Harlow Olivia S, Ravi Vijay Raaj, Ke Fang, Sanders Nathan L, Armstrong Elise, Mizgerd Joseph P, Shenoy Anukul T
Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States.
Pulmonary Center, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, United States.
Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2025 Feb 1;328(2):L260-L266. doi: 10.1152/ajplung.00323.2024. Epub 2025 Jan 9.
Rigor and reproducibility are vital to scientific advancement. It is unclear whether a protocol optimized for tissue dissociation in one institution performs well universally. Here, we share our brand-new lab's experience with interinstitutional variability that led to the discovery that a protocol optimized for murine lung dissociation at Boston University (BU) fails to reproduce similar CD4 T cell, CD8 T cell, and B cell outcomes at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor (U-M). We report that the type 2 collagenase-based protocol from BU yields reduced numbers of lung lymphocytes at U-M, and this appeared to be a result of harsher collagenase activity despite using identical protocols, reagents, and vendors at both institutions. This variability could not be explained by higher Ca levels in Ann Arbor water (which we posited may heighten the collagenase activity) but instead appeared to be due to technical details within the protocol that led to the protocols behaving in an institution-specific manner. Indeed, we find that merely switching between the protocol from BU and a newly optimized protocol at U-M was sufficient to improve (or worsen) lymphocyte yields from murine lungs when synchronously performed at both institutions. Taken together, although the reason(s) for the interinstitutional variability in lymphocyte outcomes remains unknown, this report serves as a cautionary tale against directly adopting lung dissociation protocols across institutions without reoptimization, and calls for careful inspection of cross-institutional reproducibility of previously described protocols. Rigor and reproducibility are vital to scientific advancement. It is unclear whether a protocol optimized for tissue dissociation in one institution performs well universally. Here, the authors share their experience with interinstitutional variability that led to the discovery that a protocol optimized for murine lung dissociation in one institution failed to reproduce similar lymphocyte outcomes elsewhere. This report, thus, serves as a cautionary tale against directly adopting tissue dissociation protocols across institutions without reoptimization.
严谨性和可重复性对科学进步至关重要。目前尚不清楚在一个机构中针对组织解离优化的方案在其他地方是否也能普遍适用。在此,我们分享我们新实验室关于机构间差异的经验,该差异导致我们发现,波士顿大学(BU)针对小鼠肺解离优化的方案在安阿伯的密歇根大学(U-M)无法重现类似的CD4 T细胞、CD8 T细胞和B细胞结果。我们报告称,来自BU的基于Ⅱ型胶原酶的方案在U-M产生的肺淋巴细胞数量减少,尽管两个机构使用的方案、试剂和供应商相同,但这似乎是由于胶原酶活性更强所致。这种差异无法用安阿伯水中较高的钙含量来解释(我们曾推测这可能会增强胶原酶活性),而似乎是由于方案中的技术细节导致方案在不同机构有不同表现。事实上,我们发现,仅仅在BU的方案和U-M新优化的方案之间切换,当在两个机构同步进行时,就足以提高(或降低)小鼠肺淋巴细胞的产量。综上所述,尽管淋巴细胞结果的机构间差异原因尚不清楚,但本报告警示人们,在未重新优化的情况下,切勿直接在不同机构采用肺解离方案,并呼吁仔细检查先前所述方案的跨机构可重复性。严谨性和可重复性对科学进步至关重要。目前尚不清楚在一个机构中针对组织解离优化的方案在其他地方是否也能普遍适用。在此,作者分享他们关于机构间差异的经验,该差异导致他们发现,在一个机构中针对小鼠肺解离优化的方案在其他地方无法重现类似的淋巴细胞结果。因此,本报告警示人们,在未重新优化的情况下,切勿直接在不同机构采用组织解离方案。