Page 44 - IJB-2-2
P. 44

Colony development of laser printed eukaryotic (yeast and microalga) microorganisms in co-culture

            scope (LSM 700 with 4 laser lines) with an inverted   partly “empty”.
            stage. A 10X lens and the “tile stacking” function were   The results could be analysed by applying the ex-
            used to observe the development of the colonies. A   ponential growth  model, normally  applied  to cell
            laser  excitation  wavelength  of  555  nm was  used  to   populations [17]   to the entire  micro-colonies. The lag
            observe C. vulgaris cells and micro-colonies.      period  lasted  approximately three days for both  mi-
               Image analysis was performed using  the ImageJ   croorganisms. Growth took place both within and out-
            software  (http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/). The area of  the   side of the  initial droplet. Once the  droplets were
            colonies was measured by classical image processing   “full”, growth continued on the external radius. From
            operations:                                        day 9 onwards, the colonies started to come into con-
                 conversion  to binary using the  threshold value   tact with one another and growth could no longer be
                 obtained by the moments method                considered unrestricted.  It appeared that  C. vulgaris
                 hole filling                                 dominated S. bayanus—maybe thanks to the CO 2 pro-
                 pixel size calibration                       vided by the  yeast. In a  photo-bioreactor containing
                 particle analysis                            defined medium with glucose (10 g/L), photosynthesis
            3. Results                                         over heterotrophic  growth  was privileged by  C. vul-
                                                               garis (data not shown). In this study the plates were lit
            S. bayanus  and  C. vulgaris  micro-colonies could be   so it is possible that C. vulgaris grew photosyntheti-
            easily distinguished by using the natural fluorescence   cally while S. bayanus grew heterotrophically.
            of chlorophyll (emission peak at 668 nm) (Figure 2).   Growth of the two organisms  was followed by
            After this initial identification, the growth of the mi-  measuring the surface areas and radii of their colonies
            cro-colonies could be easily followed by daily obser-  (Figure 4). Following growth by colony radius meas-
            vation of the colonies (Figure 3). This required image   urement, S. bayanus started to grow first but then rea-
            analysis (Figure 4) could take into account the amount   ched the stationary phase before C. vulgaris (Figure 5).
            of biomass present in each droplet, especially during   Following colony growth with surface density (area),
            the early stages of  growth while  the droplets were   S. bayanus started growing a day later than C. vulgaris
                                                               but reached almost the same extent of  growth  as  C.
                                                               vulgaris (Figure 6). C. vulgaris colonies were bigger
                                                               at the end of the experiment. This was not due to the
                                                               darker colour  of  the  C.  vulgaris  colonies, as image
                                                               analysis was performed in such a way as to take this
                                                               into  consideration (Figure 4). Growth  of  S. bayanus
                                                               peaked  between 3 to 7  days (Figure 6);  C. vulgaris
                                                               exhibited its fastest growth  rate between  2–6 days
                                                               (Figure 6). The order of growth for the two organisms
                                                               suggests that C. vulgaris benefited from the presence
                                                               of S. bayanus possibly due to the local production of
                                                               CO 2.
                                                                 Despite the fact that the growth rate of S. bayanus
                                                               was faster than that of C. vulgaris (Figure 7), the in-
                                                               ternal  part  of each  colony (droplet) was completely
                                                               occupied within 6 days for C. vulgaris and 7 days for

            Figure 2.  Identification of  C. vulgaris  microcolonies after   S. bayanus (Figure 3).
            printing using the natural fluorescence of chlorophyll. Typical   The  colonies grew internally within the droplets
            cell pattern obtained by the two-step laser printing: C. vulgaris   first, then both internally and  externally, and finally
            can  be easily distinguished  from  S. bayanus,  thanks to the   only externally to the droplets (Figure 3). Taking this
            natural fluorescence of  chlorophyll  excited  at  455 nm. The   growth pattern into account, it seems that the total sur-
            scale bar indicates 200 µm, the distance between the centres of
            adjacent printed microcolonies. The red fluorescence indicated   face area of the colonies would be the best parameter
            the presence of  chlorophyll. This picture was taken upon the   for the quantification of colony growth (Figure 6).
            receipt of the printed samples designated as day 1. The image   The growth  of  S. bayanus  stopped at day 9 after
            has been cropped to show a typical part of the bio-printed field.   which the apparent surface area of the yeast colonies

            40                          International Journal of Bioprinting (2016)–Volume 2, Issue 2
   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49