Zaloguj się

Aby wyświetlić tę treść, wymagana jest subskrypcja JoVE. Zaloguj się lub rozpocznij bezpłatny okres próbny.

W tym Artykule

  • Podsumowanie
  • Streszczenie
  • Wprowadzenie
  • Protokół
  • Wyniki
  • Dyskusje
  • Ujawnienia
  • Podziękowania
  • Materiały
  • Odniesienia
  • Przedruki i uprawnienia

Podsumowanie

This protocol shows an accurate and objective approach to visualize viral titrations using crystal violet, by comparing it with optical microscopy and immunocytochemical staining.

Streszczenie

Viral titration is a key assay for virology research. The detection of cytopathic effect (CPE) via TCID50 assays and plaque-forming units (PFU) assays are the two main methods to calculate the titer of a virus stock and are often based on microscopy detection or cell staining for visualization. In the case of TCID50 assay, objective visualization is commonly based on immunocytochemical (ICC) staining of intracellular virus to calculate titers combined with visual CPE detection via microscopy. However, ICC staining is costly and time consuming. In this study, we compared visual CPE observation via microscopy, ICC staining and crystal violet staining to determine the titers of two CPE-forming viruses, Influenza A virus (IAV) of swine origin and Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome virus (PRRSV). We show that both crystal violet and ICC staining are more accurate than visual CPE detection, presenting nearly identical levels of precision on both IAV and PRRSV. For this reason, here we present crystal violet staining as a faster and more affordable way to determine viral titrations on a TCID50 assay for CPE-forming viruses titrated in cell lines.

Wprowadzenie

Viral titration via TCID50 assay is a commonly used technique in infectious disease research1. Although variations on the math behind this method have been proposed over time1,2,3,4, the currently applied methods of infection detection rely on visual confirmation through the presence of cytopathic effect (CPE) using microscopy5. To confirm CPE visualization more objectively on TCID50 assays, immunocytochemical (ICC) intracellular staining targeting the proteins of the virus is one of the most-commonly used methods6 as different viruses can produce varying forms of CPE. In our case, the cell morphological changes are similar when infected with both Influenza A virus (IAV) and Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus (PRRSV), where infected cells round up and detach from the plate. In the case of PRRSV, it causes a CPE known as "total destruction", where all cells end up detaching from the well. IAV on the other hand, can present both total destruction and an additional CPE known as "subtotal destruction" where a small number of cells do not detach after infection7. However, this technique is time consuming to perform and requires the use of relatively costly reagents. It is important to note that ICC does not label CPE, but rather the number of cells successfully infected by the virus. This implies that the cells that were successfully infected by the end of the incubation will be seen as positive even if the infection has not caused CPE yet, and thus, a higher percentage of ICC positive cells compared to CPE is expected. For that reason, in this study we describe a complementary method of visual detection of CPE in a TCID50 assay based on crystal violet, a chemical with a positive charge that attaches to cell membranes and is used to stain adherent cells. Crystal violet is often utilized in virology research to measure plaque-forming units, among others8.

In this study, we compare the sensitivity of non-stained microscopy CPE detection with crystal violet staining and immunocytochemical staining based on viral protein recognition, which is known to be more objective due to its high sensitivity. This study shows that both crystal violet and immunocytochemical staining are more accurate than visual microscopy-based CPE detection and can be used to objectively identify infected wells in a TCID50 titration. Given their ability to reach nearly identical level of accuracy on the cytopathic viruses tested in cell lines, crystal violet is presented as a faster and more affordable way to determine viral titrations on a TCID50 assay. The proposed method using crystal violet staining takes a total time of 40 min to perform, with 15 min for paraformaldehyde (PFA) incubation, 5 min for crystal violet incubation and a maximum of 15 min for material preparation, buffer washes, and drying. The immunocytochemistry protocol applied for comparison takes an average time of 4 h 30 min and was performed as previously described9,10. The method proposed aims to help visualize a completed viral titration. Infection and incubation times can be performed with different layout depending on the virus. Here we tested two RNA viruses with cytopathic effect on cell lines.

Protokół

1. Titration protocol

NOTE: Use a cytopathic virus infecting adherent cells. For this demonstration, Influenza A Virus (IAV) of swine origin (A/California/07/2009/(H1N1)) and Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus (PRRSV) Type 2, strain NC 1-7-4 were used.

  1. Titrate these viruses in 96 well plates for 7 days in a biosafety cabinet located in a Biosafety Level 2 (BSL-2) laboratory.
    1. To perform these titrations, seed 96 well plates with the required cell line. For PRRSV, use MA-104 cell line and for IAV use MDCK cell line. For the cell culture, use DMEM medium supplemented with 10% FBS, L-Glutamine and Penicillin-Streptomycin and grow the cells to confluency.
    2. Before infection, wash the cells using 200 µL of PBS.
    3. Dilute the virus stocks using 10 fold dilutions series by mixing 900 µL of media and 100 µL of virus. Make sure to properly vortex the tube to ensure proper mixing of the medium and virus and to avoid dilution errors.
    4. Mark the layout of the plate on the lid. Wash the wells with 1x phosphate saline buffer (PBS). Add 50 µL of the inoculum in the corresponding wells following previously described titration methods2,3.
    5. Incubate at 37 °C in a 5% CO2 incubator for 7 days.

2. Cytopathic effect (CPE) assessment via microscopy

  1. After the 7-day incubation, wash all wells with 200 µL of 1x PBS twice.
  2. Assess all wells of the plate under a light microscope to visually detect CPE. In the case of both PRRSV and IAV, their CPE consists of cell death and subsequent detachment from the plate, leading to monolayer disruption. However, other viruses may present different types of CPE.

3. Staining protocol

NOTE: Cytopathic effect (CPE) was assessed via crystal violet staining.

  1. After the 7-day incubation, wash all the wells using 200 µL of 1x PBS twice.
  2. Fix the cells by adding 50 µL/well of 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) in 1x PBS and incubate for 15 min at room temperature (RT).
  3. After incubation, wash the cells twice with 200 µL of 1x PBS. Then, add 50 µL/well of crystal violet diluted to 4% in water and incubate for 5 min at RT.
    NOTE: Crystal violet chemical stains the cells that remain attached to the plate at the time of fixation, leaving the sections of the well where the cells detached as unstained.
  4. Finally, aspirate crystal violet from the wells and optionally leave the plates to air dry for 2-5 min at RT or wash the plate with 200 µL of water to remove excess stain prior to visualization.
  5. Use previously described methods to mathematically calculate the titer. Here, Karber formula and Muench formula were applied for PRRSV and IAV, respectively2,3. Details of these equations are presented in the representative result section.

4. Immunocytochemical (ICC) labeling

NOTE: Immunocytochemistry labeling for both viruses was performed following previously described methods9,10,11.

  1. After the 7-day incubation of the titration, fix the cells using PFA as described in step 3.2.
  2. Wash the plates with a solution composed by 100 mL of 1 M Tris hydrochloride, 1 g of Saponin, and 8.5 g of NaCl in 900 mL of H2O. Then, complete two additional washes with a mixture of 1x PBS and 5% Fetal Bovine Serum (FBS) and incubate with that Tris-Saponin-NaCl solution at Room temperature (RT) for 20 min.
  3. Incubate all the wells with the primary antibody for 2 h at RT.
    NOTE: The volume of primary antibodies for each virus was 100 µL and was prepared using a 1:300 dilution of 2% FBS in 1x PBS.
  4. Wash the cells twice with the Tris, Saponin, and NaCl solution prepared in step 4.2.
  5. Incubate all the wells with the secondary antibody for 1 h at RT.
    NOTE: The volume of secondary antibody was 100 µL and was prepared using a 1:250 dilution of 2% FBS in 1x PBS.
  6. Wash the cells with the Tris, Saponin, and NaCl dilution as described in step 4.2.
  7. Aspirate the previous dilution and incubate the plates with 200 µL/well of aminoethyl carbazole (AEC) solution at a final dilution of 1:50 in water following the manufacturer's directions for 30 min at RT.
  8. After incubation, discard the AEC solution and add 100 µL/well of 1x PBS for imaging via microscopy.
  9. Mathematically derive the titer as described in step 3.5.

Wyniki

The equations used for mathematically calculating the titer were previously described2,3.

Briefly, for PRRSV, we apply the Karber method:

Titer (TCID50) = 10 T + 1.3 where:

figure-results-352

In this formula d = negative log of the last dilution with complete positive virus response: five posi...

Dyskusje

Viral titrations are routinely used in virology research, with PFU detection and TCID50 assays most commonly used1,2,3,4. Both methods rely on the detection of CPE in infected cells, and even though they can be visually assessed via microscopy, a staining is usually applied to obtain a more objective result or to even reduce incubation times. In the case of TCID50, one of the most comm...

Ujawnienia

The authors have nothing to disclose.

Podziękowania

Authors would like to acknowledge Dr. Frank Scholle for his helpful comments in the manuscript, Chloe Mariant for her help with the microscopy images and Teresa M. Tiedge for her helpful English revision.

Materiały

NameCompanyCatalog NumberComments
96-well cell culture platesGenesee25-221Clear, flat bottom
AEC solutionThermo Fisher1122
Crystal violetThermo FisherC581-25; C581-100
DMEMCorning10-017-CV
Fetal bovine serumBioWestS1480
ParaformaldehideThermo FisherJ19943
Primary Influenza AntibodyBiossBS-0344R
Primary PRRSV AntibodyBiossBS-10043R
SaponinThermo ScientificAAA1882014
Secondaty antibodyInvitrogen31460
Tris HydrochlorideThermo ScientificAM9856

Odniesienia

  1. Kärber, G. Contribution to the collective treatment of pharmacological series experiments. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archive for Experimental Pathology and Pharmacology. 162 (4), 480-483 (1931).
  2. Ramakrishnan, M. A. Determination of 50% endpoint titer using a simple formula. World Journal of Virology. 5 (2), 85-86 (2016).
  3. Reed, L. J., Muench, H. A simple method of estimating fifty per cent endpoints. American Journal of Epidemiology. 27 (3), 493-497 (1938).
  4. Spearman, C. The method of right and wrong cases (constant stimuli) without Gauss's formulae. British Journal of Psychology. 2 (3), 227 (1908).
  5. Darling, A. J., Boose, J. A., Spaltro, J. Virus assay methods: accuracy and validation. Biologicals. 26 (2), 105-110 (1998).
  6. Kim, J., Chae, C. A comparison of virus isolation, polymerase chain reaction, immunohistochemistry, and in situ hybridization for the detection of porcine circovirus 2 and porcine parvovirus in experimentally and naturally coinfected pigs. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. 16 (1), 45-50 (2004).
  7. Suchman, E., Blair, C. Cytopathic effects of viruses protocols. American Society of Microbiology. , (2007).
  8. Karakus, U., Crameri, M., Lanz, C., Yángüez, E. . Influenza Virus. , 59-88 (2018).
  9. Tingstedt, J. -. E., Nielsen, J. Cellular immune responses in the lungs of pigs infected in utero with PRRSV: an immunohistochemical study. Viral Immunology. 17 (4), 558-564 (2004).
  10. Guarner, J., et al. Immunohistochemical and in situ hybridization studies of influenza A virus infection in human lungs. American Journal of Clinical Pathology. 114 (2), 227-233 (2000).
  11. Nicholls, J. M., et al. Detection of highly pathogenic influenza and pandemic influenza virus in formalin fixed tissues by immunohistochemical methods. Journal of Virological Methods. 179 (2), 409-413 (2012).

Przedruki i uprawnienia

Zapytaj o uprawnienia na użycie tekstu lub obrazów z tego artykułu JoVE

Zapytaj o uprawnienia

Przeglądaj więcej artyków

Crystal VioletVisual Cytopathic EffectViral TitrationTCID50 AssaysCell LineDilutionBiosafety Level 2 LaboratoryPBS WashPFA FixationMicroscopy DetectionCPE DetectionPlaque forming UnitsViral Stock Calculation

This article has been published

Video Coming Soon

JoVE Logo

Prywatność

Warunki Korzystania

Zasady

Badania

Edukacja

O JoVE

Copyright © 2025 MyJoVE Corporation. Wszelkie prawa zastrzeżone