Protocol | Published:

Modular approach for resolving and mapping complex neural and other cellular structures and their associated deformation fields in three dimensions


Understanding the biological implications of cellular mechanotransduction, especially in the context of pathogenesis, requires the accurate resolution of material deformation and strain fields surrounding the cells. This is particularly challenging for cells displaying branched, 3D architectures. Here, we provide a modular approach for 3D image segmentation and strain mapping of topologically complex structures. We describe how to use our approach, using neural cells and networks as an example. In addition to describing how to implement the computational analysis, we provide details of a cell culture protocol that can be used to generate neural networks for analysis and experimentation. This protocol allows for transformation of matrix-induced strains, and their full resolution across single cells or networks in three dimensions. The protocol also provides analyses to compute both the locally varying cytoskeletal strains and the average strain experienced by cells. An additional module allows spatial correlation of these strain maps with cytoskeletal features, including neurite disruptions such as neuronal blebs. Image processing and strain mapping take ≥3 h, with the exact time required being dependent on use case, software familiarity, and file size.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Related link

Key references using this protocol

Bar-Kochba, E., Scimone, M. T., Estrada, J.B. & Franck, C. Sci. Rep. 6, 30550 (2016):


  1. 1.

    Nelson, C. M. et al. Emergent patterns of growth controlled by multicellular form and mechanics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102, 11594–11599 (2005).

  2. 2.

    Thery, M. et al. The extracellular matrix guides the orientation of the cell division axis. Nat. Cell Biol. 7, 947–953 (2005).

  3. 3.

    Mammoto, T. & Ingber, D. E. Mechanical control of tissue and organ development. Development 137, 1407–1420 (2010).

  4. 4.

    Guilak, F. et al. Control of stem cell fate by physical interactions with the extracellular matrix. Cell Stem Cell 5, 17–26 (2009).

  5. 5.

    Friedl, P. & Wolf, K. Plasticity of cell migration: a multiscale tuning model. J. Cell Biol. 188, 11–19 (2010).

  6. 6.

    LaPlaca, M. C., Cullen, D. K., McLoughlin, J. J. & Cargill, R. S. 2nd High rate shear strain of three-dimensional neural cell cultures: a new in vitro traumatic brain injury model. J. Biomech. 38, 1093–1105 (2005).

  7. 7.

    Petrie, R. J., Doyle, A. D. & Yamada, K. M. Random versus directionally persistent cell migration. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell. Biol. 10, 538–549 (2009).

  8. 8.

    Briggs, J. A. et al. The dynamics of gene expression in vertebrate embryogenesis at single-cell resolution. Science 360, eaar5780 (2018).

  9. 9.

    Bar-Kochba, E., Scimone, M. T., Estrada, J. B. & Franck, C. Strain and rate-dependent neuronal injury in a 3D in vitro compression model of traumatic brain injury. Sci. Rep. 6, 30550 (2016).

  10. 10.

    Butler, J. P., Tolic-Norrelykke, I. M., Fabry, B. & Fredberg, J. J. Traction fields, moments, and strain energy that cells exert on their surroundings. Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 282, C595–C605 (2002).

  11. 11.

    Legant, W. R. et al. Measurement of mechanical tractions exerted by cells in three-dimensional matrices. Nat. Methods 7, 969–971 (2010).

  12. 12.

    Toyjanova, J. et al. High resolution, large deformation 3D traction force microscopy. PLoS ONE 9, e90976 (2014).

  13. 13.

    Chaudhuri, O. et al. Hydrogels with tunable stress relaxation regulate stem cell fate and activity. Nat. Mater. 15, 326–334 (2016).

  14. 14.

    Madl, C. M. et al. Maintenance of neural progenitor cell stemness in 3D hydrogels requires matrix remodelling. Nat. Mater. 16, 1233–1242 (2017).

  15. 15.

    Rodriguez, A., Ehlenberger, D. B., Dickstein, D. L., Hof, P. R. & Wearne, S. L. Automated three-dimensional detection and shape classification of dendritic spines from fluorescence microscopy images. PLoS ONE 3, e1997 (2008).

  16. 16.

    Rodriguez, A., Ehlenberger, D. B., Hof, P. R. & Wearne, S. L. Rayburst sampling, an algorithm for automated three-dimensional shape analysis from laser scanning microscopy images. Nat. Protoc. 1, 2152–2161 (2006).

  17. 17.

    Miller, K. & Chinzei, K. Mechanical properties of brain tissue in tension. J. Biomech. 35, 483–490 (2002).

  18. 18.

    Prange, M. T. & Margulies, S. S. Regional, directional, and age-dependent properties of the brain undergoing large deformation. J. Biomech. Eng. 124, 244–252 (2002).

  19. 19.

    Cloots, R. J., van Dommelen, J. A., Nyberg, T., Kleiven, S. & Geers, M. G. Micromechanics of diffuse axonal injury: influence of axonal orientation and anisotropy. Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol. 10, 413–422 (2011).

  20. 20.

    Chavko, M. et al. Relationship between orientation to a blast and pressure wave propagation inside the rat brain. J. Neurosci. Methods 195, 61–66 (2011).

  21. 21.

    Tibbitt, M. W. & Anseth, K. S. Hydrogels as extracellular matrix mimics for 3D cell culture. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 103, 655–663 (2009).

  22. 22.

    Petersen, O. W., Ronnovjessen, L., Howlett, A. R. & Bissell, M. J. Interaction with basement-membrane serves to rapidly distinguish growth and differentiation pattern of normal and malignant human breast epithelial-cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89, 9064–9068 (1992).

  23. 23.

    Bosi, S. et al. From 2D to 3D: novel nanostructured scaffolds to investigate signalling in reconstructed neuronal networks. Sci. Rep. 5, 9562 (2015).

  24. 24.

    Hopkins, A. M., DeSimone, E., Chwalek, K. & Kaplan, D. L. 3D in vitro modeling of the central nervous system. Prog. Neurobiol. 125, 1–25 (2015).

  25. 25.

    Morrison, B., Cater, H. L., Benham, C. D. & Sundstrom, L. E. An in vitro model of traumatic brain injury utilising two-dimensional stretch of organotypic hippocampal slice cultures. J. Neurosci. Methods 150, 192–201 (2006).

  26. 26.

    Lossi, L., Alasia, S., Salio, C. & Merighi, A. Cell death and proliferation in acute slices and organotypic cultures of mammalian CNS. Prog. Neurobiol. 88, 221–245 (2009).

  27. 27.

    Lancaster, M. A. et al. Cerebral organoids model human brain development and microcephaly. Nature 501, 373-379 (2013).

  28. 28.

    Dingle, Y. T. L. et al. Three-dimensional neural spheroid culture: an in vitro model for cortical studies. Tissue Eng. Part C Methods 21, 1274–1283 (2015).

  29. 29.

    Boutin, M. E. et al. A three-dimensional neural spheroid model for capillary-like network formation. J. Neurosci. Methods 299, 55–63 (2018).

  30. 30.

    Berthiaume, F. & Morgan, J. R. (eds) Methods in Bioengineering: 3D Tissue Engineering (Artech House, Norwood, MA, 2010).

  31. 31.

    Cullen, D. K., Vernekar, V. N. & LaPlaca, M. C. Trauma-induced plasmalemma disruptions in three-dimensional neural cultures are dependent on strain modality and rate. J Neurotrauma 28, 2219–2233 (2011).

  32. 32.

    Xiao, T. et al. Assembly of lamina-specific neuronal connections by slit bound to type IV collagen. Cell 146, 164–176 (2011).

  33. 33.

    Mitchel, J. A. & Hoffman-Kim, D. Cellular scale anisotropic topography guides Schwann cell motility. PLoS ONE 6, e24316 (2011).

  34. 34.

    Frega, M., Tedesco, M., Massobrio, P., Pesce, M. & Martinoia, S. Network dynamics of 3D engineered neuronal cultures: a new experimental model for in-vitro electrophysiology. Sci. Rep. 4, 5489 (2014).

  35. 35.

    George, N. & Geller, H. M. Extracellular matrix and traumatic brain injury. J. Neurosci. Res. 96, 573–588 (2018).

  36. 36.

    Prochnow, N. Relevance of gap junctions and large pore channels in traumatic brain injury. Front. Physiol. 5, 31 (2014).

  37. 37.

    Sun, L. et al. A novel cognitive impairment mechanism that astrocytic p-connexin 43 promotes neuronic autophagy via activation of P2X7R and down-regulation of GLT-1 expression in the hippocampus following traumatic brain injury in rats. Behav. Brain Res. 291, 315–324 (2015).

  38. 38.

    Scemes, E., Suadicani, S. O., Dahl, G. & Spray, D. C. Connexin and pannexin mediated cell–cell communication. Neuron Glia Biol. 3, 199–208 (2007).

  39. 39.

    Draberova, E. et al. Class III beta-tubulin is constitutively coexpressed with glial fibrillary acidic protein and nestin in midgestational human fetal astrocytes: implications for phenotypic identity. J. Neuropathol. Exp. Neurol. 67, 341–354 (2008).

  40. 40.

    Hendrickson, M. L., Rao, A. J., Demerdash, O. N. & Kalil, R. E. Expression of nestin by neural cells in the adult rat and human brain. PLoS ONE 6, e18535 (2011).

  41. 41.

    Schmid, R. S. & Anton, E. S. Role of integrins in the development of the cerebral cortex. Cereb. Cortex 13, 219–224 (2003).

  42. 42.

    Parkin, J. D. et al. Mapping structural landmarks, ligand binding sites, and missense mutations to the collagen IV heterotrimers predicts major functional domains, novel interactions, and variation in phenotypes in inherited diseases affecting basement membranes. Hum. Mutat. 32, 127–143 (2011).

  43. 43.

    Gary, D. S., Milhavet, O., Camandola, S. & Mattson, M. P. Essential role for integrin linked kinase in Akt-mediated integrin survival signaling in hippocampal neurons. J. Neurochem. 84, 878–890 (2003).

  44. 44.

    Zhang, S., Zhao, E. & Winkelstein, B. A. A nociceptive role for integrin signaling in pain after mechanical injury to the spinal facet capsular ligament. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 45, 2813–2825 (2017).

  45. 45.

    Sun, Z., Guo, S. S. & Fassler, R. Integrin-mediated mechanotransduction. J. Cell Biol. 215, 445–456 (2016).

  46. 46.

    Ross, T. D. et al. Integrins in mechanotransduction. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 25, 613–618 (2013).

  47. 47.

    Hemphill, M. A., Dauth, S., Yu, C. J., Dabiri, B. E. & Parker, K. K. Traumatic brain injury and the neuronal microenvironment: a potential role for neuropathological mechanotransduction. Neuron 85, 1177–1192 (2015).

  48. 48.

    Bercu, M. M. et al. Enhanced survival and neurite network formation of human umbilical cord blood neuronal progenitors in three-dimensional collagen constructs. J. Mol. Neurosci. 51, 249–261 (2013).

  49. 49.

    O’Shaughnessy, T. J., Lin, H. J. & Ma, W. Functional synapse formation among rat cortical neurons grown on three-dimensional collagen gels. Neurosci. Lett. 340, 169–172 (2003).

  50. 50.

    O’Connor, S. M., Stenger, D. A., Shaffer, K. M. & Ma, W. Survival and neurite outgrowth of rat cortical neurons in three-dimensional agarose and collagen gel matrices. Neurosci. Lett. 304, 189–193 (2001).

  51. 51.

    Lee, J. H. et al. Collagen gel three-dimensional matrices combined with adhesive proteins stimulate neuronal differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. J. R. Soc. Interface 8, 998–1010 (2011).

  52. 52.

    Cuntz, H., Forstner, F., Borst, A. & Hausser, M. One rule to grow them all: a general theory of neuronal branching and its practical application. PLoS Comput. Biol. 6, e1000877 (2010).

  53. 53.

    Cuntz, H., Forstner, F., Borst, A. & Hausser, M. The TREES toolbox--probing the basis of axonal and dendritic branching. Neuroinformatics 9, 91–96 (2011).

  54. 54.

    Bar-Kochba, E., Toyjanova, J., Andrews, E., Kim, K. S. & Franck, C. A fast iterative digital volume correlation algorithm for large deformations. Exp. Mech. 55, 261–274 (2015).

  55. 55.

    Patel, M., Leggett, S. E., Landauer, A. K., Wong, I. Y. & Franck, C. Rapid, topology-based particle tracking for high-resolution measurements of large complex 3D motion fields. Sci. Rep. 8, 5581 (2018).

  56. 56.

    Stout, D. A. et al. Mean deformation metrics for quantifying 3D cell-matrix interactions without requiring information about matrix material properties. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 113, 2898–2903 (2016).

  57. 57.

    Taubin, G. Curve and surface smoothing without shrinkage. Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Comput. Vis. (1995).

  58. 58.

    Pop, V. et al. Early brain injury alters the blood-brain barrier phenotype in parallel with beta-amyloid and cognitive changes in adulthood. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 33, 205–214 (2013).

  59. 59.

    Lozano, D. et al. Neuroinflammatory responses to traumatic brain injury: etiology, clinical consequences, and therapeutic opportunities. Neuropsychiatr. Dis. Treat. 11, 97–106 (2015).

  60. 60.

    Chodobski, A., Zink, B. J. & Szmydynger-Chodobska, J. Blood-brain barrier pathophysiology in traumatic brain injury. Transl. Stroke Res. 2, 492–516 (2011).

  61. 61.

    Mattucci, S. F., Moulton, J. A., Chandrashekar, N. & Cronin, D. S. Strain rate dependent properties of younger human cervical spine ligaments. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 10, 216–226 (2012).

  62. 62.

    Oh, Y. K., Kreinbrink, J. L., Wojtys, E. M. & Ashton-Miller, J. A. Effect of axial tibial torque direction on ACL relative strain and strain rate in an in vitro simulated pivot landing. J. Orthop. Res. 30, 528–534 (2012).

  63. 63.

    Roan, E. & Waters, C. M. What do we know about mechanical strain in lung alveoli? Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell. Mol. Physiol. 301, L625–L635 (2011).

  64. 64.

    Sonka, M., Hlavac, V. & Boyle, R. Image Processing, Analysis, and Machine Vision 4th edn (Cengage Learning, Stamford, CT, 2015).

  65. 65.

    Schindelin, J. et al. Fiji: an open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 676–682 (2012).

  66. 66.

    Rizk, A. et al. Segmentation and quantification of subcellular structures in fluorescence microscopy images using Squassh. Nat. Protoc. 9, 586–596 (2014).

  67. 67.

    Donohue, D. E. & Ascoli, G. A. Automated reconstruction of neuronal morphology: an overview. Brain Res. Rev. 67, 94–102 (2011).

  68. 68.

    Peng, H. et al. BigNeuron: large-scale 3D neuron reconstruction from optical microscopy images. Neuron 87, 252–256 (2015).

  69. 69.

    Peng, H., Meijering, E. & Ascoli, G. A. From DIADEM to BigNeuron. Neuroinformatics 13, 259–260 (2015).

  70. 70.

    Dolle, J. P. et al. Newfound sex differences in axonal structure underlie differential outcomes from in vitro traumatic axonal injury. Exp. Neurol. 300, 121–134 (2018).

  71. 71.

    Wirth, P. et al. New method to induce mild traumatic brain injury in rodents produces differential outcomes in female and male Sprague Dawley rats. J. Neurosci. Methods 290, 133–144 (2017).

  72. 72.

    Campbell, J. J., Husmann, A., Hume, R. D., Watson, C. J. & Cameron, R. E. Development of three-dimensional collagen scaffolds with controlled architecture for cell migration studies using breast cancer cell lines. Biomaterials 114, 34–43 (2017).

  73. 73.

    Rupert, C. E. & Coulombe, K. L. K. IGF1 and NRG1 enhance proliferation, metabolic maturity, and the force-frequency response in hESC-derived engineered cardiac tissues. Stem Cells Int. 2017, 7648409 (2017).

  74. 74.

    Garnotel, R. et al. Human blood monocytes interact with type I collagen through alpha x beta 2 integrin (CD11c-CD18, gp150-95). J. Immunol. 164, 5928–5934 (2000).

  75. 75.

    Leitinger, B. & Hohenester, E. Mammalian collagen receptors. Matrix Biol. 26, 146–155 (2007).

  76. 76.

    Owen, L. M. et al. A cytoskeletal clutch mediates cellular force transmission in a soft, three-dimensional extracellular matrix. Mol. Biol. Cell 28, 1959–1974 (2017).

  77. 77.

    Linkert, M. et al. Metadata matters: access to image data in the real world. J. Cell Biol. 189, 777–782 (2010).

Download references


The authors acknowledge M. Patel and A.K. Landauer for helpful discussions, and J. Toyjanova for assistance in early protocol development. The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support from the RI Science and Technology Council, a Haythornthwaite Research Initiation Grant, and the Office of Naval Research (T. Bentley). E.B.-K. acknowledges support from a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship. J.B.E. acknowledges support from a Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need (GAANN) fellowship from the Brown University Institute for Molecular and Nanoscale Innovation.

Author information

M.T.S., E.B.-K., and J.B.E. worked on the initial cell culture development. E.B.-K. developed the image processing with assistance from J.B.E. for post processing. E.B.-K. and C.F. developed the strain mapping technique. R.A. and M.T.S. worked on code refinement. E.B.-K., M.T.S., and J.B.E. acquired the test images. H.C.C. and M.T.S. performed immunostaining and imaged all immunostained samples. M.T.S., H.C.C., and C.F. wrote the paper. All authors reviewed the manuscript. C.F. supervised the project.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Correspondence to Christian Franck.

Integrated supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 1 Mapping strains on tagged blebs.

Maximum intensity–projected confocal micrograph of a cell with artificially introduced spherical blebs (green arrows). Artificial blebs were introduced during image processing and do not represent signal from actual morphological processes. Blebs were tagged in NeuronStudio. Axial strain values were transformed onto the blebs using the same strain field as in Fig. 6a,b. Scale bar = 20 µm.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Text and Figures

Supplementary Figure 1 and Supplementary Manual

Reporting Summary

Supplementary Data

Code and test volumes

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark
Fig. 1: The culture platform and the resulting fiber and cell networks.
Fig. 2: Maximum intensity–projected confocal micrographs showing immunofluorescent signals of cells.
Fig. 3: Images of critical steps during dissection and sample preparation.
Fig. 4: Image processing workflow.
Fig. 5: Neuron tree projected in 3D with descriptors of tree structure node classifications.
Fig. 6: Example strain mappings.
Fig. 7: Control viability data and representative projection.
Supplementary Figure 1: Mapping strains on tagged blebs.


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.