Abstract
The three-dimensional visualization of cellular architecture by volume electron microscopy (vEM) has reignited interest in morphological descriptions of complex tissue. At the same time, the increasing availability of vEM in life sciences was the foundation for the accelerated development of analysis pipelines with automated software tools for segmentation and 3D reconstruction. This progress results in continuous generation of large amounts of data that hold a treasure box of new scientific insights waiting for discovery. Automated segmentation of morphological architecture provides quantitative readouts of cellular and organellar properties, while open availability of datasets creates the opportunity to address a diversity of research questions. Here, we discuss sample preparation and data analysis strategies in vEM and showcase how this methodology contributed to our knowledge of myelin biology and disease. Furthermore, we intent to inform users about new developments in the field of instrumentation, methods and software development with the potential to contribute to other areas of research.
1 Introduction
To study phenomena at the cellular level and within complex tissue, transmission electron microscopy (TEM) was for many decades the main tool with sufficient resolution to visualize cellular ultrastructure. Electron microscopy (EM) has always played an important role as method of investigation in understanding myelin biology, as the fine details of the myelin sheath with its compacted multilayered membranes and the delicate ultrastructure of the axon-myelin unit require high resolution. This was pioneered by Betty Ben Geren [1] who described myelination in peripheral nerves of chicken embryos and Mary Bartlett Bunge and Richard P. Bunge who studied the mammalian central nervous system [2]. However, the two-dimensional nature of data obtained from ultrathin sections limits the information that can be retrieved from such images. Therefore, serial sectioning methods were applied already in the past to overcome this problem. For example, to understand the properties of myelinating oligodendrocytes, the glia cells that form myelin in the central nervous system (CNS) (Figure 1), several hundreds to thousands of serial ultrathin sections of cat corpus callosum and spinal cord in early development were prepared to visualize a large volume of tissue [3]. Within these sections, ensheathed axons, termed glial units, and oligodendroglial cell bodies were identified and systematically imaged. Subsequently, selected datasets were subjected to manual 3D reconstruction. Together with the electron microscopic study on axon ensheathment in early development in the same two CNS regions [4], these were important descriptions based on serial electron micrographs and instrumental for the understanding of developmental myelination.

Schematic drawing of the oligodendrocyte and myelin sheath in the central nervous system with its major components. Inset of cross-section through the optic nerve of a mouse. IT: inner tongue, OT: outer tongue, black arrowhead: microtubule, empty arrowhead: neurofilament.
The need for large volumes as well as high-resolution has made volume electron microscopy vEM [5] a very valuable tool in the field of neuroscience. Such data are now generated on a larger scale and much faster than the subsequent analysis can be performed. Several different imaging modes are available for vEM. These range from serial TEM imaging methods to the application of scanning electron microscopy (SEM) either on serial sections or by serial block-face imaging approaches [6]. These modalities differ in the achievable resolution in x, y and z and in the maximal size of the volume that can be imaged. Each mode of image acquisition requires an appropriate sample preparation method [7]. This means that the method needs to be selected specifically for the intended outcome and adapted to the sample of interest.
The main motivation for the development of vEM and one of the most important applications was the investigation of neuronal networks and circuit reconstruction in connectomics [8]. For this reason brain tissue in different species ranging from human [9], mouse (reviewed in Ref. [10]), zebrafish [11] to Drosophila [12] is most often mapped in 3D by vEM. An exception is a dataset in juvenile rat that was acquired specially to reconstruct glial cells [13]. Datasets were mostly obtained in grey matter regions. However, myelinated axons are contained not only in white matter tracts but also in cortical brain areas. Myelin impacts neuronal networks in multiple ways by influencing conduction velocities and fidelity in action potential propagation (reviewed in Refs. [14], [15]). The availability of high-resolution vEM data inspired investigation of the myelination pattern of the different neuronal cell types in the cortical layers of mouse brain. These studies revealed that myelin function goes beyond increasing conduction velocity in long range neuronal projections. It was shown that cortical myelination differs from subcortical white matter [16] and that inhibitory interneurons are myelinated [17]. These examples demonstrate that vEM generates a wealth of unbiased new data [10], on the basis of which new insights are possible in many fields of research. Here, we focus on the impact of this technology on the understanding of myelin biology. In this context we provide an overview of the methodology of sample preparation and data analysis to cover all requirements for vEM of myelin. Since data analysis is a major bottle neck in the vEM workflow, we discuss several software tools which are suitable for myelin segmentation.
2 Practical aspects of vEM
2.1 Sample preparation
For any microscopy method, sample preparation is one of the most crucial steps. Here we briefly summarize a variety of sample preparation approaches for vEM. A detailed introduction into the methods is available in this review [6]. To our experience, the so-called rOTO (reduced Osmium-Thiocarbohydrazide-Osmium) protocol [18] (see below) is suitable for myelin visualization in mouse and human tissue [19]. In general, the targeted structure of interest and the applied imaging method are dictating the sample preparation method. In this section we describe which modifications were applied to meet specific requirements of a given sample or animal species.
Due to the inherent properties of the image formation inside the SEM and the sample properties of biological specimens, protocols were optimized with the aim to achieve homogenously stained large sample blocks generating enough contrast for high resolution imaging using backscattered electron detection. In general, the smaller the sample the easier and quicker fixation and staining can be achieved. In the 1960s the (OTO) protocol was developed as a staining method for lipid-containing membranes and droplets in osmium tetroxide-fixed tissue [20]. This was developed further by Deerinck and colleagues [18] for serial block-face scanning electron microscope (SBEM) volume imaging, since the original protocol suffered from inhomogeneous staining in larger samples. A combination of potassium ferrocyanide with aqueous OsO4 solution, followed by thiocarbohydrazide and OsO4 (rOTO) as well as lead aspartate staining enhanced the signal for backscattered electron imaging of resin embedded tissue at low acceleration voltages. Potassium ferri- or ferrocyanide were used in combination with OsO4, making it more reactive [21]. However, this was not applicable in samples above 200 µm of sample thickness. In the lab of Winfried Denk a dense en-bloc staining protocol was developed replacing thiocarbohydrazide with pyrogallol (BROPA, brain-wide reduced-osmium staining with pyrogallol-mediated amplification) and using Spurr’s resin for the resin infiltration of bigger samples [22]. This was further developed for faster processing of Zebrafish brain (called fBROPA) to reduce incubation times from months to days [23]. Here, the addition of lead aspartate increased conductivity and prevented charging during SEM imaging. In another approach contrast and diffusibility were enhanced by a two-step uranyl acetate incubation protocol with the first incubation at low temperature and the second at higher temperatures, followed by lead aspartate staining [24]. Attempting to process even larger samples, the same lab modified the protocol according to Mikula to extend the sample size from 8 mm3 up to a full mouse brain (∼1 cm3 in size) [25]. Most of the published protocols are variations of the common rOTO-scheme and were developed for brain samples of specific species. For the preparation of other organs or brain tissue from different model organisms, reagents and incubation times might require optimization.
If chemical fixation deteriorates the structure of interest, or samples are small enough (max. 200 µm thickness) high-pressure freezing followed by freeze substitution can be used to preserve samples closer to their native state. Here, cryo-immobilization is used to keep all structures in their native context, followed by slowly introducing different stains while warming up the sample and finally embedding it in a resin. Most freeze substitution protocols for TEM imaging use only a few staining steps. To be able to get enough contrast for focused ion beam – scanning electron microscopy (FIB-SEM) or SBEM, especially for larger tissue, additional contrast enhancement steps (using OsO4 or uranyl acetate) can be added at the end of the freeze substitution also utilizing microwave-assisted processing for thicker specimen [26].
In the choice of the embedding resin, viscosity for good infiltration into large tissue blocks, rigidity of the sample to vacuum conditions and resistance to electron beam damage as well as the cutting properties in SBEM need consideration. An exhaustive comparison of a variety of resins regarding viscosity and behavior in FIB-SEM and SBEM was recently performed by Borghgraef and colleagues [27]. Tegethoff and Briggman also evaluated resin formulations for their polymerization uniformity, hardness and cutting properties to identify the best protocol for vEM [28].
2.2 vEM data acquisition
In the recent years various model systems and disease mechanisms have been studied using isotropic datasets generated by the FIB-SEM [29], [30], or larger datasets with lower resolution in z using the SBEM [31]. Lastly array tomography has been used to acquire datasets on sections collected on tape or wafer, which allows a rescanning of the same area at different resolutions [32], [33], [34]. Further developments on the microscope end allowed image collection not just with one electron beam, but an array of 61 or 91 beams [35], [36] and up to 196-beams at a time [37] leading to fast high-resolution mm-scale data collection. Here the lab of Jeff Lichtman in Harvard is pioneering efforts to map petascale fragments of the human brain [9], [38].
SEM samples need to be conductive to allow charge dissipation from the electron beam. Due to a better balance between negatively charged electrons and positively charged gallium ions inside the FIB-SEM chamber less charging occurs on the surface of the sample and smaller amounts of heavy metal suffice to dissipate charges. Larger specimens with open space between cells suffer from charging artefacts especially in SBEM. To prevent this, conductive components, for example silver particles, can be introduced into the resin embedding during the last infiltration step, surrounding the specimen with metal particles and dissipating charge from the freshly cut surface [39], [40]. Another approach to circumvent charging from the microscope point of view is a focal charge compensation device in the chamber flowing nitrogen gas across the sample surface and reducing surface charging [41].
Volume data can also be acquired under cryogenic conditions with a FIB-SEM or Plasma FIB-SEM (PFIB-SEM) if the samples need to be kept as close as possible in native conditions. PFIB-SEM utilizes different ion sources such as argon, xenon or nitrogen instead of gallium to allow faster milling of bigger specimen for volume imaging [42].
3 Data processing
Deciphering biological architecture in the healthy or pathological nervous system involves laborious, manual effort, especially when dealing with challenging objects such as the densely-packed multilayered fine structure of myelin. As a result, not only does the sample processing need to be carefully adapted to the analyzed sample, but also downstream processing of the generated data often requires customized pipelines.
Classical metrics derived from 2D electron microscopic images for analyzing axons and myelin include axon density and g-ratio measurement [43]. The g-ratio is the ratio of the axonal diameter to the diameter of the myelinated fiber [44], [45]. Today, many of these measurements are generated manually for each individual axon. Given the irregular morphology of nerve fibers, especially under pathological conditions, accurate segmentation of myelin and axon is essential for meaningful analysis [46]. For this purpose, several software tools are available, including KNOSSOS [47], and TrakEM2 [48] for circuit reconstruction, or Microscopy Image Browser [49] and IMOD [50] for manual reconstruction.
First attempts to transition from manual to partially automated segmentation methods were based on traditional image processing techniques, including thresholding [51], watershed algorithms [52], binarization and pixel classification by region growing [53] and region growing in combination with intensity and shape based criteria [54]. Later approaches were built on feature-based machine learning [55]. Although these early approaches contributed to improved accuracy and reduced processing time, they faced several limitations. Designed for specific imaging modalities, their performance was not robust when parameters such as contrast or resolution were changed. Other drawbacks included the need for extensive pre-processing, reliance on manually selected features and parameters for axon discrimination, and/or the need for extensive post-processing. Contextual information or mean forms were not considered and not all tools were publicly available (discussed in Ref. [43]).
Recent advancements in artificial intelligence, particularly in the use of deep learning techniques, hold significant promise for improving our ability to analyze both 2D and 3D EM datasets. Among these advancements, convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have emerged as a powerful tool for image analysis, especially for tasks involving image classification and segmentation [56]. In a CNN, the architecture generally comprises several steps with three key types of layers: convolutional layers that extract features such as edges and textures, pooling layers that reduce the data’s spatial resolution, and fully connected layers that are responsible for prediction [57]. The parameters of such a network are learned by comparing network prediction with annotations on labeled training data in a process called supervised learning. The U-Net architecture, introduced by Ronneberger and colleagues [58], has been particularly influential in the field of bio-medical image segmentation. By integrating a contracting and expanding pathway, consisting of convolutional, pooling and upsampling layers (see above), the U-Net is able to capture contextual information and at the same time the precise localization of complex structures. The network itself can be successfully trained already from a few annotated images with a reasonable training time, depending on the difficulty of the segmentation problem. With that, the U-Net architecture did outperform prior methods that were not based on deep learning and enhanced segmentation accuracy [58]. It has since been extended to also process 3D data by replacing 2D with 3D convolutions (3D U-net [59]). Architectures derived from the U-Net are still the state-of-the-art in most bio-medical segmentation problems (nnU-Net [60]). Now a large number of tools with their specific advantages and disadvantages is available, targeting both general microscopy and specifically myelin research. Some notable examples are presented below and summarized in Table 1.
Overview of software tools for myelin segmentation.
Software | Input | Basis | Segmentation | Main feature | Validation | Limitation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ilastik Berg [61] | 2D, 3D | Python | Automated and semi-automated | Interactive segmentation/classification with real-time feedback, paint interface | Visual inspection, uncertainty prediction | Not optimized for capturing global information |
MyelTracer Kaiser [62] | 2D | Python | Semi-automated and manual correction | G-ratio quantification, GUI, manual tracing function | Visual inspection/overlay output | Assumes circularity of axons, requires manual separation of adjacent myelin sheaths |
AimSeg Carillo-Babera 2023 [63] | 2D | Python | Automated and semi-automated | G-ratio considering inner tongue, combines Ilastik and Fiji, correction modes | Precision, recall, F1 score, Jaccard index and visual inspection | Need for classifier training, occasional underestimation of axon area |
AxonDeepSeq Zaimi [43] | 2D | Python | Automated | High-throughput/large datasets, semantic segmentation, optimized for SEM and TEM data | Dice coefficient, precision, sensitivity and visual inspection | Only trained and tested on healthy tissue |
ACSON Abdollahzadeh [64] | 2D, 3D | Matlab | Automated | Segmentation of myelin, axons, mitochondria, cells and vacuoles, tested on SBEM data, automatic quantification (morphometry) | Precision, recall weighted Jaccard index, weighted Dice coefficient and visual inspection | User needs to tune parameters (similarity, intensity thresholds), annotation of mitochondria requires more human intervention |
gACSON Behanova [65] | 2D, 3D | Matlab | Automated and manual correction | Unsupervised segmentation, analysis of myelinated axons and intra-axonal space, calculation of metrics, interactive approach for reviewing/correcting | Precision, recall, F1 score and visual inspection | Inaccuracies by dividing myelin content equally, unsupervised segmentation less accurate under pathological conditions |
-
Validation metrics: Precision: proportion of predicted objects correctly matching the ground truth; Recall/Sensitivity: proportion of target objects/ground truth matching the prediction mask; F1 score/Dice coefficient: harmonic mean of precision and recall. Higher F1 score ∼ good object detection; Jaccard Index/Intersection over Union: measure of similarity assessing the overlap between ground truth and prediction mask/intersection divided by the union of both. Details and further reading: [63].
3.1 Ilastik
Ilastik is a Python-based “interactive learning and segmentation toolkit” (www.ilastik.org) designed to enable users without image processing expertise to easily analyze biological images. It offers different workflows that implement segmentation and classification tasks in an easy-to-use interface. The most widely applied workflow is pixel classification using a random forest classifier that learns from user-provided labels through a paint interface. The classifier uses intensity, edge and textural features, which are computed for each pixel based on its local neighborhood. The pixel classification workflow performs semantic segmentation, separating the image into classes such as foreground or background, instead of performing an instance segmentation, where individual objects are created. This approach provides real-time feedback, facilitating interactive segmentation and correction. By combining machine learning with interactive user annotation, pixel classification is able to handle complex segmentation tasks. Ilastik allows users to view overlays with predictions and an uncertainty map to guide through difficult regions within the image. Once trained on a representative set of images, Ilastik can batch process large image sets automatically. Pixel classification supports both 2D and 3D data and is capable of automatic and semi-automatic segmentation of EM volumes and other microscopy data. Other Ilastik workflows provide functionality for automatic and semi-automatic instance segmentation, object detection and object tracking. Among these, the “carving workflow” is especially useful for vEM data, as it can be used for interactive 3D segmentation based on seeded region growing. The implementation of Ilastik can be particularly useful for the segmentation of myelinated axons across nodes of Ranvier [55] or the detection of myelin in general ([66] and Supplementary within). It is also integrated within other tools for myelin research such as AimSeg (see below).
Overall, Ilastik, more specifically its pixel classification workflow, offers an excellent starting point for many analyses due to its user-friendly design, requiring no coding experience, and its capability to efficiently perform standard image processing tasks. Although it excels in handling local cues such as brightness, color and texture, it is not optimized for capturing global information. Nonetheless, it provides a practical solution for many image segmentation challenges that would otherwise require a custom algorithm. Ilastik is open-source and can be used and extended without restrictions [61].
3.2 Semi-automated and automated segmentation and quantification of myelin properties on 2D images
Introduced in 2021, MyelTracer is a Python-based, open source, semi-automated software focusing on g-ratio quantification (https://github.com/HarrisonAllen/MyelTracer) [62]. The g-ratio quantification is based on the Open Computer Vision Library (OpenCV) and PyQt5’s GUI. The developers of MyelTracer place a high priority on user-friendliness to make their tool accessible to users with little to no coding experience. Their software uses intensity thresholding to create contours around axons and myelin, but also includes a manual tracing function, allowing for correction of abnormal/difficult myelin sheath shapes and axons. The efficacy of MyelTracer was tested across different tissues and ages, including remyelination scenarios, and samples after optic nerve crush. MyelTracer can be used for 2D segmentation, to measure areas, calculate g-ratios, and determine the percentage of myelinated axons, reducing quantification time by 40–60 %.
AimSeg is a machine learning-based tool for the assessment of myelin thickness and myelin properties in EM images. It uniquely focuses not only on compact myelin, but also on the innermost non-compacted myelin layer, known as the inner tongue (https://github.com/paucabar/AimSeg) [63]. Although critical for myelin function and pathology, the inner tongue has been largely overlooked in past analysis. AimSeg segments axons, inner tongues, and compact myelin hierarchically as three objects, which in combination enables precise calculation of parameters like g-ratio and inner tongue area.
The tool offers both, automated segmentation and an assisted workflow, allowing for correction of results with minimal human intervention. It was trained on TEM images of mouse corpus callosum undergoing demyelination and remyelination. Thus, making it versatile for analyzing and quantifying compact and non-compacted myelin under various conditions. Its core pipeline utilizes a Fiji script to process input files generated by supervised machine learning classifiers from Ilastik (for pixel and object classification). Users can either use the pre-trained classifiers and enhance them with their own data and annotations, or train their own classifiers based on the provided user documentation. In addition, AimSeg includes optional post-processing steps for automatic correction of axon segmentation and user editing steps for correcting inaccuracies or common annotation errors before quantification. When assessing their computation time, the authors could show a reduction of 1 h per image manual annotation time (validation of ground truth) to 6–7 s on average by using automated processing with AimSeg including postprocessing. AimSeg provides a bioimage analysis tool, combining the user-friendliness of Ilastik with the versatility of Fiji. However, a potential limitation might be the spatial resolution when applied to other imaging modalities.
AxonDeepSeg (https://github.com/axondeepseg/axondeepseg) is an open-source tool using supervised deep learning for the automatic segmentation of axons and myelin sheaths on 2D images [43]. Featuring a CNN architecture, the model is tailored for the semantic segmentation of histological images and provides two pre-trained models optimized for SEM and TEM data. Trained on mouse brain samples and macaque corpus callosum, the authors achieved high accuracy in segmenting axons and myelin, as demonstrated on a full rat spinal cord slice. AxonDeepSeg is implemented in Python using the TensorFlow deep learning framework. It is important to note that AxonDeepSeg has been rigorously trained and tested on healthy tissue. However, the study did not explore its efficacy on pathological samples.
3.3 Automated segmentation and quantification of myelin properties on 3D volumes
ACSON (AutomatiC 3D Segmentation and morphometry Of axoNs) supports automated segmentation and morphometric analysis of white matter ultrastructure in 3D [64] (https://github.com/aAbdz/ACSON). This tool segments various components, including myelin, myelinated and unmyelinated axons, mitochondria, cells, and vacuoles, providing a detailed morphological analysis. By applying their pipeline to SBEM image stacks of the corpus callosum from sham-operated and brain-injured rats, the authors revealed that cross-sections of myelinated axons were elliptical rather than circular. In addition, they showed that axonal diameters varied significantly along their longitudinal axes, underscoring the limitations of 2D studies. The ACSON pipeline comprises several steps. Initially, the images are denoised, after which the bounded volume growing (BVG) technique is employed for segmentation. This combines seeded region growing and edge detection algorithms in three dimensions. Subsequent refinement of the segmentation is achieved through supervoxel techniques. Finally, the pipeline segments subcellular structures and cells, with the aim of annotating myelinated and unmyelinated axons. Their morphometry pipeline offers an automatic quantification of the segmented myelinated axons. Although ACSON largely automates the segmentation process, the user is still required to tune parameters such as similarity or intensity thresholds. Of note, the annotation of mitochondria presents a particular difficulty and still requires more human intervention.
gACSON (Graphical User Interface for Automatic Segmentation of axONs), released in 2022, is an open source Matlab-based software designed for visualizing, segmenting, assessing, and analyzing the morphology of myelinated axons in 3D EM volumes of brain samples [65] (https://github.com/Andrea-Behanova/gACSON). Aside from the description of the software the publication also provides a useful summary of other available tools and their properties. gACSON allows for both automatic segmentation and manual correction. It automatically segments the intra-axonal space and corresponding myelin sheaths, enabling the calculation of various metrics such as axonal diameter, eccentricity, myelin thickness, or g-ratio. Building on their previous pipelines ACSON and DeepACSON [67], gACSON integrates additional segmentation algorithms and features. While supervised learning-based methods such as DeepMIB [68] or AxonDeepSeg require manually annotated training data, gACSON uses unsupervised segmentation without the need for such data. By performing instance segmentation, gACSON does not require any assumptions about axon shape, which differentiates it from other techniques such as MyelTracer [62] (2D, semantic segmentation), where axons are assumed to be approximately circular in cross-section. Additionally, gACSON automatically separates adjacent myelin sheaths, a task that MyelTracer requires user input for. Another novelty is an interactive approach for reviewing and correcting automatically generated segmentations. The gACSON pipeline includes denoising with the block-matching 4D filtering algorithm (BM4D) and semantic segmentation of myelin. A distinctive feature is the instance segmentation of myelin, which accurately maps myelin sheaths to the appropriate intra-axonal space instances, allowing precise calculation of parameters like myelin thickness and g-ratio. The tool was applied to six SBEM datasets from the somatosensory cortex of one sham-operated and two traumatic brain injury (TBI) rats, demonstrating its capability for automatic segmentation of brain tissue ultrastructure and correction of automatic segmentations.
Despite its advantages, gACSON has some limitations. The dataset size cannot exceed the available RAM, necessitating the tiling of large datasets into subvolumes. Furthermore, the instance segmentation can encounter inaccuracies when there are substantial differences in myelin sheath thickness of adjacent fibers, due to the watershed algorithm dividing myelin content equally between adjacent axons. Also, for more difficult conditions, e.g. due to pathologies, the unsupervised segmentation quality may be worse compared to approaches that learn from annotated data.
3.4 Validation approaches
Validation and quality control is an important aspect of (semi-) automated analysis workflows to ensure consistent analysis quality. The most common approach is visual inspection of segmentation results using an image viewer with segmentation overlay. All tools presented here support this feature. However, this approach still requires manual effort to inspect results. Consequently, for analyses of large datasets, e.g. large volume EM or high-throughput TEM, only samples of the segmentation results can be validated manually. Moreover, the analysis tools listed here often lack functionality to efficiently visualize such large datasets, requiring use of another specialized tool such as WebKnossos [69], Catmaid [70] or MoBIE [71]. An alternative to manual inspection is validating the segmentation results against manual or proof-read annotations of a sample of the dataset to be analyzed. Here, different metrics to evaluate semantic or instance segmentation can be used, see [72] for a comprehensive overview. Most of the tools listed here support such an automated evaluation, except Ilastik and MyelTracer. This approach offers a more objective evaluation and can also be used to compare different segmentation approaches. However, it is more labor intensive, due to the fact that it requires additional manual annotations. Furthermore, the annotated data has to be chosen such that it covers the variety of the data to be analyzed, otherwise risking an underestimate of the segmentation error. The annotated data also has to be strictly separated from annotations used for training any machine learning based approach to avoid such an underestimate.
In conclusion, the evolution of segmentation methods, from manual to automated deep learning approaches, is changing the field of myelin and axon analysis. While challenges remain, particularly in terms of precision and handling pathological variations, the advancements in AI and deep learning hold great promise for more accurate, efficient, and comprehensive analyses in the future.
4 Utilizing vEM to dissect myelin protein function and properties of healthy myelin
As described in the first section, technical developments in the field of vEM have greatly expanded the possibilities for researching the three-dimensional properties of myelin in most tissues often in combination with fluorescence microscopy and live imaging. This was accompanied by the development of improved sample preparation strategies for myelin preservation and vEM [19], [73], [74]. Here we summarize some of the recent studies applying vEM that shape our current understanding of CNS myelin biology.
4.1 Developmental myelination
During development myelin is generated as a specialized plasma membrane domain of oligodendrocytes. By spirally wrapping around axons, a sheath composed of dense layers of compacted membranes is formed (Figure 1). Details of this wrapping process were unclear and different models were proposed. According to the “carpet crawler” model a sheet-like structure of a broadened oligodendrocyte process contacts and then wraps the axon at full length [75], while the “liquid croissant model” proposed a small cell process spiralling around the axon before growing laterally [76]. Snaidero and colleagues have shown with a combination of methods including FIB-SEM and three-dimensional reconstruction that the leading edge of the growing myelin sheath was the inner tongue. This is the innermost myelin wrap that directly contacts the axon [77]. According to their model, this inner tongue expands and spirals underneath the continuously added layers of myelin membrane, while these layers are growing laterally along the axon towards the forming nodes of Ranvier with their non-compacted edges always in contact with the axon. These non-compacted edges finally formed the paranodal loops. This model highlighted the inner tongue as the growth zone and the role of non-compacted openings, also called cytoplasmic channels within the myelin sheath [78], as supply pipelines for myelin growth in development.
For correct developmental myelination, target recognition, myelin thickness, internode length and the formation of nodes of Ranvier must be tightly regulated. Although the mechanisms are not entirely clear, bidirectional interactions by immunoglobulin cell adhesion molecules (CAMs) like Cadm3/4 play important roles [79], [80]. The Ig-CAM myelin-associated glycoprotein (MAG) is located at the adaxonal surface of the internodal myelin sheath and excluded from compact myelin [81], [82]. Its extracellular domain is facing the periaxonal space and is involved in regulating axon/myelin apposition [83], [84]. Paranodal adhesion proteins contactin-1 (Cntn1) and contactin-associated protein (Caspr) at the axonal surface and neurofascin 155 (Nfasc155) at the glial side [85], [86], coordinate together with MAG myelin growth and paranode formation in development [87]. The latter study analyzed developmental myelination by live imaging in Zebrafish and by vEM using automatic tape-collecting ultramicrotome (ATUM) and FIB-SEM in young mice under double and triple knock-out conditions. In these mutants, three-dimensional reconstruction of EM data stacks revealed complex phenotypes. Double myelin sheaths were formed by either two sheaths growing on top of each other or by the formation of two leading edges in one myelin sheath with one wrapping around the axon and the other growing into the forming sheath. Taken together, the study established that both, MAG at the internode and the paranodal adhesion molecules Cntn1, Caspr and Caspr2 function synergistically to target the growing edge and keep the developing myelin sheath connected to the axon during the wrapping process [87].
Using the mouse optic nerve as model tissue, Djannatian and colleagues investigated the ultrastructural changes in myelin during development by SBEM [88]. In this developmental phase, myelin membranes were produced in excess in the form of complicated three-dimensional aberrant myelin structures, so-called outfoldings that extend between neighboring fibers and are formations of redundant myelin. The 3D data stacks at different ages revealed that many of these structures were engulfed and phagocytosed by microglia cells. These findings were complemented by live-imaging in zebrafish showing microglia activity and the dynamics of myelin formation and remodeling. This important study demonstrated that developmental myelination is a dynamic process that involves myelin overproduction, myelin retraction, remodeling and refinement by microglia.
A recent study by Iyer and colleagues addressed the question by which mechanism myelin sheath length is determined during developmental myelination and added another important detail to the current concept of the cell biology of myelination [89]. They showed that calcium signalling is specifically required for myelin sheath length determination, but not for the number of myelinated axons or myelin thickness. To determine myelin sheath length in the mouse optic nerve after genetic calcium attenuation they performed SBEM and 3D reconstruction. This revealed multiple myelin outfoldings and dysmorphic, shorter sheaths in the mutants. Taken together, their study demonstrated that calcium-regulated actin filament assembly in nascent sheaths is a mechanism to elongate and refine the myelin sheath in response to neuronal activity.
4.2 Properties and functions of myelin
The inner tongue, paranode and juxtaparanode of the myelin sheath were found to play an important role in myelin maintenance. As Meschkat and colleagues reported, in adulthood, newly generated myelin membranes were continuously added at the inner tongue in proximity to the paranodal loops [90]. In this investigation, myelin basic protein (MBP) – which is the only essential protein required for the compaction of myelin in the CNS, was used as a structural indicator of resident myelin. After the inducible conditional knock-out of exon 1 of the classical Mbp locus in adult mice, any newly formed myelin membrane was incapable to form compact myelin due to the absence of MBP. This resulted in a slow disappearance of the developmentally formed myelin sheath due to replacement by non-compacted myelin membranes. This structural change was visualized with FIB-SEM at different time points after knock-out induction thereby providing information about the slow turnover of a myelin internode with a half-life of 20 weeks in the optic nerve.
vEM was also used to address the fundamental question whether individual oligodendrocytes show a preference for axons of a specific diameter [91]. Single oligodendrocytes myelinate multiple distant axons whereby each myelin sheath is connected to the cell body by a fine process. Tanaka and colleagues applied SBEM to samples from mouse corpus callosum to investigate oligodendrocyte heterogeneity. They classified interfascicular oligodendrocytes into two subtypes depending on their arrangement in rows or as isolated cells within the white matter tract and analyzed the shape of single oligodendrocytes and their myelin sheath. This revealed some fundamental properties: These oligodendrocytes generally myelinated distinct axons and hardly formed multiple sheaths on the same axon. They also showed a cell-specific preference for axonal diameters and a characteristic myelin thickness indicating heterogeneity within the oligodendrocyte population.
Myelin function might differ between white matter tracts and cortical regions and also between different types of myelinated axons. Myelin sheaths in white matter tracts speed up action potential propagation and fidelity by reducing the local internodal capacitance [92], [93] and support axonal energy metabolism [94], [95]. Different to this, myelination in grey matter regions can be discontinuous with large unmyelinated gaps, as shown for pyramidal neurons in superficial layers by high-throughput vEM using the ATUM and scanning serial sections [16]. Array tomography and vEM further revealed that most myelinated axons in the cortex belong to inhibitory interneurons [17].
To address myelin function heterogeneity in cortical regions, Kole and colleagues investigated the role of myelination on axons of parvalbumin-expressing (PV+) basket cells [96]. For this study on structure-function relationship in fast-spiking inhibitory interneurons, they took advantage of publicly available vEM datasets of mouse visual cortex from the MICrONS Consortium (https://www.microns-explorer.org/ [97]) and complemented it with electrophysiology, live Ca2+ imaging and immunofluorescence data. In the EM dataset, the distribution of axonal mitochondria in myelinated, unmyelinated and intermittent myelinated axon branches was visualized in relation to the myelin sheaths of the axon. Their study revealed that axonal mitochondria show a cell-type specific distribution pattern and clustered in myelinated segments of axons of these PV+ interneurons. Mitochondria were also longer, larger, showed a higher aspect ratio and occupied a larger volume than in non-myelinated parts of the axon. Different to this, in excitatory layer 2/3 cortical pyramidal neurons, such a volume difference of mitochondria between myelinated and unmyelinated segments of the axon was not found. By investigating Ca2+ fluxes, Kole and colleagues detected low mitochondrial Ca2+ transients in axons and axonal mitochondria along myelinated internodes and large action-potential evoked Ca2+ responses at non-myelinated branch points and nodes of Ranvier. Myelin function in PV+ interneurons might therefore include the restriction of mitochondrial Ca2+ buffering to the non-myelinated areas and support of ATP production along the internodes to sustain high firing frequencies and synchronization with fast gamma oscillations typical for these neurons [96].
Previously undescribed myelin proteins found in the myelin proteome might have unexplored functions towards axonal integrity. Knock-out mouse models offer an opportunity to study these and learn more about the complex axon-glia relationship. For example, the tetraspan-transmembrane protein CMTM5 (chemokine-like factor-like MARVEL-transmembrane domain containing protein 5) was found enriched in oligodendrocytes and myelin [98]. Although CMTM5 is a minor component in the myelin proteome, Cmtm5-deficient mice developed an early-onset progressive axonopathy despite the formation of normal appearing myelin [99]. Axonopathy in this mutant was evaluated by FIB-SEM and three-dimensional reconstruction. The pathology was characterized as axonal degeneration visible in the form of myelin whorls that consist of membranes with myelin-typical periodicity lacking any indication of an axon. Three-dimensional analysis was required to determine that these whorls were indeed spherical membranous objects and not parts of larger assemblies like myelin outfoldings. These whorls were interpreted as remnants of axons which underwent Wallerian degeneration with preservation of neuronal cells bodies [100]. The observed amelioration in the presence of the Wallerian degeneration slow (Wld S ) mutation which can protect axons from several types of insult [101] further supported this interpretation [99].
Ultimately, these studies were performed to elucidate properties of normal myelin and discover functions of myelin proteins. In the following section we will discuss how vEM contributed to the understanding of pathological changes of myelin.
5 Volume EM as a tool to study myelin in pathology and injury
5.1 Inherited myelin disease
Myelinated axons exist in a close metabolic relationship with the myelinating oligodendrocyte [95], [102]. The importance of an intact axo-glia unit is highlighted by the impact of genetic defects affecting the myelinating glial cell on neuronal health [103]. One example is proteolipid protein (PLP), the major myelin protein in the CNS of mouse and human encoded by the PLP1/Plp1 gene [98], [104], [105]. Point mutations, gene duplication or deletion are the genetic cause of a spectrum of inherited X-linked dys-myelinating leukodystrophies from severe Pelizaeus Merzbacher disease (PMD) to the milder late-onset spastic paraplegia type 2 (SPG2) [106]. The Plp −/Y mouse is a model of SPG2 which develops large axonal swellings and neuropathy leading to the view that the performance of the ensheathing oligodendrocyte directly influences the health and survival of the myelinated axon [107], [108], [109]. Although the exact disease mechanism is unclear, length-dependent axonal degeneration is secondary to the glial defect and might be a consequence of focal axonal transport impairment [107]. Revisiting the phenotype of the Plp −/Y mouse by FIB-SEM yielded additional interesting information: The myelin sheath appears normally compacted [73], but is characterized by many large cytoplasmic/myelinic channels that might play a role in enhanced axonal support [110]. However, sustained metabolic alterations in this myelin mutant affect axonal mitochondria [109]. Swollen and shorter mitochondria were found along the axon and within axonal swellings that sometimes consisted entirely of mitochondria. In addition, so far undescribed accumulations of organelles at the inner tongue were observed.
Recently, in an extended vEM study, the axo-myelin unit in the Plp-deficient mouse was carefully scrutinized with manual 3D reconstruction of FIB-SEM stacks [46]. The Mag-deficient mouse model was as well included into this study. MAG was mentioned in the preceding section as an important adhesion protein in ensuring correct myelin wrapping in development. Despite the differences in location and functions of PLP and MAG, their deficiencies share the myelin feature of outfoldings [81]. This formation of redundant myelin occurs transiently in normal development (see preceding section and [88]) but becomes pathological in adulthood. The three-dimensional ultrastructural investigation now revealed the spatial dimensions and complex shapes of these outfoldings (Figure 2 and movie) [46]. Unexpectedly, this study found that lack of these structural myelin proteins not only impacted the myelin sheath itself, but also entailed axonal pathology characterized by diameter increase, axonal sprouting and anastomosis. Descriptions of such secondary axonal pathologies have been emerging only recently.
![Figure 2:
Myelin pathologies: reconstruction of myelin (yellow) and axon (blue) in optic nerves of myelin mutants analyzed at postnatal day 75 based on a focused ion beam – scanning electron microscope (FIB-SEM) dataset (openly available, see section data availability). (A), (B), (C) 3D model; (A′), (B′), (C′) EM image with highlighted features (myelin yellow, blue axon). (A), (A′) from a Mag-deficient (Mag
−/−) mouse. (B), (B′), (C), (C′) from a Plp-deficient (Plp
−/Y) mouse. Scale bar 1 µm. Adapted from [46] (under Creative Commons Attribution License).](/document/doi/10.1515/mim-2024-0013/asset/graphic/j_mim-2024-0013_fig_002.jpg)
Myelin pathologies: reconstruction of myelin (yellow) and axon (blue) in optic nerves of myelin mutants analyzed at postnatal day 75 based on a focused ion beam – scanning electron microscope (FIB-SEM) dataset (openly available, see section data availability). (A), (B), (C) 3D model; (A′), (B′), (C′) EM image with highlighted features (myelin yellow, blue axon). (A), (A′) from a Mag-deficient (Mag −/−) mouse. (B), (B′), (C), (C′) from a Plp-deficient (Plp −/Y) mouse. Scale bar 1 µm. Adapted from [46] (under Creative Commons Attribution License).
5.2 Models of white matter injury
While inherited leukodystrophies like PMD are rare, multiple sclerosis (MS) is one of the most prevalent causes of neurological impairment manifesting in young adulthood [111]. MS is a chronic inflammatory demyelinating disease characterized by lesion formation in white and grey matter areas of the CNS ultimately leading to axonal loss and disability [112]. In animal models of MS, amyloid precursor protein (APP)-positive axonal accumulations of organelles are often used as marker for acute neuroaxonal damage [113]. Using the mouse model of toxic demyelination with cuprizone [114], content and volume of axonal swellings in the corpus callosum were studied by SBEM and immunohistochemistry confirming that alterations in axonal transport leading to accumulations of APP+ vesicles and mitochondria are a hallmark of early axonal damage [115]. To elucidate the role of myelin and demyelination in axonal vulnerability, Schäffner and colleagues investigated axonal pathology in relation to the status of myelination in human MS lesions and mouse models of MS [116]. By 2D EM of MS lesions, they found that axonal pathology was characterized by either organelle accumulation in axonal swellings or by condensed axoplasm. Time-course studies in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), cuprizone and lysophosphatidylcholine (LPC) mouse models of white matter injury revealed that axonal swellings were an early and reversible characteristic of axonal pathology. By SBEM they could show that these occurred only in axonal segments with residual myelin while adjacent demyelinated sections of the same axon appeared normal. In contrast, condensed axoplasm as a sign of late stage damage was only found in myelinated axons and less prevalent in a hypomyelinating mouse mutant which exhibits more unmyelinated axons due to a low expression of MBP. Based on these results a hypothesis was proposed that under inflammatory conditions, myelin becomes dysfunctional promoting axonal damage that could be prevented by efficient demyelination [116].
Currently, MS is incurable. Supporting endogenous remyelination to restore function is one important therapeutic goal. Therefore, a better understanding of this process is crucial for the development of possible therapeutic interventions. A wealth of evidence from mouse models indicates that neural progenitor cells (NPCs) and oligodendrocyte progenitor cells (OPCs) play a major role in remyelination after recruitment to the lesion site and differentiation into myelinating oligodendrocytes (reviewed in Ref. [117]). To investigate the remyelinating potential of residual and viable mature adult oligodendrocytes after damage and partial loss of their internodes Duncan and colleagues studied two large animal models of demyelination [118]. The first model is feline irradiated food-induced demyelination (FIDID) which resulted in spinal cord demyelination and concurrent remyelination. During recovery in the ventral and lateral spinal cord, a mosaic pattern of unaffected and remyelinated axons was observed which were identified based on their different g-ratios. Meticulous analysis by SBEM showed single oligodendrocytes with cytoplasmic connections to unaffected mature myelin sheaths and remyelinating myelin sheaths at different stages of wrapping. Similar findings were obtained in a non-human primate model of vitamin B12 deprivation in the same study. These are strong indications that mature oligodendrocytes might participate in remyelination under certain conditions. The difference from previous findings could be due to the different model species as well as the type of injury or lesion formation that might be specific for the affected CNS region.
Response to white matter injury and remyelination requires coordinated multicellular tissue reactions [119]. To study functional and structural changes in a mouse model of LPC-induced demyelination, Androvic and colleagues developed spatial transcriptomics-correlated electron microscopy (STcEM) which combines two unlikely compatible techniques to visualize morphology and function of cells in a complex tissue environment [120]. This technique allowed to combine large-area vEM of lesions and spatial transcriptomics with multiplexed error-robust fluorescence in situ hybridization (MERFISH) [121] on adjacent tissue sections revealing functional heterogeneity in expression responses. For validation, immunocytochemistry and lipid staining-coupled single-cell RNA sequencing were applied. This type of method development and combination is exemplary for future possibilities to visualise complex processes with the ultimate goal of understanding disease mechanisms as a basis for meaningful therapeutic intervention.
6 Conclusions and further perspectives
6.1 Instrumentation and sample preparation
A variety of instruments and different approaches are currently available for vEM. Further technical development can be expected in the field of FIB-SEM with the invention of ‘enhanced FIB-SEM’ [122] or PFIB-SEM improving acquisition time, resolution in X, Y and Z, stability of the sample during image acquisition and homogeneity of the milling procedure. In the field of fast image acquisition by multibeam-SEM, FAST-EM (Fast, Automated Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy) utilizes a new optical transmission detection technique on sections mounted on a scintillator that converts electrons into photons [123], [124]. Kievits and colleagues now implemented an array tomography workflow for vEM on an early adopter FAST-EM system [125].
Sample preparation procedures must be adapted to the respective properties of the sample. In principle, these protocols are variations of a heavy metal-rich formulation like the classic rOTO protocol, at least in neuroscience. New protocols were developed to overcome side effects of fixation like cell swelling and preserve the extracellular space in brain tissue [126]. It was also shown in this study that this protocol increased the efficacy of heavy metal infiltration. Indeed, as sample sizes increase, effective infiltration methods will be required, possibly with application of microwave-assisted processing [26] or agitation methods [127]. There might be development in the field of resins depending on how the existing formulations cope with new milling procedures as applied in PFIB-SEM. For serial section imaging, recent methods development aiming at high-throughput collection of thousands of sections directly on wafer greatly improved the efficacy and quality by abolishing the need for serial section collection [128], [129]. Both studies applied addition of a thin layer of magnetic particle containing resin on the side of the sample. After sectioning, a dense cloud of freely floating sections was collected with the help of a permanent magnet and deposited onto wafer. The serial order of the sections was retrieved after imaging, e.g. by light microscopy when the magnetic resin also contained fluorescent particles [129]. This method is compatible with correlative 3D light and electron microscopy workflows (vCLEM).
Correlative workflows facilitate imaging across the scales and help targeting the structure of interest within a larger tissue context. A review worth reading by Chris Guerin and Saskia Lippens tells the history of moving CLEM into the three dimensional space [130]. From this active community many innovative developments are expected in the future. For example, embedding procedures which are compatible with fluorescence imaging facilitate easier correlation in vCLEM [131]. Wide-field fluorescent image acquisition integrated in the SEM using cathodoluminescent markers was used to map the regions of interest for high-resolution SEM image acquisition on serial sections [132]. Combining imaging modalities like intravital fluorescence microscopy or functional imaging with X-ray tomography for targeting in vEM helped to find rare events [133] or to link function to structure [134].
6.2 Data handling
Large datasets produced by vEM are extremely valuable if they meet the FAIR (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reuse of digital assets) principles of data policy. Well described datasets including metadata should be openly available via repositories such as Nanotomy (http://www.nanotomy.org/OA/), EMPIAR (Electron Microscopy Public Image Archive, https://www.ebi.ac.uk/empiar/), neurodata.io (https://neurodata.io/) or the Image Data Repository (https://idr.openmicroscopy.org/). To enable further analysis in the spirit of open science, these data should be accessible on demand with a tool such as CATMAID [70], MoBIE [71] or WebKnossos [69]. Such datasets are not only required for potential scientific re-use [135], but manually annotated and segmented open datasets are also needed to train neuronal networks.
The automatic quantification of myelinated axons becomes increasingly important due to the larger availability and throughput of vEM for myelin research. Several user-friendly tools for automated analysis of myelin and electron microscopy exist thanks to the wide adoption of machine and deep learning in bio-medical image analysis. However, these tools are still limited in their generalization to different imaging conditions and hampered by difficulties in training deep neural networks on newly annotated data. Two recent trends promise to remove these hurdles and make advanced image analysis fully available to biologists. First, the recent development of a common model format and a resource for sharing deep neural networks, BioImage.IO [136], enables re-use of trained networks within user-friendly software such as Ilastik [61] and Deep MIB [68] as well as integration with ZeroCost4DL [137] a tool for easy network training. Due to these trends researchers will be able to further train networks on their EM myelin data and share the results with the community. Second, the emergence of “foundation models” for microscopy data. Foundation models are powerful deep learning models trained on massive datasets to solve a number of different tasks of a specific category. While these models require a large data and computational footprint for initial training, the availability of segmentation foundation models, in particular Segment Anything [138] has enabled their adoption to microscopy [139] and enables fast interactive and automatic segmentation of complex structures in EM and other microscopy modalities. Further developments of these methods promise powerful segmentation approaches that can be adapted to new data from very few examples. Given the further automation and ease-of-use of 3D segmentation tasks, the development of better models for 3D morphology that go beyond simple measures like the g-ratio will also become increasingly important. Many parameters can be extracted from any segmented object emphasizing the importance to convert 3D data into meaningful metrics. One example can be found in the analysis of 3D axonal properties shown by Steyer and colleagues [46] extracting curvature, torsion, circumference changes and eccentricity. This exemplifies the need for interdisciplinary research bringing together neuroscience, computational science and mathematics.
6.3 Further perspectives
Currently, large 3D imaging of brain tissue and automated reconstruction from of an increasing number of species will inevitably reveal a plethora of unknowns that have been overlooked. Besides this, systematic comparisons of mutant versus wildtype in smaller datasets although deemed less spectacular, are essential to test exciting hypotheses. However, of particular interest are human diseases leading to neurodegeneration e.g. MS and natural processes like ageing. A deep-learning workflow specifically developed for myelin segmentation in human autopsy samples is available [140]. Multimodal approaches as pioneered by Androvic and colleagues [120] offer unique insight into cellular activity, morphology and distribution in a disease context. Other fields of research beyond neuroscience will profit from such methods development. Although many questions have been investigated using conventional 2D TEM, there is much more to explore in 3D to improve our understanding of the interplay between different components in the central and peripheral nervous system. In light of the current technical advance in the field of instrumentation, sample preparation, imaging and data analysis, the future holds a wide range of opportunities.
Funding source: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Award Identifier / Grant number: 401510699
Acknowledgments
L.C.S. is supported by the cluster of excellence Multiscale Bioimaging: from Molecular Machines to Networks of Excitable Cells (MBExC) as a collegian of the Hertha Sponer College with access to training opportunities for early career researchers. We like to thank Klaus-Armin Nave, director of the Department of Neurogenetics, for his advice and support. He is supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, TRR274), the Dr Myriam and Sheldon Adelson Medical Foundation (AMRF) and an ERC Advanced Grant (MyeliNANO).
-
Research ethics: Not applicable.
-
Informed consent: Not applicable.
-
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission. WM, AMS: conceptualization, LCS, TR, CP, AOS, AMS, WM: writing and text editing; AOS, AMS, WM: Figure creation.
-
Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools: Chat GPT was used to improve language in chapter 3.
-
Conflict of interest: Authors state no conflicts of interest.
-
Research funding: This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) under Germany’s Excellence Strategy – EXC 2067/1-390729940 and funded by the DFG (MO 1084/2-2, project 401510699 (FOR2848) to W.M.
-
Data availability: vEM Data sets analysed in Steyer et al. 2023 (A. M. Steyer et al., “Focused ion beam-scanning electron microscopy links pathological myelin outfoldings to axonal changes in mice lacking Plp1 or Mag,” Glia, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 509–523, Mar 2023, doi: 10.1002/glia.24290) are openly available in EMPIAR (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/empiar/EMPIAR-11214/) with access to the other related EMPIAR entries of this study: EMPIAR-11215, EMPIAR-11216, EMPIAR-11219, EMPIAR-11220, EMPIAR-11237, EMPIAR-11238, EMPIAR-11239 and EMPIAR-11240.
List of abbreviations
- ATUM
-
automated tape-collecting ultramicrotome
- APP
-
amyloid precursor protein
- BROPA
-
brain-wide reduced-osmium staining with pyrogallol-mediated amplification
- BVG
-
bounded volume growing
- CAM
-
cell adhesion molecule
- CNN
-
convolutional neural network
- CNS
-
central nervous system
- EAE
-
experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis
- EM
-
electron microscopy
- FAST-EM
-
fast, automated scanning transmission electron microscopy
- FIB-SEM
-
focused ion beam-scanning EM
- FIDID
-
feline irradiated food-induced demyelination
- GUI
-
graphical user interface
- LPC
-
lysophospatidylcholine
- MAG
-
myelin associated glycoprotein
- MBP
-
myelin basic protein
- MERFISH
-
multiplexed error-robust fluorescence in situ hybridization
- MS
-
multiple sclerosis
- NPC
-
neural progenitor cell
- OPC
-
oligodendrocyte progenitor cell
- PFIB-SEM
-
plasma FIB-SEM
- PLP
-
proteolipid protein
- PMD
-
Pelizaeus Merzbacher disease
- rOTO
-
reduced osmium-thiocarbohydrazide-osmium
- RAM
-
random access memory
- ROI
-
region of interest
- SBEM
-
serial block face scanning electron microscope
- SEM
-
scanning electron microscope
- SPG2
-
spastic paraplegia type 2
- STcEM
-
spatial transcriptomics-correlated electron microscopy
- TBI
-
traumatic brain injury
- TEM
-
transmission electron microscopy
- vCLEM
-
volume correlative light and electron microscopy
- vEM
-
volume electron microscopy
References
[1] B. Ben Geren, “The formation from the Schwann cell surface of myelin in the peripheral nerves of chick embryos,” Exp. Cell Res., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 558–562, 1954. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0014-4827(54)80098-x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[2] M. B. Bunge, R. P. Bunge, and G. D. Pappas, “Electron microscopic demonstration of connections between glia and myelin sheaths in the developing mammalian central nervous system,” J. Cell Biol., vol. 12, pp. 448–453, 1962. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.12.2.448.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[3] S. Remahl and C. Hildebrand, “Relation between axons and oligodendroglial cells during initial myelination. I. The glial unit,” (in eng), J. Neurocytol., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 313–328, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01188401.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[4] S. Remahl and C. Hildebrand, “Relations between axons and oligodendroglial cells during initial myelination. II. The individual axon,” J. Neurocytol., vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 883–898, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01186817.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[5] C. J. Peddie and L. M. Collinson, “Exploring the third dimension: volume electron microscopy comes of age,” Micron, vol. 61, pp. 9–19, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micron.2014.01.009.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[6] C. J. Peddie, et al.., “Volume electron microscopy,” Nat. Rev. Methods Primers, vol. 2, p. 51, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-022-00131-9.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[7] J. P. Schneider, J. Hegermann, and C. Wrede, “Volume electron microscopy: analyzing the lung,” Histochem. Cell Biol., vol. 155, no. 2, pp. 241–260, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00418-020-01916-3.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[8] K. L. Briggman and D. D. Bock, “Volume electron microscopy for neuronal circuit reconstruction,” Curr. Opin. Neurobiol., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 154–161, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2011.10.022.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[9] A. Shapson-Coe, et al.., “A petavoxel fragment of human cerebral cortex reconstructed at nanoscale resolution,” Science, vol. 384, no. 6696, p. eadk4858, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adk4858.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[10] L. F. Abbott, et al.., “The mind of a mouse,” Cell, vol. 182, no. 6, pp. 1372–1376, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.08.010.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[11] D. G. C. Hildebrand, et al.., “Whole-brain serial-section electron microscopy in larval zebrafish,” Nature, vol. 545, no. 7654, pp. 345–349, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature22356.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[12] Z. Zheng, et al.., “A complete electron microscopy volume of the brain of adult Drosophila melanogaster,” Cell, vol. 174, no. 3, pp. 730–743.e22, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.06.019.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[13] C. Cali, et al.., “3D cellular reconstruction of cortical glia and parenchymal morphometric analysis from serial block-face electron microscopy of juvenile rat,” Prog. Neurobiol., vol. 183, p. 101696, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pneurobio.2019.101696.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[14] A. Klingseisen and D. A. Lyons, “Axonal regulation of central nervous system myelination: structure and function,” Neuroscientist, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 7–21, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073858417703030.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[15] S. Sugio, D. Kato, and H. Wake, “Myelinated axon as a plastic cable regulating brain functions,” Neurosci. Res., vol. 187, pp. 45–51, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2022.11.002.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[16] G. S. Tomassy, et al.., “Distinct profiles of myelin distribution along single axons of pyramidal neurons in the neocortex,” Science, vol. 344, no. 6181, pp. 319–324, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1249766.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[17] K. D. Micheva, et al.., “A large fraction of neocortical myelin ensheathes axons of local inhibitory neurons,” Elife, vol. 5, p. e15784, 2016. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.15784.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[18] T. J. Deerinck, E. A. Bushong, V. Lev-Ram, X. Shu, R. Y. Tsien, and M. H. Ellisman, “Enhancing serial block-face scanning electron microscopy to enable high resolution 3-D nanohistology of cells and tissues,” Microsc. Microanal., vol. 16, pp. 1138–1139, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1431927610055170.Search in Google Scholar
[19] A. M. Steyer, A. Schertel, C. Nardis, and W. Möbius, “FIB-SEM of mouse nervous tissue: fast and slow sample preparation,” Methods Cell Biol., vol. 152, pp. 1–21, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.mcb.2019.03.009.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[20] A. M. Seligman, H. L. Wasserkrug, and J. S. Hanker, “A new staining method (OTO) for enhancing contrast of lipid-containing membranes and droplets in osmium tetroxide-fixed tissue with osmiophilic thiocarbohydrazide (TCH),” J. Cell Biol., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 424–432, 1966. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.30.2.424.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[21] J. C. Tapia, et al.., “High-contrast en bloc staining of neuronal tissue for field emission scanning electron microscopy,” Nat. Protoc., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 193–206, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2011.439.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[22] S. Mikula and W. Denk, “High-resolution whole-brain staining for electron microscopic circuit reconstruction,” Nat. Methods, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 541–546, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.3361.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[23] C. Genoud, B. Titze, A. Graff-Meyer, and R. W. Friedrich, “Fast homogeneous en bloc staining of large tissue samples for volume electron microscopy,” Front. Neuroanat., vol. 12, p. 76, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnana.2018.00076.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[24] Y. Hua, P. Laserstein, and M. Helmstaedter, “Large-volume en-bloc staining for electron microscopy-based connectomics,” Nat. Commun., vol. 6, p. 7923, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8923.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[25] K. Song, Z. Feng, and M. Helmstaedter, “High-contrast en bloc staining of mouse whole-brain and human brain samples for EM-based connectomics,” Nat. Methods, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 836–840, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-023-01866-3.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[26] A. M. Steyer, T. Ruhwedel, and W. Möbius, “Biological sample preparation by high-pressure freezing, microwave-assisted contrast enhancement, and minimal resin embedding for volume imaging,” J. Vis. Exp.: JoVE, vol. 145, 2019. https://doi.org/10.3791/59156.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[27] P. Borghgraef, A. Kremer, M. De Bruyne, C. J. Guerin, and S. Lippens, “Resin comparison for serial block face scanning volume electron microscopy,” Methods Cell Biol., vol. 177, pp. 33–54, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.mcb.2023.01.011.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[28] L. Tegethoff and K. L. Briggman, “Quantitative evaluation of embedding resins for volume electron microscopy,” Front. Neurosci., vol. 18, p. 1286991, 2024. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2024.1286991.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[29] K. J. Hayworth, et al.., “Ultrastructurally smooth thick partitioning and volume stitching for large-scale connectomics,” Nat. Methods, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 319–322, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.3292.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[30] G. Knott, H. Marchman, D. Wall, and B. Lich, “Serial section scanning electron microscopy of adult brain tissue using focused ion beam milling,” (in eng), J. Neurosci., vol. 28, no. 12, pp. 2959–2964, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3189-07.2008.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[31] W. Denk and H. Horstmann, “Serial block-face scanning electron microscopy to reconstruct three-dimensional tissue nanostructure,” (in eng), PLoS Biol., vol. 2, no. 11, p. e329, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020329.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[32] V. Baena, R. L. Schalek, J. W. Lichtman, and M. Terasaki, “Serial-section electron microscopy using automated tape-collecting ultramicrotome (ATUM),” Methods Cell Biol., vol. 152, pp. 41–67, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.mcb.2019.04.004.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[33] K. J. Hayworth, J. L. Morgan, R. Schalek, D. R. Berger, D. G. Hildebrand, and J. W. Lichtman, “Imaging ATUM ultrathin section libraries with WaferMapper: a multi-scale approach to EM reconstruction of neural circuits,” Front. Neural Circ., vol. 8, p. 68, 2014. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncir.2014.00068.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[34] N. Kasthuri, et al.., “Saturated reconstruction of a volume of neocortex,” Cell, vol. 162, no. 3, pp. 648–661, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2015.06.054.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[35] A. L. Eberle, S. Mikula, R. Schalek, J. Lichtman, M. L. K. Tate, and D. Zeidler, “High-resolution, high-throughput imaging with a multibeam scanning electron microscope,” J. Microsc., vol. 259, no. 2, pp. 114–120, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmi.12224.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[36] A. Mohammadi-Gheidari and P. Kruit, “Electron optics of multi-beam scanning electron microscope,” (in English), Nucl. Instrum. Methods A, vol. 645, no. 1, pp. 60–67, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2010.12.090.Search in Google Scholar
[37] T. Doi, M. Yamazaki, T. Ichimura, Y. Ren, and P. Kruit, “A high-current scanning electron microscope with multi-beam optics (in English),” Microelectron. Eng., vol. 159, pp. 132–138, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mee.2016.02.055.Search in Google Scholar
[38] N. Karlupia, et al.., “Immersion fixation and staining of multicubic millimeter volumes for electron microscopy-based connectomics of human brain biopsies,” Biol. Psychiatr., vol. 94, no. 4, pp. 352–360, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2023.01.025.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[39] H. B. Nguyen, T. Q. Thai, Y. Sui, M. Azuma, K. Fujiwara, and N. Ohno, “Methodological improvements with conductive materials for volume imaging of neural circuits by electron microscopy,” Front. Neural Circ., vol. 12, p. 108, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncir.2018.00108.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[40] A. A. Wanner, C. Genoud, T. Masudi, L. Siksou, and R. W. Friedrich, “Dense EM-based reconstruction of the interglomerular projectome in the zebrafish olfactory bulb,” Nat. Neurosci., vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 816–825, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4290.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[41] T. J. Deerinck, T. M. Shone, E. A. Bushong, R. Ramachandra, S. T. Peltier, and M. H. Ellisman, “High-performance serial block-face SEM of nonconductive biological samples enabled by focal gas injection-based charge compensation,” J. Microsc., vol. 270, no. 2, pp. 142–149, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmi.12667.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[42] M. Dumoux, et al.., “Cryo-plasma FIB/SEM volume imaging of biological specimens,” Elife, vol. 12, 2023. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.83623.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[43] A. Zaimi, M. Wabartha, V. Herman, P. L. Antonsanti, C. S. Perone, and J. Cohen-Adad, “AxonDeepSeg: automatic axon and myelin segmentation from microscopy data using convolutional neural networks,” Sci. Rep., vol. 8, no. 1, p. 3816, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-22181-4.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[44] T. Chomiak and B. Hu, “What is the optimal value of the g-ratio for myelinated fibers in the rat CNS? A theoretical approach,” PLoS One, vol. 4, no. 11, p. e7754, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0007754.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[45] S. Goebbels, et al.., “Elevated phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-trisphosphate in glia triggers cell-autonomous membrane wrapping and myelination,” (in eng), J. Neurosci., vol. 30, no. 26, pp. 8953–8964, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0219-10.2010.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[46] A. M. Steyer, et al.., “Focused ion beam-scanning electron microscopy links pathological myelin outfoldings to axonal changes in mice lacking Plp1 or Mag,” Glia, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 509–523, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1002/glia.24290.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[47] M. Helmstaedter, K. L. Briggman, and W. Denk, “High-accuracy neurite reconstruction for high-throughput neuroanatomy,” Nat. Neurosci., vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 1081–1088, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.2868.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[48] A. Cardona, et al.., “TrakEM2 software for neural circuit reconstruction,” PLoS One, vol. 7, no. 6, p. e38011, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038011.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[49] I. Belevich, M. Joensuu, D. Kumar, H. Vihinen, and E. Jokitalo, “Microscopy image browser: a platform for segmentation and analysis of multidimensional datasets,” PLoS Biol., vol. 14, no. 1, p. e1002340, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002340.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[50] J. R. Kremer, D. N. Mastronarde, and J. R. McIntosh, “Computer visualization of three-dimensional image data using IMOD,” J. Struct. Biol., vol. 116, no. 1, pp. 71–76, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1006/jsbi.1996.0013.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[51] E. Romero, O. Cuisenaire, J. F. Denef, J. Delbeke, B. Macq, and C. Veraart, “Automatic morphometry of nerve histological sections,” J. Neurosci. Methods, vol. 97, no. 2, pp. 111–122, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0165-0270(00)00167-9.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[52] T. Liu, E. Jurrus, M. Seyedhosseini, M. Ellisman, and T. Tasdizen, “Watershed merge tree classification for electron microscopy image segmentation,” in Proc IAPR Int Conf Pattern Recogn, vol. 2012, 2012, pp. 133–137.Search in Google Scholar
[53] X. Zhao, Z. Pan, J. Wu, G. Zhou, and Y. Zeng, “Automatic identification and morphometry of optic nerve fibers in electron microscopy images,” Comput. Med. Imaging Graph., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 179–184, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compmedimag.2009.08.009.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[54] H. L. More, J. Chen, E. Gibson, J. M. Donelan, and M. F. Beg, “A semi-automated method for identifying and measuring myelinated nerve fibers in scanning electron microscope images,” J. Neurosci. Methods, vol. 201, no. 1, pp. 149–158, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2011.07.026.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[55] A. Kreshuk, et al.., “Automated tracing of myelinated axons and detection of the nodes of Ranvier in serial images of peripheral nerves,” J. Microsc., vol. 259, no. 2, pp. 143–154, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmi.12266.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[56] A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and G. E. Hinton, “ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks,” (in English), Commun. ACM, vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 84–90, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1145/3065386.Search in Google Scholar
[57] Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio, and G. Hinton, “Deep learning,” Nature, vol. 521, no. 7553, pp. 436–444, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14539.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[58] O. Ronneberger, P. Fischer, and T. Brox, “U-net: convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation,” (in English), Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., vol. 9351, pp. 234–241, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4_28.Search in Google Scholar
[59] Ö. Çiçek, A. Abdulkadir, S. S. Lienkamp, T. Brox, and O. Ronneberger, “3D U-net: learning dense volumetric segmentation from sparse annotation,” in Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention – MICCAI 2016, Cham, Springer International Publishing, 2016, pp. 424–432.10.1007/978-3-319-46723-8_49Search in Google Scholar
[60] F. Isensee, P. F. Jaeger, S. A. A. Kohl, J. Petersen, and K. H. Maier-Hein, “nnU-Net: a self-configuring method for deep learning-based biomedical image segmentation,” Nat. Methods, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 203–211, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-020-01008-z.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[61] S. Berg, et al.., “Ilastik: interactive machine learning for (bio)image analysis,” Nat. Methods, vol. 16, no. 12, pp. 1226–1232, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-019-0582-9.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[62] T. Kaiser, et al.., “MyelTracer: a semi-automated software for myelin g-ratio quantification,” eNeuro, vol. 8, no. 4, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0558-20.2021.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[63] P. Carrillo-Barbera, A. M. Rondelli, J. M. Morante-Redolat, B. Vernay, A. Williams, and P. Bankhead, “AimSeg: a machine-learning-aided tool for axon, inner tongue and myelin segmentation,” PLoS Comput. Biol., vol. 19, no. 11, p. e1010845, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010845.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[64] A. Abdollahzadeh, I. Belevich, E. Jokitalo, J. Tohka, and A. Sierra, “Automated 3D axonal morphometry of white matter,” Sci. Rep., vol. 9, no. 1, p. 6084, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-42648-2.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[65] A. Behanova, A. Abdollahzadeh, I. Belevich, E. Jokitalo, A. Sierra, and J. Tohka, “gACSON software for automated segmentation and morphology analyses of myelinated axons in 3D electron microscopy,” Comput. Methods Programs Biomed, vol. 220, p. 106802, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2022.106802.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[66] T. Beier, et al.., “Multicut brings automated neurite segmentation closer to human performance,” Nat. Methods, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 101–102, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4151.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[67] A. Abdollahzadeh, I. Belevich, E. Jokitalo, A. Sierra, and J. Tohka, “DeepACSON automated segmentation of white matter in 3D electron microscopy,” Commun. Biol., vol. 4, no. 1, p. 179, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-021-01699-w.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[68] I. Belevich and E. Jokitalo, “DeepMIB: user-friendly and open-source software for training of deep learning network for biological image segmentation,” PLoS Comput. Biol., vol. 17, no. 3, p. e1008374, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008374.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[69] K. M. Boergens, et al.., “webKnossos: efficient online 3D data annotation for connectomics,” Nat. Methods, vol. 14, no. 7, pp. 691–694, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4331.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[70] S. Saalfeld, A. Cardona, V. Hartenstein, and P. Tomancak, “CATMAID: collaborative annotation toolkit for massive amounts of image data,” Bioinformatics, vol. 25, no. 15, pp. 1984–1986, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp266.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[71] C. Pape, et al.., “MoBIE: a Fiji plugin for sharing and exploration of multi-modal cloud-hosted big image data,” Nat. Methods, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 475–476, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-023-01776-4.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[72] L. Maier-Hein, et al.., “Metrics reloaded: recommendations for image analysis validation (in English),” Nat. Methods, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 195–212, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-023-02151-z.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[73] W. Möbius, K. A. Nave, and H. B. Werner, “Electron microscopy of myelin: structure preservation by high-pressure freezing,” Brain Res., vol. 1641, no. Pt A, pp. 92–100, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2016.02.027.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[74] M. T. Weil, T. Ruhwedel, M. Meschkat, B. Sadowski, and W. Möbius, “Transmission electron microscopy of oligodendrocytes and myelin,” Methods Mol. Biol., vol. 1936, pp. 343–375, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-9072-6_20.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[75] M. B. Bunge, R. P. Bunge, and H. Ris, “Ultrastructural study of remyelination in an experimental lesion in adult cat spinal cord,” J. Biophys. Biochem. Cytol., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 67–94, 1961. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.10.1.67.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[76] B. Sobottka, U. Ziegler, A. Kaech, B. Becher, and N. Goebels, “CNS live imaging reveals a new mechanism of myelination: the liquid croissant model,” Glia, vol. 59, no. 12, pp. 1841–1849, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1002/glia.21228.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[77] N. Snaidero, et al.., “Myelin membrane wrapping of CNS axons by PI(3,4,5)P3-dependent polarized growth at the inner tongue,” Cell, vol. 156, nos. 1–2, pp. 277–290, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2013.11.044.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[78] J. M. Edgar, et al.., “Rio-Hortega’s drawings revisited with fluorescent protein defines a cytoplasm-filled channel system of CNS myelin,” J. Anat., vol. 239, no. 6, pp. 1241–1255, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/joa.13577.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[79] N. Elazar, et al.., “Axoglial adhesion by Cadm4 regulates CNS myelination,” Neuron, vol. 101, no. 2, pp. 224–231.e5, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2018.11.032.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[80] N. Elazar, A. Vainshtein, K. Rechav, M. Tsoory, Y. Eshed-Eisenbach, and E. Peles, “Coordinated internodal and paranodal adhesion controls accurate myelination by oligodendrocytes,” J. Cell Biol., vol. 218, no. 9, pp. 2887–2895, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201906099.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[81] J. Patzig, et al.., “Septin/anillin filaments scaffold central nervous system myelin to accelerate nerve conduction,” Elife, vol. 5, 2016. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.17119.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[82] B. D. Trapp and R. H. Quarles, “Immunocytochemical localization of the myelin-associated glycoprotein. Fact or artifact?” J. Neuroimmunol., vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 231–249, 1984. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-5728(84)90011-0.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[83] C. Li, et al.., “Myelination in the absence of myelin-associated glycoprotein,” Nature, vol. 369, no. 6483, pp. 747–750, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1038/369747a0.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[84] D. Montag, et al.., “Mice deficient for the myelin-associated glycoprotein show subtle abnormalities in myelin,” Neuron, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 229–246, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1016/0896-6273(94)90472-3.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[85] L. Gollan, D. Salomon, J. L. Salzer, and E. Peles, “Caspr regulates the processing of contactin and inhibits its binding to neurofascin,” J. Cell Biol., vol. 163, no. 6, pp. 1213–1218, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200309147.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[86] J. C. Rios, et al.., “Contactin-associated protein (Caspr) and contactin form a complex that is targeted to the paranodal junctions during myelination,” J. Neurosci., vol. 20, no. 22, pp. 8354–8364, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.20-22-08354.2000.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[87] M. Djannatian, et al.., “Two adhesive systems cooperatively regulate axon ensheathment and myelin growth in the CNS,” Nat. Commun., vol. 10, no. 1, p. 4794, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-12789-z.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[88] M. Djannatian, et al.., “Myelination generates aberrant ultrastructure that is resolved by microglia,” J. Cell Biol., vol. 222, no. 3, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.202204010.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[89] M. Iyer, et al.., “Oligodendrocyte calcium signaling promotes actin-dependent myelin sheath extension,” Nat. Commun., vol. 15, no. 1, p. 265, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-44238-3.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[90] M. Meschkat, et al.., “White matter integrity in mice requires continuous myelin synthesis at the inner tongue,” Nat. Commun., vol. 13, no. 1, p. 1163, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-28720-y.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[91] T. Tanaka, et al.., “Large-scale electron microscopic volume imaging of interfascicular oligodendrocytes in the mouse corpus callosum,” Glia, vol. 69, no. 10, pp. 2488–2502, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/glia.24055.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[92] C. C. H. Cohen, et al.., “Saltatory conduction along myelinated axons involves a periaxonal nanocircuit,” Cell, vol. 180, no. 2, pp. 311–322.e15, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.11.039.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[93] K. A. Nave and H. B. Werner, “Myelination of the nervous system: mechanisms and functions,” Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol., vol. 30, pp. 503–533, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100913-013101.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[94] U. Fünfschilling, et al.., “Glycolytic oligodendrocytes maintain myelin and long-term axonal integrity,” Nature, vol. 485, no. 7399, pp. 517–521, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11007.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[95] A. S. Saab and K. A. Nave, “Myelin dynamics: protecting and shaping neuronal functions,” Curr. Opin. Neurobiol., vol. 47, pp. 104–112, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2017.09.013.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[96] K. Kole, B. J. B. Voesenek, M. E. Brinia, N. Petersen, and M. H. P. Kole, “Parvalbumin basket cell myelination accumulates axonal mitochondria to internodes,” Nat. Commun., vol. 13, no. 1, p. 7598, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-35350-x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[97] Z. Ding, et al.., “Functional connectomics reveals general wiring rule in mouse visual cortex,” bioRxiv, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.03.13.531369.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[98] O. Jahn, et al.., “The CNS myelin proteome: deep profile and persistence after post-mortem delay,” Front. Cell Neurosci., vol. 14, p. 239, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2020.00239.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[99] T. J. Buscham, et al.., “Progressive axonopathy when oligodendrocytes lack the myelin protein CMTM5,” Elife, vol. 11, 2022. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.75523.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[100] M. P. Coleman and A. Höke, “Programmed axon degeneration: from mouse to mechanism to medicine,” Nat. Rev. Neurosci., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 183–196, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-020-0269-3.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[101] M. P. Coleman, et al.., “An 85-kb tandem triplication in the slow Wallerian degeneration (Wlds) mouse,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., vol. 95, no. 17, pp. 9985–9990, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.95.17.9985.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[102] I. Micu, J. R. Plemel, A. V. Caprariello, K. A. Nave, and P. K. Stys, “Axo-myelinic neurotransmission: a novel mode of cell signalling in the central nervous system,” Nat. Rev. Neurosci., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 49–58, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2017.128.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[103] R. M. Stassart, W. Möbius, K. A. Nave, and J. M. Edgar, “The axon-myelin unit in development and degenerative disease,” Front. Neurosci., vol. 12, p. 467, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00467.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[104] V. I. Gargareta, et al.., “Conservation and divergence of myelin proteome and oligodendrocyte transcriptome profiles between humans and mice,” Elife, vol. 11, 2022. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.77019.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[105] O. Jahn, S. Tenzer, and H. B. Werner, “Myelin proteomics: molecular anatomy of an insulating sheath,” Mol. Neurobiol., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 55–72, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12035-009-8071-2.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[106] G. Khalaf, C. Mattern, M. Begou, O. Boespflug-Tanguy, C. Massaad, and L. Massaad-Massade, “Mutation of proteolipid protein 1 gene: from severe hypomyelinating leukodystrophy to inherited spastic paraplegia,” Biomedicines, vol. 10, no. 7, 2022, https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10071709.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[107] J. M. Edgar, et al.., “Oligodendroglial modulation of fast axonal transport in a mouse model of hereditary spastic paraplegia,” J. Cell Biol., vol. 166, no. 1, pp. 121–131, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200312012.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[108] I. Griffiths, et al.., “Axonal swellings and degeneration in mice lacking the major proteolipid of myelin,” Science, vol. 280, no. 5369, pp. 1610–1613, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.280.5369.1610.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[109] A. M. Steyer, T. Ruhwedel, C. Nardis, H. B. Werner, K. A. Nave, and W. Möbius, “Pathology of myelinated axons in the PLP-deficient mouse model of spastic paraplegia type 2 revealed by volume imaging using focused ion beam-scanning electron microscopy,” J. Struct. Biol., vol. 210, no. 2, p. 107492, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsb.2020.107492.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[110] A. Trevisiol, et al.., “Structural myelin defects are associated with low axonal ATP levels but rapid recovery from energy deprivation in a mouse model of spastic paraplegia,” PLoS Biol., vol. 18, no. 11, p. e3000943, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000943.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[111] D. S. Reich, C. F. Lucchinetti, and P. A. Calabresi, “Multiple sclerosis,” N. Engl. J. Med., vol. 378, no. 2, pp. 169–180, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1401483.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[112] C. Stadelmann, S. Timmler, A. Barrantes-Freer, and M. Simons, “Myelin in the central nervous system: structure, function, and pathology,” Physiol. Rev., vol. 99, no. 3, pp. 1381–1431, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.00031.2018.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[113] V. Gudi, et al.., “Synaptophysin is a reliable marker for axonal damage,” J. Neuropathol. Exp. Neurol., vol. 76, no. 2, pp. 109–125, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnen/nlw114.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[114] G. K. Matsushima and P. Morell, “The neurotoxicant, cuprizone, as a model to study demyelination and remyelination in the central nervous system,” Brain Pathol., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 107–116, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3639.2001.tb00385.x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[115] S. Rühling, et al.., “Visualization of the breakdown of the axonal transport machinery: a comparative ultrastructural and immunohistochemical approach,” Mol. Neurobiol., vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 3984–3998, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12035-018-1353-9.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[116] E. Schäffner, et al.., “Myelin insulation as a risk factor for axonal degeneration in autoimmune demyelinating disease,” Nat. Neurosci., vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 1218–1228, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-023-01366-9.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[117] R. J. Franklin and V. Gallo, “The translational biology of remyelination: past, present, and future,” Glia, vol. 62, no. 11, pp. 1905–1915, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1002/glia.22622.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[118] I. D. Duncan, A. B. Radcliff, M. Heidari, G. Kidd, B. K. August, and L. A. Wierenga, “The adult oligodendrocyte can participate in remyelination,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., vol. 115, no. 50, pp. E11807–E11816, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1808064115.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[119] R. J. M. Franklin and C. Ffrench-Constant, “Regenerating CNS myelin – from mechanisms to experimental medicines,” Nat. Rev. Neurosci., vol. 18, no. 12, pp. 753–769, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2017.136.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[120] P. Androvic, et al.., “Spatial transcriptomics-correlated electron microscopy maps transcriptional and ultrastructural responses to brain injury,” Nat. Commun., vol. 14, no. 1, p. 4115, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-39447-9.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[121] K. H. Chen, A. N. Boettiger, J. R. Moffitt, S. Wang, and X. Zhuang, “RNA imaging. Spatially resolved, highly multiplexed RNA profiling in single cells,” Science, vol. 348, no. 6233, p. aaa6090, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa6090.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[122] C. S. Xu, et al.., “Enhanced FIB-SEM systems for large-volume 3D imaging,” Elife, vol. 6, 2017. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.25916.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[123] A. J. Kievits, B. H. P. Duinkerken, J. Fermie, R. Lane, B. N. G. Giepmans, and J. P. Hoogenboom, “Optical STEM detection for scanning electron microscopy,” Ultramicroscopy, vol. 256, p. 113877, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2023.113877.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[124] W. Zuidema and P. Kruit, “Transmission imaging on a scintillator in a scanning electron microscope,” Ultramicroscopy, vol. 218, p. 113055, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2020.113055.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[125] A. J. Kievits, et al.., “FAST-EM array tomography: a workflow for multibeam volume electron microscopy,” Methods Microsc., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 49–64, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1515/mim-2024-0005.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[126] X. Lu, X. Han, Y. Meirovitch, E. Sjostedt, R. L. Schalek, and J. W. Lichtman, “Preserving extracellular space for high-quality optical and ultrastructural studies of whole mammalian brains,” Cell Rep. Methods, vol. 3, no. 7, p. 100520, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crmeth.2023.100520.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[127] S. Reipert, et al.., “Agitation modules: flexible means to accelerate automated freeze substitution,” J. Histochem. Cytochem., vol. 66, no. 12, pp. 903–921, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1369/0022155418786698.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[128] K. A. Fulton, P. V. Watkins, and K. L. Briggman, “GAUSS-EM, guided accumulation of ultrathin serial sections with a static magnetic field for volume electron microscopy,” Cell Rep. Methods, vol. 4, no. 3, p. 100720, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crmeth.2024.100720.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[129] T. Templier, “MagC, magnetic collection of ultrathin sections for volumetric correlative light and electron microscopy,” Elife, vol. 8, 2019. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.45696.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[130] C. J. Guerin and S. Lippens, “Correlative light and volume electron microscopy (vCLEM): how community participation can advance developing technologies,” J. Microsc., vol. 284, no. 2, pp. 97–102, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmi.13056.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[131] X. Heiligenstein and M. S. Lucas, “One for all, all for one: a close look at in-resin fluorescence protocols for CLEM,” Front. Cell Dev. Biol., vol. 10, p. 866472, 2022. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2022.866472.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[132] R. Lane, A. H. G. Wolters, B. N. G. Giepmans, and J. P. Hoogenboom, “Integrated array tomography for 3D correlative light and electron microscopy,” Front. Mol. Biosci., vol. 8, p. 822232, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2021.822232.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[133] M. A. Karreman, et al.., “Fast and precise targeting of single tumor cells in vivo by multimodal correlative microscopy,” J. Cell Sci., vol. 129, no. 2, pp. 444–456, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.181842.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[134] C. Bosch, et al.., “Functional and multiscale 3D structural investigation of brain tissue through correlative in vivo physiology, synchrotron microtomography and volume electron microscopy,” Nat. Commun., vol. 13, no. 1, p. 2923, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-30199-6.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[135] K. J. Czymmek, I. Belevich, J. Bischof, A. Mathur, L. Collinson, and E. Jokitalo, “Accelerating data sharing and reuse in volume electron microscopy,” Nat. Cell Biol., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 498–503, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-024-01381-3.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[136] W. Ouyang, et al.., “BioImage model zoo: a community-driven resource for accessible deep learning in BioImage analysis,” bioRxiv, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.06.07.495102.Search in Google Scholar
[137] L. von Chamier, et al.., “Democratising deep learning for microscopy with ZeroCostDL4Mic,” Nat. Commun., vol. 12, no. 1, p. 2276, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22518-0.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[138] A. Kirillov, et al.., “Segment anything,” (in English) in IEEE I Conf Comp Vis, 2023, pp. 3992–4003.10.1109/ICCV51070.2023.00371Search in Google Scholar
[139] A. Archit, et al.., “Segment anything for microscopy,” bioRxiv, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.08.21.554208.Search in Google Scholar
[140] P. Janjic, et al.., “Measurement-oriented deep-learning workflow for improved segmentation of myelin and axons in high-resolution images of human cerebral white matter,” J. Neurosci. Methods, vol. 326, p. 108373, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2019.108373.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
Supplementary Material
This article contains supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/mim-2024-0013).
© 2024 the author(s), published by De Gruyter on behalf of Thoss Media
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- What is open access and what is it good for?
- News
- Community news
- View
- Optical sectioning in fluorescence microscopies is essential for volumetric measurements
- Review Article
- Wrapped up: advancements in volume electron microscopy and application in myelin research
- Research Articles
- Reducing artifact generation when using perceptual loss for image deblurring of microscopy data for microstructure analysis
- Utilizing collagen-coated hydrogels with defined stiffness as calibration standards for AFM experiments on soft biological materials: the case of lung cells and tissue
- Phase characterisation in minerals and metals using an SEM-EDS based automated mineralogy system
- Corrigendum
- Corrigendum to: FAST-EM array tomography: a workflow for multibeam volume electron microscopy
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- What is open access and what is it good for?
- News
- Community news
- View
- Optical sectioning in fluorescence microscopies is essential for volumetric measurements
- Review Article
- Wrapped up: advancements in volume electron microscopy and application in myelin research
- Research Articles
- Reducing artifact generation when using perceptual loss for image deblurring of microscopy data for microstructure analysis
- Utilizing collagen-coated hydrogels with defined stiffness as calibration standards for AFM experiments on soft biological materials: the case of lung cells and tissue
- Phase characterisation in minerals and metals using an SEM-EDS based automated mineralogy system
- Corrigendum
- Corrigendum to: FAST-EM array tomography: a workflow for multibeam volume electron microscopy