During development and regeneration, tissues emerge from coordinated sequences of stem cell renewal, specialization, and assembly that are orchestrated by cascades of regulatory factors. This complex in vivo milieu, while necessary to fully recapitulate biology and to properly engineer progenitor cells, is difficult to replicate in vitro. We are just starting to fully realize the importance of the entire context of cell microenvironment—the other cells, three-dimensional matrix, molecular and physical signals. Bioengineered environments that combine tissue-specific transport and signaling are critical to study cellular responses at biologically relevant scales and in settings predictive of human condition. We therefore developed microbioreactors that couple the application of fast dynamic changes in environmental signals with versatile, high-throughput operation and imaging capability. Our base device is a microfluidic platform with an array of microwells containing cells or tissue constructs that are exposed to stable concentration gradients. Mathematical modeling of flow and mass transport can predict the shape of these gradients and the kinetic changes in local concentrations. A single platform, the size of a microscope slide, contains up to 120 biological samples. As an example of application, we describe studies of cell fate specification and mesodermal lineage commitment in human embryonic stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cells. The embryoid bodies formed from these cells were subjected to single and multiple concentration gradients of Wnt3a, Activin A, bone morphogenic protein 4 (BMP4), and their inhibitors, and the gene expression profiles were correlated to the concentration gradients of morphogens to identify the exact conditions for mesodermal differentiation.
MurryCEKellerG. Differentiation of embryonic stem cells to clinically relevant populations: Lessons from embryonic development. Cell2008; 132: 661–80.
5.
ZhangS. Beyond the petri dish. Nat Biotechnol2004; 22: 151–2.
6.
BurdickJAVunjak-NovakovicG. Engineered microenvironments for controlled stem cell differentiation. Tissue Eng Part A2009; 15: 205–19.
7.
ChenDSDavisMM. Molecular and functional analysis using live cell microarrays. Curr Opin Chem Biol2006; 10: 28–34.
8.
CimettaECannizzaroCJamesRBiecheleTMoonRTElvassoreNVunjak-NovakovicG. Microfluidic device generating stable concentration gradients for long term cell culture: Application to wnt3a regulation of b-catenin signaling. Lab Chip2010; 10: 3277–83.
WhitesidesGM. The origins and the future of microfluidics. Nature2006; 442: 368–73.
11.
WattFMHoganBLM. Out of Eden: Stem cells and their niches. Science2000; 287: 1427–30.
12.
CimettaESirabellaDYeagerKDavidsonKSimonJMoonRTVunjak-NovakovicG. Microfluidic bioreactor for dynamic regulation of early mesodermal commitment in human pluripotent stem cells. Lab Chip2013; 13: 355–64.
13.
KhademhosseiniALangerRBorensteinJVacantiJP. Microscale technologies for tissue engineering and biology. PNAS2006; 103: 2480–7.
14.
MooreKALemischkaIR. Stem cells and their niches. Science2006; 311: 1880–5.
15.
SpradlingADrummond-BarbosaDKaiT. Stem cells find their niche. Nature2001; 414: 98–104.
16.
CimettaEFigalloECannizzaroCElvassoreNVunjak-NovakovicG. Micro-bioreactor arrays for controlling cellular environments: Design principles for human embryonic stem cell applications. Methods2009; 47: 81–9.
17.
JeonNLDertingerSKWChiuDTChoiISStroockADWhitesidesGM. Generation of solution and surface gradients using microfluidic systems. Langmuir2000; 16: 8311–6.
18.
SquiresTMQuakeSR. Microfluidics: Fluid physics at the nanoliter scale. Rev Mod Phys2005; 77: 977–1016.
19.
DischerDEJanmeyPWangY-L. Tissue cells feel and respond to the stiffness of their substrate. Science2005; 310: 1139–43.
20.
EnglerABacakovaLNewmanCHateganAGriffinMDischerD. Substrate compliance versus ligand density in cell on gel responses. Biophys J2004; 86: 617–28.
21.
EnglerAJGriffinMASenSBönnemannCGSweeneyHLDischerDE. Myotubes differentiate optimally on substrates with tissue-like stiffness: Pathological implications for soft or stiff microenvironments. J Cell Biol2004; 166: 877–87.
SerenaECimettaEZattiSZagliaTZagalloMKellerGElvassoreN. Micro-arrayed human embryonic stem cells-derived cardiomyocytes for in vitro functional assay. PLoS One2012; 7: e48483–e48483.
24.
SerenaEZattiSReghelinEPasutACimettaEElvassoreN. Soft substrates drive optimal differentiation of human healthy and dystrophic myotubes. Integr Biol2010; 2: 193–201.
25.
KensahGGruhIVieringJSchumannHDahlmannJMeyerHSkvorcDBärAAkhyariPHeisterkampAHaverichAMartinU. A novel miniaturized multimodal bioreactor for continuous in situ assessment of bioartificial cardiac tissue during stimulation and maturation. Tissue Eng Part C Methods2011; 17: 463–73.
26.
AbaciHEDevendraRSomanRDrazerGGerechtS. Microbioreactors to manipulate oxygen tension and shear stress in the microenvironment of vascular stem and progenitor cells. Biotechnol Appl Biochem2012; 59: 97–105.
27.
GobaaSHoehnelSRoccioMNegroAKobelSLutolfMP. Artificial niche microarrays for probing single stem cell fate in high throughput. Nat Methods2011; 8: 949–55.
28.
HuhDHamiltonGAIngberDE. From 3D cell culture to organs-on-chips. Trends Cell Biol2011; 21: 745–54.
29.
YumKHongSGHealyKELeeLP. Physiologically relevant organs on chips. Biotechnol J2014; 9: 16–27.
30.
StevensKRUngrinMDSchwartzRENgSCarvalhoBChristineKSChaturvediRRLiCYZandstraPWChenCSBhatiaSN. Invert molding for scalable control of tissue microarchitecture. Nat Commun2013; 4: 1847–1847.
31.
KimaHJIngberDE. Gut-on-a-chip microenvironment induces human intestinal cells to undergo villus differentiation. Integr Biol2013; 5: 1130–1130.
32.
HuiEEBhatiaSN. Micromechanical control of cell-cell interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA2007; 104: 5722–6.
33.
KhetaniSRBhatiaSN. Microscale culture of human liver cells for drug development. Nat Biotechnol2008; 26: 120–6.
34.
HuhDMatthewsBDMammotoAMontoya-ZavalaMHsinHYIngberDE. Reconstituting organ-level lung functions on a chip. Science2010; 328: 1662–8.
35.
ZhengYChenJCravenMChoiNWTotoricaSDiaz-SantanaAKermaniPHempsteadBFischbach-TeschlCLópezJAStroockAD. In vitro microvessels for the study of angiogenesis and thrombosis. PNAS2012; 109: 9342–7.
KattmanSJWittyADGagliardiMDuboisNCNiapourMHottaAEllisJKellerG. Stage-specific optimization of activin/nodal and bmp signaling promotes cardiac differentiation of mouse and human pluripotent stem cell lines. Cell Stem Cell2011; 8: 228–40.
40.
CoudreuseDYMRoelGBetistMCDestreOKorswagenHC. Wnt gradient formation requires retromer function in wnt-producing cells. Science2006; 312: 921–4.
41.
JacksonSASchiesserJStanleyAGElefantyAG. Differentiating embryonic stem cells pass through ‘temporal windows’ that mark responsiveness to exogenous and paracrine mesendoderm inducing signals. PLoS One2010; 5: e10706–e10706.
42.
KattmanSJHuberTLKellerGM. Multipotent flk-1+ cardiovascular progenitor cells give rise to the cardiomyocyte, endothelial, and vascular smooth muscle lineages. Dev Cell2006; 11: 723–32.
43.
Yang L, Soonpaa MH, Adler ED, Roepke TK, Kattman SJ, Kennedy M, Henckaerts E, Bonham K, Abbott GW, Linden RM, Field LJ , Keller GM. Human cardiovascular progenitor cells develop from a kdr1 embryonic-stem-cell-derived population. Nature 2008;453:524–8..
44.
ZhangJWilsonGFSoerensAGKoonceCHYuJPalecekSPThomsonJAKampTJ. Functional cardiomyocytes derived from human induced pluripotent stem cells. Circ Res2009; 104: e30–41.
45.
Kouskoff V, Lacaud G, Schwantz S, Fehling HJ, Keller G. Sequential development of hematopoietic and cardiac mesoderm during embryonic stem cell differentiation. PNAS 2005;102:13170–5..
46.
BauwensCLPeeraniRNiebrueggeSWoodhouseKAKumachevaEHusainMZandstraPW. Control of human embryonic stem cell colony and aggregate size heterogeneity influences differentiation trajectories. Stem Cells2008; 26: 2300–10.
