The aim of this study was to authenticate the species identity of cell lines available for use at the Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s National Centre for Foreign Animal Disease, and to establish methods that can be integrated into the laboratory quality assurance system. Confirming cell line species at our laboratory was previously conducted by comparing the electrophoretic migratory patterns of common intracellular enzymes (isoenzymes). Examining the polymorphic isoenzyme profiles between species for cell line confirmation has limitations including limited species range, low sensitivity of detection, and complex data interpretation.
In this study, 53 of the 63 cell lines had a COX1 sequence that was consistent with the expected species; the reads from each of these cell lines had a breadth of coverage of > 95% across the COX1 gene, and no more than five variants compared to the reference. LFBK-αvβ6 and SCP-HS cells were found to be from a different genus than expected, suggesting that the cell lines had been misidentified, contaminated, or mislabeled. When reads from the LFBK-αvβ6 and SCP-HS cell lines were mapped to the COX1 genes corresponding to the species identified by BLAST analysis, no variants were observed in either sample. The porcine DNA found within the LFBK-αvβ6 cell line is consistent with a published erratum that this cell line is of porcine origin25,26. LFBK-αvβ6 isoenzyme patterns are also consistent with cultures of porcine origin (unpublished results).
Assembled sequences from eight of the cell lines showed a higher pairwise nucleotide identity to a different species within the same genus than what was expected (Table 2). Five of the cell lines were of primate origin, two were of bat (flying foxes) origin, and one was of goose origin. The number of variants (i.e., SNPs, MNPs, INDELs) between the mapped reads and the COX1 gene was used as an indication of how similar the cell line was to a particular species. The difference in the number of variants between the expected and observed species varied for each cell line (between 9–64 variants); however, in each case, the number of variants was higher when aligned to the expected species as compared to the observed species. Turner et al. (2018)28 describes the morphological differences between species of the Chlorocebus genus of Old World monkeys, and reported that various geographical locations may permit deviation from the predicted morphology of these species. Thus, the species of the individual animal from which each of these cell lines originated was likely misidentified. It was also noticed that the number of variants in the bat cell lines (PaLu and PaSPT) was considerably higher in the observed species (39 and 40 variants, respectively) compared to all of the other cell lines (6 or fewer variants). The genus Pteropus is known to be very diverse with a large number of species29, therefore, additional investigation will be required to determine if the cell lines are, in fact P. ornatus, as identified here, or if there was a misidentification between closely related species when the cell line was originally created.
The current gold standard for the authentication of human cell lines is STR profiling30, while non-human cell lines are best identified using DNA barcoding with the COX1 gene8. The International Cell Line Authentication Committee (ICLAC) keeps a Register of all known misidentified or cross-contaminated cell lines. As of this study, the Register was last updated March 25, 2020 and contains a total of 509 cell lines that are misidentified; of these only 38 were nonhuman cell lines31. This is likely not because human cell lines are more susceptible to contamination compared to nonhuman cell lines, but rather, because there is more information available for human cell lines in addition to the limitations of STR profiling which is only applicable for single species differentiation31. Thus, the method described here is useful since it can identify the species as well as the presence of contaminants such as other cell lines, mycoplasma, or viruses1.
Experimental results can be negatively impacted due to mycoplasma contamination of cell lines. Depending on the species of mycoplasma, the effects on the cells vary from changes in protein and nucleic acid synthesis levels to a complete loss of the culture32. Detection of contamination is difficult, due in part to the small size (0.3–0.8µM)33 of the mycoplasma cells, which allows them to pass through filters33,34. Additionally, high concentrations of mycoplasma are possible without any obvious visual signs34. In this study, mycoplasma was not detected in any of the 63 cell lines tested. This result was expected as the NCFAD currently has quality control procedures in place to check for mycoplasma contamination in their cultures, and the results here are consistent with the systems in place.
The presence of certain viruses was expected in some of the cell lines. Bovine viral diarrhea virus 2 (BVDV2) is a common contaminant in fetal bovine serum35 and was present in the CPAE and OA3.Ts cell lines. Human adenovirus C was found in both HEK-293 and A549 cells. PCV1, a ubiquitous virus in pigs, was found as expected in the PK-15 (PCV+) cell line and in all four of the IPAM clones tested. Retroviral sequences are common in the genomes of their hosts due to insertion into the host genome27. The near-complete genome (99.3% breadth of coverage with 77 variants) of murine leukemia virus (MuLV) was detected in the P3X63-Ag8 cell line. Partial genomes from retroviruses such as avian leukosis virus (ALV) and porcine endogenous retrovirus (PERV) were detected in some cell lines.
Sequencing reads covering 39.5% of the CSFV genome were found in the cell line IB-RS-2 Clone D10 with 7 total variants shared between the reads mapped and the reference genome. This clone was originally determined to be free of CSFV contamination30, however, testing of this cell line obtained from the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) by Bolin, et al. (1994)36 detected the virus in this clone. The presence of the entire CSFV genome was also found in the same cell line used by the Pirbright Institute, UK (Don King, personal communication).