1. Introduction
Light microscopes are essential for biological studies at different scales—tissues, cellular, and molecular levels. Fluorescence microscopy is a powerful imaging technique that enables the visualization of protein localization, dynamic biological processes, cell-to-cell communication, and subcellular structures. However, due to the wave nature of light, structural features smaller than ~200 nm cannot be resolved using conventional optical systems, as described by both Abbe’s and Rayleigh’s criteria for optical resolution in a diffraction-limited system [
1,
2].
The advent of superresolution microscopy has revolutionized optical imaging for nanometer-scale samples by circumventing the diffraction limit, enabling the imaging of samples with resolution not achievable via traditional optical microscopy, such as confocal or widefield microscopes, and achieving target specificity with labeling strategies not easily found in electron microscopes [
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10,
11,
12,
13]. Superresolution imaging provides insights into biological structures and small molecules at the nanometer scale. Specifically, this imaging technique is an umbrella term that encompasses three main categories: structured illumination microscopy (SIM) [
9,
11,
12,
14,
15], stimulated emission-depletion microscopy (STED) [
4,
10,
13], and single-molecule localization microscopy (SMLM) [
3,
5,
7,
8,
16,
17,
18]. These methods, in addition to their resolving power below 200 nm, keep the same advantages as light microscopy in specimen preparation, specific labeling via dye-conjugates, and the degree of freedom in multicolor imaging.
Among the superresolution techniques, SMLM, a collection of techniques, has the exceptional ability to visualize specimens at a higher spatial resolution than other superresolution methods, principally working by only allowing a few fluorophores in the fluorescent state (“ON” state) while keeping the other in the non-fluorescent state (“OFF” state) [
3,
5,
7,
8,
16,
17,
18]. dSTORM exploits the photophysical properties of fluorophores by stochastically switching the ON (for only a fraction of fluorophores) and OFF (for most fluorophores) states, with the principle that the imaging buffer initiates the oxidation-reduction reaction for activating the on-and-off switching mechanism in the organic fluorophores [
3,
7,
16]. With the few fluorescent molecules in each time frame, one can find a precise location of the centroid of their point-spread function (PSF) in each image. Now, by repeated imaging, accumulated fluorophore localizations can be reconstructed in the superresolution image, with a spatial resolution of approximately 10–20 nm.
However, protein molecules are typically only a few nanometers in size, and even with the resolution of dSTORM, accessing finer structural features, such as protein arrangements and relative molecular localizations, remains challenging. To overcome these limitations, researchers have sought complementary strategies to enhance effective resolution. One promising solution is to physically expand the sample within the polyacrylamide gel matrix, a method known as expansion microscopy (ExM) [
19,
20]. This leads to integrating ExM with superresolution techniques such as STED and SMLM, forming the hybrid approaches Ex-STED and Ex-SMLM, respectively. Specifically, due to high spatial resolution in SMLM imaging, Ex-SMLM allows us to access finer details in the structure that cannot be easily achieved using ExM or SMLM alone. Recent efforts have robustly employed four-fold expansion strategies with dSTORM and STED [
21,
22,
23], and these strategies have significantly advanced the understanding of nanoscale protein organization, spatial relationships between biomolecules, and the structural composition of cellular organelles [
19,
20,
24]. However, in intricately organized structures, such as centrioles, even four-fold expansion can result in overlapping localization signals and insufficient spatial separation between molecular targets.
We sought to further the effective resolution directly associated with the degree of expansion in Ex-SMLM in imaging by developing a refined Ex-SMLM method. To this end, we turned to Ten-fold Robust Expansion Microscopy (TREx) [
25,
26], a member of the ExM family that achieves higher expansion factors while maintaining tissue and cellular integrity. Building on this, we introduce a post-labeling variant of TREx integrated with dSTORM, which we term plTREx-dSTORM. This can theoretically enhance the ability to visualize nanometer-scale specimens with high fidelity and achieve an effective spatial resolution of a few nanometers.
However, we encountered several issues in developing plTREx-dSTORM. First, the TREx expansion sample is fragile and easily breakable, which makes it difficult to manipulate (
Supplementary Figure S1a). Moreover, we found that cell integrity may be compromised (
Supplementary Figure S1b). Second, the fluorescent signals of the TREx-expanded sample are too weak to display the protein architecture, resulting in a loss of fluorescent signals (
Supplementary Figure S2). This is particularly problematic for marker proteins such as ATP synthase, which we previously used as in situ references for drift correction in dSTORM imaging [
22,
27]. Third, unoptimized re-embedding conditions may not ensure maximal retention of the expansion factor when specimen-gel composites are incubated in imaging buffer solutions.
Therefore, this study was pinpointed with several troubleshooting areas and developed a pragmatic method by post-labeling the sturdy expansion hydrogel to preserve structural fidelity, refining the homogenization process to improve fluorescent signal output, and achieving 10-fold expansion under harsh dSTORM imaging conditions (
Figure 1). With the combinatorial imaging solution, we can visualize the miniature architecture that governs essential biological functions inside cells. Thus, this study aims to enhance superresolution imaging using the plTREx-dSTORM system by elucidating the structure of interest, specifically centriolar proteins. The plTREx-dSTORM serves as an effective approach to investigate structural and molecular networks in biological systems at the few-nanometer scale.
3. Discussion
We have systematically developed plTREx and promoted its combination with dSTORM without sacrificing the expansion effort. Our plTREx workflow enables improved mechanical stability to address fragility, provides fluorescent signal display through a post-labeling strategy, and achieves specimen expansion nearly ten-fold. With dSTORM, we further optimized the re-embedding strategy to achieve plTREx expansion capability across ddH
2O and the Tris-based, thiol-rich imaging buffer. While previous studies have combined ExM with dSTORM, they typically achieved expansion factors of around 4×. Moreover, they faced challenges such as gel shrinkage in photoswitching buffers, even after re-embedding [
19,
33]. Our approach addresses these limitations by enabling a ten-fold expansion compatible with dSTORM imaging. This represents an exciting advance over previous Ex-SMLM approaches, particularly those limited to four-fold expansion strategies with dSTORM, which has reduced effective resolution due to insufficient expansion. The plTREx-dSTORM opens a new door for molecular-level investigations, like protein organizations, as evident in the high-resolution visualization of the ultrastructural context in centriolar features. This suggests the potential of this superresolution solution to investigate an array of biomolecules that other optical modalities may not efficiently execute, leveraging a deeper understanding of biology down to the molecular scale.
Compared to other expansion superresolution methods, plTREx-dSTORM offers a number of advantages in its imaging performance (
Supplementary Table S1). For starters, Ex-STED generally achieves lower effective resolution than Ex-SMLM, where plTREx-dSTORM in the study belongs to, due to its different mechanism to bypass the diffraction limit of light. Ex-dSTORM, particularly the combination of dSTORM with ExM or U-ExM, offers about 4× expansion—with optimal expansion retention taken into account—which inherently limits the effective resolution to breakthrough below the ~5–10 nm range. plTREx-dSTORM, on the other hand, achieves a higher expansion factor close to 10× with enhanced labeling density (insets in
Figure 4a) and thus an enhanced effective localization precision to ~1 nm. In addition, it is important to note that while direct signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) comparisons are not feasible across different expansion scales, SNR in U-ExM samples may appear higher due to increased labeling density, assuming the total amount of fluorophores remains constant. Moreover, we carefully tuned the denaturation conditions to mitigate the potential over-expansion artifacts: structures imaged under 95 °C for 1.5 h retain structural continuity while 2 h treatment introduce detectable breakages of the ciliary axoneme (
Figure 2e).
The performance of plTREx-dSTORM is highly dependent on fine-tuning the polyacrylamide network, especially the temperature and time control in denaturation and re-embedding formulation. To begin with the gel handling, instead of performing mechanical testing such as Young’s modulus measurement, we adopted a deformation analysis approach, as described in the previous study (Damstra et al.), serving as a reproducible proxy to quantify improvements in gel physical stability and handling (
Figure 2a). Secondly, the slight imbalances in each variable might lead to gel shrinkage, deviating from our goal of expansion retention. Denaturation-based homogenization, while preserving epitope accessibility to enable post-labeling, poses a risk of structural distortion when temperature and duration exceed the optimal threshold. Thirdly, it is difficult to image the target proteins on the same focal plane because the cells and molecules inside the expansion matrix are expanded three-dimensionally. In addition, there are practical concerns about antibody penetration in dense specimens or antibody labeling efficiency. Together, these aspects underscore the method’s technical sensitivity and the extent of its current applications. We further demonstrated the versatility of the plTREx-dSTORM workflow to image additional markers, including the Golgi apparatus (GM130) and cytoskeletal protein α-Tubulin (
Supplementary Figure S7). We introduced a powerful expansion strategy that can extend to other superresolution modalities. These include stimulated emission-depletion microscope (STED) and SMLM (such as PALM and DNA-PAINT). Or one can use plTREx to visualize protein molecules, cell samples, or tissue slices with the advantages that expansion microscopy could offer—a convenient, cost-effective, and robust approach for nanoscale structural imaging using a widefield or confocal microscope.
In practice, we observed a clear distinction in the basal body and axoneme in each primary cilium—the extension of the ciliary architecture from the proximal end of the mother centriole (
Figure 4). As plTREx-dSTORM achieves a clear resolution of the basal body-axoneme transition, a feature typically resolved only by electron microscopy. This method enhances optical imaging for visualizing organelles and probing sub-organelle and ultrastructural details. For example, with dual gain in expansion and localization precision of plTREx-dSTORM imaging, we can observe the ciliary growth trend, deciphering architectural nuances like the two and five trendlines on the same primary cilium but in different imaging methods, plTREx and Ex-dSTORM (
Supplementary Figure S8). Going far beyond the nomenclature of the new imaging techniques, we have developed plTREx-dSTORM, which contributes to enhanced imaging capability within the Ex-SMLM framework. Importantly, plTREx-dSTORM pushes the boundary of superresolution imaging and bridges the gap between optical imaging and electron microscopy, leading to potential molecular exploration in biological and medical research.
4. Materials and Methods
4.1. Reagents
Bovine serum albumin (BSA, A9647, Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA), Tween 20 (P137, Sigma-Aldrich), Methyl alcohol (methanol, 15306121, Macron, Center Valley, PA, USA), Phosphate buffered saline (10X PBS, 70011044, Gibco, Grand Island, NY, USA), Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO, D8418, Sigma-Aldrich), Sodium acrylate (SA, 97%, 408220, Sigma-Aldrich), Acrylamide (AA, 40%, A4058, Sigma-Aldrich), Acrylamide/Bis-acrylamide (30%, 29:1, 1610156, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA), N,N,N′,N′-Tetramethylethylenediamine (TEMED, 1610801, Bio-Rad), Ammonium persulfate (APS, 1610700, Bio-Rad), Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS, 0227, VWR Life science, Radnor, PA, USA), Sodium chloride (NaCl, 31434, Sigma-Aldrich), Tris (1.5 M, pH 8.8, J831, VWR Life Science), Bind-silane (abx082155, Abbexa, Cambridge, UK), Acetic acid (33209, Sigma-Aldrich), and Ethanol (absolute, ≥99.8%, 32221, Sigma-Aldrich).
4.2. Cell Culture
Human retinal pigment epithelial cells (hTERT RPE-1, shortened as RPE-1, ATCC-CRL-4000, Manassas, VA, USA) were cultured at 37 °C with 5% CO2 in the environment. The culture medium is comprised of Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM)/F-12 mixture medium with L-glutamine, HEPES (1:1; 11330-032, Gibco, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Grand Island, NY, USA), 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS, SH3010903, Hyclone, Cytiva, Logan, UT, USA), sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3, S6014, Sigma-Aldrich), and 1% penicillin-streptomycin (15140122, Gibco, Thermo Fisher Scientific).
4.3. Sample Preparation for TREx
RPE-1 cells were transferred and cultured on coverslips coated with poly-L-lysine before fixation, and 24–48 h serum starvation was applied to induce cilium formation. Fixation was performed with cold methanol at −20 °C for 10 min.
Then, antibody staining was performed to label the structure of interest specifically in fluorescence microscopy. Primary antibodies used in this study were acetylated tubulin (rabbit IgG; Catalog No. 5335S; Cell Signaling, Danvers, MA, USA) for primary cilia and centrioles visualization, and ATP synthase (mouse IgG; Catalog No. ab109867; Abcam, Cambridge, UK), for in situ drift correction in the later section titled “Drift Correction.” Secondary antibodies applied were CF568 (dilution 1/100, Goat Anti-Rabbit IgG(H+L); Catalog No. 20098; Biotium, Fremont, CA, USA) and Alexa Fluor 488 (dilution 1/100, Donkey anti-Mouse IgG (H+L); Catalog No. A21202; Invitrogen, Waltham, MA, USA).
After antibody staining is performed, gelation (or polymerization) was carried out via incubating each coverslip at 37 °C with a monomer solution (14% (w/w) SA, 10% (w/w) AA, 0.005% (w/w) BIS in PBS) supplemented with 0.25% TEMED and 0.25% APS. After pre-polymerization on the ice for 1 min, the chamber was transferred into the incubator for gelation at 37 °C for 1 h. After gelation, coverslips with hydrogel were placed in a fresh digestion buffer (proteinase K diluted 1/100 in digestion buffer) for 3 h (TREx) at RT. Detached hydrogels were washed twice in fresh PBS at room temperature for 15 min each. Finally, the polymer gel matrix is expanded in fresh, double-deionized water (ddH2O) at least three times, each for 30 min, with gentle shaking, and then incubated overnight in ddH2O.
4.4. Sample Preparation for plTREx
Instead of Proteinase K digestion and antibody staining before gelation, the cells on coverslips were directly incubated at 37 °C with the same TREx monomer solution (described in the last section) and, then, the polymerized gel matrix with cells embedded was bathed in denaturation buffer (200 mM SDS, 200 mM NaCl in 50 mM Tris (pH 8.8) for 15 min at RT with gentle shaking to detach the hydrogels from the coverslips. Then, the pl-TREx hydrogels were put in fresh denaturation buffer and treated at 95 °C for 1–2 h (note that this is the optimal condition from testing denaturation conditions at 85–95 °C for 1.5–2 h). Afterwards, the hydrogels were transferred to a Petri dish and were expanded in fresh, double-deionized water at least three times with gentle shaking until an expansion plateau was reached.
Subsequently, the hydrogels were kept in PBS for immunostaining and then trimmed to approximately 1 cm × 0.5 cm dimensions (width × length) before being placed into Eppendorf tubes. Primary antibodies (acetylated tubulin and ATP synthase, same products as used in TREx) were diluted 1:200 in PBS supplemented with 2% BSA, and 100 µL of the antibody solution was added to each trimmed gel. Samples were incubated at 37 °C for 3 h on an orbital shaker (about 80 rpm). Then, samples were washed three times with 0.1% Tween-20 in PBS (PBST) for 10 min each with gentle shaking. Secondary antibody staining was performed following this with 100 µL of a 1:200 dilution of secondary antibodies (CF568 and Alexa Fluor 488, same products as used in TREx) in the mixture of 2% BSA in PBS. Similar to the previous operation, the samples were washed three times with 0.1% PBST for 10 min. Finally, the samples were transferred to 15 cm dishes and bathed in fresh deionized water, which was exchanged at least three times until the expansion plateau was reached. For widefield imaging of the expanded samples, the hydrogel was trimmed to approximately 2 cm × 2 cm dimensions (width × length) and placed in water to prevent shrinkage during imaging.
4.5. Hydrogel Re-Embedding
The immunolabeled, expanded pl-TREx hydrogels were incubated in fresh re-embedding solution (14% (w/w) AA, 0.0075% (w/w) BIS, 0.025% (w/w) TEMED, 0.025% (w/w) APS in ddH2O) for 25 min and were exchanged again with another fresh re-embedding solution, both with gentle shaking. In parallel, a fresh bind-silane coating solution (5 μL bind-silane, 8 mL absolute ethanol, 200 μL acetic acid, and 1.8 mL ddH2O) was prepared. Few coverslips were prepared and washed with ddH2O and absolute ethanol, followed by rinsing with bind-silane coating solution. After the coating solution had completely evaporated, the coverslips were washed with absolute ethanol and then left to air-dry. The hydrogel samples, after the re-embedding bath, were transferred onto these coverslips and placed together in a nitrogen-filled, humidified chamber at 37 °C for 1.5 h incubation. The result was the expanded pl-TREx hydrogel being crosslinked with another neutral acrylamide gel for stabilization in the dSTORM imaging buffer. The re-embedded gel was washed three times with ddH2O for 20 min each. Note that the three re-embedding solutions were tested, except for the optimal one to retain expansion factor well close to 10 described already, 10% (w/w) AA, 0.05% (w/w) BIS, 0.5% (w/w) TEMED, 0.5% (w/w) APS in ddH2O and 14% (w/w) AA, 0.005% (w/w) BIS, 0.025% (w/w) TEMED, and 0.025% (w/w) APS in ddH2O.
4.6. plTREx-dSTORM Imaging and Validation
The dSTORM image acquisition was conducted using a custom-built setup based on a commercial inverted microscope (Eclipse Ti-E, Nikon, Tokyo, Japan) that was equipped with a laser merge module (ILE, Spectral Applied Research, Richmond Hill, ON, Canada) and a focus stabilizing system. The setup included four light sources that were individually controlled, i.e., a 561 nm laser (Jive 561 150 mW, Cobolt, Solna, Sweden), a 488 nm laser (OPSL 488 LX 150 mW, Coherent, Santa Clara, CA, USA), and a 405 nm laser (OBIS 405 LX 100 mW, Coherent), which were homogenized using a Borealis Conditioning Unit (Spectral Applied Research, Richmond Hill, ON, Canada) and focused onto the back focal plane of an oil-immersing objective (100X 1.49, CFI Apo TIRF, Nikon) for widefield illumination of the samples. During the dSTORM image acquisition, the 561 nm laser lines was operated at a high intensity of approximately 3 kW/cm
2 to quench most of the fluorescence from CF568. To convert a portion of fluorophores from a dark to a fluorescent state, a weak 405 nm laser beam was introduced. The 488 nm laser line was intermittently switched on every 800 frames for in situ drift correction. Fluorescent signals were detected using a quad-band filter (ZET405/488/561/640 mv2, Chroma, Bellows Falls, VT, USA) and recorded on an electron-multiplying charge-coupled device (EMCCD) camera (Evolve 512 Delta, Photometrics, Tucson, AZ, USA) with a pixel size of 93 nm. For single-color imaging, the CF568 channel was acquired using a combination of quad-band and short-pass filters (BSP01-633R-25, Semrock, Rochester, NY, USA). Typically, 15,000–30,000 frames were acquired at a rate of 50 fps for each dSTORM image. The individual single-molecule peak position was then localized using the MetaMorph Superresolution Module (Molecular Devices, San Jose, CA, USA) based on a wavelet segmentation algorithm. The superresolution images were cleaned using a Gaussian filter of 0.7–1 pixel. Prior to imaging, the immobilized re-embedding hydrogels were immersed in an imaging buffer (Tris-HCl, NaCl (TN) buffer at pH 8.0, 10–100 mM mercaptoethylamine (MEA) at pH 8.0, and an oxygen-scavenging vsystem consisting of 10% glucose (G5767, Sigma-Aldrich), 0.5 mg mL
−1 glucose oxidase, and 40 μg mL
−1 catalase). To validate the system resolution, Fourier Ring Correlation (FRC) analysis was conducted on plTREx-dSTORM images of Ac-Tubulin–stained centrioles and cilia using the GDSC SMLM plugin, an ImageJ (1.53q)-based software tool [
33]. The resolution was estimated by applying a threshold value of 1/7 on the FRC curve to identify the cutoff spatial frequency, thereby determining the corresponding spatial resolution. Additionally, localization precision was quantified with the same plugin through detection and fitting of individual single-molecule bursts.
4.7. Drift Correction and Post-Imaging Processing
The dSTORM imaging often requires post-correction of acquired images because the localized puncta are subjected to drift after tens of thousands of frames acquired over several minutes. The in-situ drift correction was introduced. ATP Synthase (mouse IgG; Catalog No. ab109867; Abcam) was used as a marker protein, which was intermittently excited and emitted signals during acquisition of the target channel of CF568, and signals from the marker channel were corrected by an ImageJ plugin to correlate the pattern shifted over the acquired data. Once the data were corrected, a homemade code, based on LabVIEW (National Instruments, Austin, TX, USA), MATLAB (MathWorks, Natick, MA, USA), and ImageJ (NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA), was used to eliminate the marker signals.
4.8. Data Analyses and Reproducibility
This study mainly included deformation analysis, macroscopic expansion factor analysis, and microscopic expansion factor analysis. For starters, deformation analysis was carried by measuring three different thicknesses, determined by the number of coverslips stacked in the gelation chamber of the expanded hydrogels (
Supplementary Figure S3). Expanded hydrogels were cut in half to achieve a semicircular shape and put on the board to measure the vertical deviation Δ
r from the base to the arc relative to the gel radius
r (
Figure 2a). Secondly, the macroscopic expansion factor analysis was determined by dividing the measurements of the gel dimensions before and after the re-embedding treatment (
Figure 3b). Lastly, the microscopic expansion factor was determined by dividing the diameter measured from the centrioles in expanded and unexpanded samples (
Figure 2d,
Figure 3c and
Figure 4d). In addition, all widefield, dSTORM, TREx-dSTORM, and plTREx-dSTORM images panels were repeated at least three times, and representative images were shown in this paper (
Figure 2b,e,f, and
Figure 4a,c;
Supplementary Figures S1, S2, S4 and S6–S8).