.180 ± 0.048 | 10270 ± 4282 |
Table 2: Quantitative data for stromal cell populations. Mean of frequency in BM live cells and cell counts per tibia for the different stromal cell populations analyzed in total BM. Data shown as mean ± standard deviation (SD), n = 4.
| Cell population | Mean of freq. of BM live cells ± SD (n=4) | Mean of cell count ± SD (n=4) per tibia |
| ECs | 0.064 ± 0.006 | 2255 ± 150 |
| aBMECs | 0.041 ± 0.010 | 1419 ± 286 |
| sBMECs | 0.023 ± 0.006 | 819 ± 250 |
Table 3: Quantitative data for endothelial cell populations. Mean of frequency in BM live cells and cell counts per tibia for the different endothelial cell populations analyzed in total BM. Data shown as mean ± standard deviation (SD), n = 4.
Supplementary Table 1: Details of the animals used in the study. Strain, sex, age, and weight of the animals used to produce the data shown in Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 3 and Table 1, Table 2, and Table 3. Abbreviation: g = grams. Please click here to download this File.