Numerous behavioral experiments have demonstrated the ability of migratory animals to orient by the Earth’s magnetic field, but the nature of the underlying magnetic sensory structures remains one of the greatest mysteries in sensory biology (Mouritsen 2018). The magnetic sense has been studied most thoroughly in night-migratory songbirds, where various lines of evidence point towards the existence of at least two fundamentally different magnetoreception mechanisms. One is based on radical pairs, with the flavoprotein cryptochrome 4 as the potential magnetic sensory molecule, located in cone photoreceptor cells in the retina (Hore & Mouritsen, 2016; Günther et al., 2018; Wu et al., 2020; Xu et al., 2021), and suggested to provide directional, i.e., “compass” information (Zapka et al., 2009). The radical-pair mechanism is consistent with the observation that songbirds tested in Emlen funnels were magnetically disoriented during exposure to weak radiofrequency magnetic fields aimed at interfering with the mechanism (Ritz et al., 2004; Engels et al., 2014; Schwarze et al., 2016). The second magnetoreception mechanism is suggested to be based on ferrimagnetic particles within the upper beak innervated by the ophthalmic branch of the trigeminal nerve (V1; Williams & Wild, 2000; Fleissner et al., 2003, 2007; Falkenberg et al., 2010), and which seem to provide magnetic information for a navigational map (Kishkinev et al., 2013; Pakhomov et al., 2018). This mechanism is consistent with the observation that birds pre-exposed to a brief but strong magnetic pulse (as a tool to perturb a magnetic particle-based magnetoreceptor) had shifted orientations compared to untreated control birds (Wiltschko et al., 1994, 2007; Beason et al., 1997; Holland & Helm, 2013). The observation that pulse effects were restricted to experienced migrants which had already successfully finished at least one migratory journey has led to the notion that adults use magnetic-particle based receptors to acquire magnetic map information. Further evidence in support of the so-called magnetic map theory has come from both physical displacement and virtual magnetic displacement studies, where animals readjusted their orientation according to a different place when tested under magnetic field parameters mimicking the displacement site (Kishkinev et al., 2013, 2015; Pakhomov et al., 2018).
From ablation studies, V1 has been identified as necessary for conveying magnetic map information in migratory songbirds (Kishkinev et al., 2013; Pakhomov et al., 2018). In addition, behavioral molecular mapping has shown that birds exposed to a strongly changing magnetic field stimulus display significantly increased expression levels of immediate early genes in subcompartments of the principle and spinal sensory trigeminal brainstem nuclei which receive V1 input (Heyers et al., 2010; Lefeldt et al., 2014; Elbers et al., 2017; but see Kishkinev et al., 2016). The magnetically activated neurons in the principal sensory trigeminal brainstem nucleus were recently shown to define a morphologically distinct neuronal subpopulation, likely to form the origin of a neuronal processing stream exclusively dedicated to transmitting trigeminally perceived magnetic information to higher telencephalic integration centers (Kobylkov et al., 2020).
Given that magnetic map information is conveyed by V1 but misinterpreted after magnetic pulsing, it is sensible to postulate that magnetic particles form the basis of trigeminal magnetoreception. With V1 responsible for sensory innervation of the upper beak, iron-rich structures found in the upper beak of homing pigeons and songbirds (Williams and Wild, 2001; Fleissner et al., 2003, 2007; but see Winklhofer & Kirschink, 2008; Tian et al. 2007; Falkenberg et al., 2010) were considered to represent the long-sought trigeminal magnetic sensor, particularly since the structures were found to contain magnetite nanocrystals in large numbers (Hanzlik et al., 2000; Winklhofer et al., 2001) and suggested to colocalize with nervous tissue (Williams and Wild, 2001; Fleissner et al., 2003). Critically, however, the association between iron-rich structures and nervous tissue turned out irreproducible in independent follow-up studies, who found iron-rich structures not associated with nervous tissue but highly colocalized with cells presenting MHC class II, i.e. probably macrophages (Treiber et al., 2012, 2013; Engels et al., 2018).
The majority of these studies screened tissue sections for non-hemin iron-rich structure as possible hints towards magnetosensory structures, using the Prussian blue (PB) staining technique. However, upon closer comparison of earlier PB studies on the upper beak of birds, we realized potential methodological pitfalls, which might have been the cause for the contradictory results of previous studies:
(1) Fleissner et al. (2003) and Treiber et al. (2012, 2013) relied on antibodies against generic neuronal markers such as neurofilaments to find possible colocalizations of PB and nervous tissue. It is not clear if this approach is suitable to also label free nerve endings, where primary sensory receptors are expected to occur.
(2) Apart from false negatives, such a generic labelling approach may also yield false positives in the form of PB positive sites colocalizing with nerves of the autonomous system, e.g., for regulation of blood vessels.
(3) None of the previous works used a suitable positive control for intracellular magnetite. Although the PB method detects ultrafine iron oxide nanoparticles (< 10 nm) in tissue when present as dense accumulations measuring several hundreds of microns in diameter (Hanzlik et al., 2000; Nimpf et al., 2017), such nanoparticulate structures are far from representing an optimized solution for realizing a sensor that should be capable of detecting the small magnetic field differences which were implied from the magnetic map experiments mentioned above. For instance, cuticulosomes, which are iron-rich vesicles found in the cuticular plate of hair cells in the Avian inner ear (Lauwers et al., 2013; Nimpf et al., 2017; Malkemper et al. 2019), are so weakly magnetic that they would not even qualify for a compass sense to begin with (de Gille et al., 2021). In contrast, magnetite crystals with particle-sizes between 40 and 100 nm have superior magnetic properties, forming single-domain magnets, which makes them much more suitable as magnetic field sensitive structures (Kirschink et al., 2010), as can be best seen in the example of magnetotactic bacteria (Fig. 1).
These microorganisms biomineralize chains of membrane-enclosed sub-100 nm magnetite crystals, termed magnetosomes, which impart a permanent magnetic dipole moment to the bacterial cell body and keep it thus aligned with the magnetic field (Frankel et al., 1979). Notably, similar crystals were found in structural magnetoreceptor candidates associated with trigeminally innervated regions of the olfactory epithelium of rainbow trout (Walker et al., 1997; Diebel et al., 2000), using reflectance confocal laser scanning microcopy for screening in combination with electron microscopy or magnetic scanning probe microscopy for validation of iron chemistry or of magnetic properties, respectively. In contrast to these methods sensitive to physical properties of single-domain magnetite, it is not known if the PB method is capable of detecting just a dozen of magnetosome-like crystals, which suffice for a magnetoreceptor according to theoretical models (Winklhofer & Kirschvink, 2010). We therefore embarked on a reexamination of the topic, where we studied beak tissues of a night-migratory songbird, the Eurasian blackcap (Sylvia atricapilla), in which we specifically labelled V1 fiber terminals within the beak using neuronal tract tracing. As in previous studies (Williams & Wild, 2001; Fleissner et al., 2003, 2007; Tian et al. 2007; Treiber et al., 2012, 2013), we used the PB technique, for the lack of a better histochemical stain with specificity for the magnetic iron compounds magnetite (or its oxidized form, maghemite) – two components which we would ultimately expect to find in a magnetic-particle based magnetoreceptor structure. None of the previous studies applied the modified PB protocol with diaminobenzidine (DAB) postenhancement of PB (Nguyen-Legros et al. 1980; Moos & Møllgård 1993; Meguro et al. 2003), since DAB was already used as chromogen in immunohistochemistry, which is why we did without the modified protocol, too.
To approach point 3) also independently, we applied the PB technique to the olfactory epithelium of rainbow trout where we expect to find candidate magnetoreceptor structures (Walker et al., 1997; Diebel et al., 2000), however in sparse occurrence, and therefore, for ground-truthing, to cells of a magnetotactic bacterium (Magnetospirillum magnetotacticum strain MS-1, see Fig. 1), where we know with certainty of the occurrence of intracellular iron-rich target structures.
Since the PB technique is essential for our study, we commence with a brief summary of the chemical reactions involved in PB staining, followed by theoretical considerations exploring the potential sensitivity of the PB stain in relation to various iron oxide minerals found in tissues.
The Prussian Blue staining reactions
The PB stain for ferric ion was introduced by Perls in 1867 and has since been employed widely in biology and pathology. Despite variations in the protocol, all ferric iron staining kits use the hexacyanoferrate anion, \({\left[{\text{F}\text{e}}^{\text{I}\text{I}}{\left(\text{C}\text{N}\right)}_{6}\right]}^{4-}\), as reagent to bind free Fe3+ in the form a blue pigment referred to as a Prussian Blue. The reagent is applied in acid solution, typically hydrochloric acid (HCl) solution, to liberate Fe3+ from its bound forms in the tissue, because ferric iron requires pH < 2 to exist as free Fe3+ ion, see Pourbaix diagram for the iron-water system in Delahay et al. (1950); a pH value of 2 corresponds to 10mM HCl solution or approx. 0.04 wt% HCl. When a crystalline iron oxide is present, e.g., Fe2O3, the low pH also affords the protons to dissolve the oxide, i.e.,
$${\text{F}\text{e}}_{2}{\text{O}}_{3}+ 6 {\text{H}}^{+} ->2 {\text{F}\text{e}}^{3+}+ 3{\text{H}}_{2}\text{O}. \left(1\right)$$
Thus, unlike a conventional histochemical stain, which would label a target molecule directly, the PB staining technique requires the (acidic) dissolution of the target compound to then label the liberated target ion. Depending on the mobility of the free Fe3+, the PB stain may not mark the original site of the target compound, but rather its diffusion trace. Depending on the ease with which the target compound can be dissolved, it may also disappear altogether. In any case, the target compound will be irreversibly altered.
The actual PB staining reaction is thought to occur in two steps, with the following reaction proceeding first:
$${\text{F}\text{e}}^{3+}+{\left[{\text{F}\text{e}}^{\text{I}\text{I}}{\left(\text{C}\text{N}\right)}_{6}\right]}^{4-}+{\text{K}}^{+} ->\text{K}{\text{F}\text{e}}^{\text{I}\text{I}\text{I}}\left[{\text{F}\text{e}}^{\text{I}\text{I}}{\left(\text{C}\text{N}\right)}_{6}\right], \left(2\right)$$
where the potassium ions are delivered with the dissolved reagent, \({\text{K}}_{4}\left[{\text{F}\text{e}}^{\text{I}\text{I}}{\left(\text{C}\text{N}\right)}_{6}\right]\). The product in Eq. (2) is referred to as (water-)soluble PB (Keggin & Miles, 1936). In the presence of excess Fe3+, insoluble PB precipitates according to:
$${{4\text{F}\text{e}}^{3+}+3\left[{\text{F}\text{e}}^{\text{I}\text{I}}{\left(\text{C}\text{N}\right)}_{6}\right]}^{4-} + x {\text{H}}_{2}\text{O} ->{\text{F}\text{e}}_{4}^{\text{I}\text{I}\text{I}}{\left[{\text{F}\text{e}}^{\text{I}\text{I}}{\left(\text{C}\text{N}\right)}_{6}\right]}_{3}\bullet x {\text{H}}_{2}\text{O}, \left(3\right)$$
with variable amounts x (14 … 16) of unbound water of crystallization in the crystal structure of insoluble PB (Buser et al., 1977, for structure visualization see also Kraft, 2021). Combining Eq. (1) with (3), the complete reaction writes
$$12 {\text{H}}^{+}+ 2 {\text{F}\text{e}}_{2}{\text{O}}_{3}+3 {\left[{\text{F}\text{e}}^{\text{I}\text{I}}{\left(\text{C}\text{N}\right)}_{6}\right]}^{4-}+\left(x-6\right){\text{H}}_{2}\text{O} ->{\text{F}\text{e}}_{4}^{\text{I}\text{I}\text{I}}{\left[{\text{F}\text{e}}^{\text{I}\text{I}}{\left(\text{C}\text{N}\right)}_{6}\right]}_{3}\bullet x{ \text{H}}_{2}\text{O}. \left(4\right)$$
Some of the hexacyanoferrate on the left of Eqs. (3,4) is derived from the soluble PB forming first (Eq. 2), so that also mixed phase crystals containing both soluble and insoluble PB can be expected. Either way, all these forms of PB containing iron in mixed valence have blue color. However, after incubation of the tissue with the PB reagent, at least one rinsing step with distilled water ensues, which does not affect the insoluble forms of PB but is likely to wash away the soluble form of PB forming first, which then diminishes the sensitivity and accuracy with which a cellular target can be marked with the technique (Hirose et al., 1970).
Theoretical considerations on sensitivity of Prussian Blue staining
Despite the vagaries with soluble PB, we here point out that the PB reaction in principle can enhance the apparent amount of iron present. To understand the multiplication effect, it is necessary to compare the volumetric concentration of ferric iron in the iron source material with that in the PB product (Table 1). Strikingly, both soluble and insoluble PB have approximately ten times lower concentration in ferric iron compared to the possible iron oxide source mineral. This means that the ferric iron liberated from a completely dissolved iron-oxide crystal of initial volume v0 is equivalent to a PB volume of approximately 10 times v0 (with reagent ad libitum), hence the enhancement.
Next, we ask if the PB method is theoretically sensitive enough to amplify a chain of magnetosomes (Fig. 1) such that it can be visualized in a normal wide-field, transmitted-light micrograph taken with a high numerical aperture objective. We assume that all magnetite in a volume v0 can be dissolved completely. We then compare that volume with known cellular iron-containing structures that were marked with the PB technique in tissue sections and verified independently with transmission electron microscopy in unstained ultrathin sections. A good example here are cuticulosomes in hair cells of birds, iron-rich structures with diameter of 0.4 µm, densely packed with ferritin nanoparticles (Lauwers et al., 2013; Nimpf et al., 2017). Assuming a packing density of 0.5, a ferritin protein shell diameter of 12.5 nm and a mineral core containing 1000 – 3000 ferric iron atoms (typical iron load in human-liver or horse-spleen ferritin; Harrison & Arosio, 1996), we obtain the total number of Fe3+ ions in a cuticulosome as 1.6 – 4.9 x 107. A typical magnetosome chain in a magnetotactic spirillum consists of 15 magnetite crystals (Fig. 1), with 45 nm edge length each, amounting to an equivalent of 3.7 x 107 Fe3+ ions. Judging from this close numerical agreement in ferric iron loads between magnetosomes and cuticulosomes, the PB technique is deemed capable of resolving a magnetosome chain under normal transmitted light, which without staining is short of impossible unless special optical contrast enhancement techniques are used. However, there are two important unknowns that remain to be constrained from experiments. First, while magnetite nanocrystals are dissolved completely within 5 minutes of exposure to a 4% HCl solution (Fleissner et al., 2003), it may take significantly longer to dissolve a 50 nm sized crystal, and yet longer when the crystal is enveloped by a membrane vesicle. Second, it is not known if the acid treatment is sufficient to perforate membranes to a point where the PB reagent can enter the iron source region. We address these questions by applying the PB technique to whole cells of magnetotactic bacteria.
Table 1
Ferric iron content in Prussian Blue in relation to other iron-oxide minerals and iron-oxyhydroxides found in tissues, as calculated from chemical formulae and volumetric mass density.
Compound | Chemical formula | Density [g/cm3] | FeIII conc. [mol/cm3] |
Prussian Blue soluble1 insoluble2 | FeIII4[FeII(CN)6]3 · x H2O (x = 14-16) KFeIII[FeII(CN)6] „soluble“ | 1.45 1.72 - 1.78 | 4.71 6.35 |
Magnetite3 | Fe3O4 FeIII2O3 FeIIO | 5.21 | 45.0 (total Fe: 67) |
Maghemite4 | γ-FeIII2O3 FeIII2O3 FeIII2/3O | 4.80 | 61.5 |
Hematite5 | α-FeIII2O3 | 5.27 | 66.0 |
Ferrihydrite6,7 | FeIII8.2O8.5 • 7.4 OH •3 H2O FeIII10O14(OH)2 | 4.0 4.9 | 46.7 60.0 |
1Keggin & Miles 1936, 2Buser et al. 1977; |
3,4 Magnetite and its fully oxidized form, maghemite, are strongly ferrimagnetic minerals. The oxidation of magnetite to maghemite produces one vacancy at every third of the former iron(II) sites in the lattice, hence the lower density compared to magnetite. To emphasize the relationship between maghemite and magnetite, the chemical formula of maghemite can also be written as FeIII2O3 FeIII2/3O or in sum, Fe8/3O4. |
5,6,7 Hematite and ferrihydrite (for structural details see Michel et al., 2007, 2010) are weakly ferrimagnetic minerals. In the biological iron storage protein ferritin, iron is typically stored in the form of a nanocrystalline core of ferrihydrite or hematite, sometimes of a magnetite-like phase (magnetite or maghemite), at least in human brains (Quintana et al., 2004). Magnetic data of horse spleen ferritin can be explained by a combination of ferrihydrite and a small, variable amount of strongly magnetic phase like magnetite or maghemite (Brem et al., 2006). |